20100177 Draft Drainage Report 072210DRAFT
DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
SALMON RUN APARTMENTS
10720 VANCIL ROAD SOUTHEAST
YELM, WA 98597
Prepared: July 22, 2010
By: Chad Heimbigner, P.E., LEED AP
Coffman Project #10247
L.
.,
~s~
V<
25870
DRAFT
Prepared By:
~COFFMAN
10 N. Post Street, Suite 500
Spokane, WA 99201
(509)328-2994
~~~~~~~D
B Y: --------------------
TAI3LI~, OF CONTI~NTS
Project Description .................................................................................. ......................................1
Methodology ........................................................................................... ......................................1
Topographic Data .................................................................................... ......................................1
Soils ......................................................................................................... ...................................... I
Peak Flow, Volume and Disposal Calculations ...................................... ......................................2
1. Runoff and Rainfall Data ........................................................... ......................................2
2. Hydrology Computations ........................................................... ......................................2
3. Stormwater Treatment ................................................................ ......................................3
Conclusions ............................................................................................. ......................................3
ATTACHMENTS
"A": Vicinity Map
"B": Geotechnical Report
"C": Drainage Basin Map
"D": Hydrology Calculations
C®FFiV1~4iV
N G I N E E R S
Salmon Run
Drainage Report
PRO.TI)CT 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) cotmnunity 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 Ye]m in a portion of the southeast ~/a and northeast'/a of Section 3Q Township 17
North, Range 2 EasC, City of Yelm, W.M. Thurston County, Washington. (See Vicinity Map, Attachment
.,A,,,)
METHODOLOGY
Stormwater generated on-site will utilize best management practices recommended in the Stonnu~ater
Mmtagernent Manual for Westent 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. The Rational Method is also used in conjunction with the Bowstring
Method to determine the drawdown time associated with a 2-year return frequency. Stormwater disposal is
based on recommendations from the geotechnical report contained herein.
TOPOGRAPHIC DATA
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%.
SOILS
Soils for the subject site are classified as Nisqually loamy fine sand, 3 Co 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, 77iurstori County, Washington, as published by the Natural Resources
Conservation Sewice.
On-site soils were sampled and classified by the project geotechnical engineers, Tema Associates, Inc. This
was accomplished by excavating seven test pits, obtaining samples and performing laboratory testing. Tena
Associates, Inc. indicated infiltration facilities would be suitable for the subjects site. Based on their
analysis, an estimated long-term design infiltration rate of two inches per hour can be used for sizing of the
infiltration facilities. A copy of the Terra Associates, Inc., Geotechraical Report, dated May 2010, is
included in Attachment "B". Groundwater was not observed during the test pit excavations.
C®FFIVIAN
NGINEERS
Salmon Run
Drainage Report
PIsAK PLOW VOLUMIi AND DISPOSAL CALCULATIONS
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 volwne from a 6-month, 24-hour storm event. Runoff from Che on-site drainage basins is directed to
bio-infiltration swales. The Swale bottoms are relatively flat, with longitudinal slopes less than 1%.
stormwater is allowed to pond to a treatment depth of 6" before overflowing into a catch basin which
discharges to subsurface infiltration galleries. The Rational Method is used in conjunction with the
Bowstring Method to determine the drawdown time associated with a 2-year return frequency. The
geotechnieal engineer provided an inflUation 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 infihration 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 72070 of the 2-year,
24-hour rainfall amount as recommended by the Stor~nwater Management Manual for Western
Was•12rngton. The 2-year, 24-hour rainfall amount was obtained from an isopluvial map for the state
of Washington. The rainfall intensities utilized with the Bowstring Method were calculated using
an equation in Section 2-5.4 of the WSDOT Hydraulics Manual, along with rainfall coefficients
from Figure 2-5.4A associated with a 2-year storm event.
2. Hydrology Computations
The site has been divided into two drainage basins, labeled `Basin A' and `Basin B' (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.
The following table summarizes the results of the basin calculations.
Treatment `Treatment Infiltration
Basins Drains Storage Storage Gallery
Within Required Provided llimensions
48 Hours ' (CP') (Cr) (W x L x D)
Basin A Yes 1098 1098 5' x 93' x 5'
Basin B Yes 2254 228]. 8' x 127' x 5'
C®FFtd1AN
NGINEERS
3. Stormwater Treatment
Salmon Run Apartments
Drainage Report.
Per the geotechnical report, groundwater was not observed during the Lest pit excavations.
According to the Stm~nwater Ma~~tager~aerxt Manual for Werteni Was/iuxgton site suitability criteria,
the subject site is suitable for infiltration systems. Runoff from Ure parking lot areas and
hydraulically connected sidewalks is treated with the bio-infiltration swales. Pcr the City of Yelm,
roof runoff was included in the total storm runoff volumes, buC not included as a pollutant
generating source for the heatmcnt volume calculations.
CONCLUSIONS
The above described stormwater management improvements will provide the necessary systems to
control and treat runoff associated with the design stortn events for the Salmon Run development.
Refer to the attachments for additional information.
3
VICINITY MAP
ATTACHMENT "A"
~l"1'1~:
VICINITYMAP
ATTAC~IMENT "A"
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
ATTACHIvIENT "B"
o H Va
0'1' ° . ~
o
,
0 0 ~ 'C
a
a m °'° ~ m ~ z °
'
~
~ d e
'
-~'
M N
'
a rD
Dl N N
N 9 „~
r
t O .C 1 N. ' C c. ,
' ~' N '"~' N N
.{ N d'< a ~'..
M17 W O W N .Z d
`~ 3
` 5
~ ~ ~
~r
n
O
~ W N
01 O of ~ ~
(,; pl i!
u'
b ;,.r
ro
~' ?~ n'
~
C to
a A
cn ~ ~
i.r ~
D ~-+
p ~
C 0
~
CEOTECF~NlCAL REPORT
Salmon Run Apartments
10720 Vanci! Road SE
Yelm, Washington
Project No. Td6437
Prepared for:
TimE3ar River E3evelopment
Eellevue, °J~ashington
!}flay 5, 2010
TE~~tA ~.SSC)CIATE~, inc.
Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology
and
Environmental [arAt Sciences
May S, 2010
Project No. T-6437
Mr. Mark Rozgay
Timber River Development
2223 - 1 12th Avenue NE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Subjece Geotechnical Report
Salmon Run Apartrnents
10720 Vancil Road SE
Yehn, Washington
Dear Mr. Rozgay:
As requested, we have conducted a eeotecJrnical engineering study fbr the subject project. Our field esploradon
indicates the site is generally underlain by 2 !0 2.5 feet of organic GIl material overlying variable glacial
sediments composed of silty sand, sand with silt, variable gravel content, and gravel with sand, The fill materials
are not suitable for the support of the proposed buildings and pavements. The fill materials will need to be
removed from structural and pavernem subgrades.
The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotecfmical aspects of project design and
construction.
We bust the information presented in this report is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or
require additional infomtatiou, please call.
Sa=/4
12525 Willpw5 Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Vdashingtoit 98034
Phone {425) 1321-7777 • Fas (425) 821-4334
Sincerely yours,
TE32RA ASSOCIATES, I~IC.
Carolyn Scheppcr, E.LT.
rnn-,x of ron rF,~rs
Pane No.
1.0 Project Description
2.0 Scope of Work...,..
3.0 SiteCondilious ..................................................................... ...........................................2
3.1 Surface ..................................................................... ...........................................2
3.2 Subsurface ............................................................... ...........................................2
3.3 Groundwater ........................................................... ............................................2
4.0 Gcologicl3arards ................................................................ ............................................?
4.1 SeismieConsideratious .......................................... ............................................2
4.2 Erosion ................................................................... ............................................ 3
4.3 Landslide Hazard .................................................... ............................................ 3
5.0 Discussion and Recommendations ....................................... ........................................... 4
S.1 General .................................................................... ........................................... 4
5.2 Site Preparation end Grading .................................. ........................................... 4
5.3 Exca~•ations ............................................................. ...........................................5
5.4 Foundation Support ................................................. ........................................... 5
5.~ Floor Slab-on-Grade ............................................... ............................................ ~i
5.G Storniwater Infiltration Feasibility .......................... ...........................................6
5.7 Drainage ................................................................. ............................................ 7
5.8 Utilities ................................................................... ............................................7
5.9 Pavement ................................................................ ............................................ S
G.0 Additional Services ............................................................. ............................................ S
7.0 Liuuttations ........................................................................... ............................................ S
Fi~ures
Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................ F'ieure I
Expioration Location Plan .................................................................................................... Fi~.;urc 2
Apnendic
Field Exploration aad Laboratory Testing ........................................................................Appendix A
Geotechnical Report
Salmon Run Apartments
10720 Vancii Road SE
Yelm, Washington
L0 YROJrCT' DL;SC12t1'TION
The project consists of developing the site with live new apartment buildings, a community building, a play area,
and associated parking and utilities. Based on the conceptual site plan prepared by7_eck Bultcr Architects dated
September 2, 2003, the buildings will be located on the outer edges of the property with the community building
and play area located in the center,
t,Ve expect that the aparroneut structures and the recreational building will be hvo-story wood-framed buildings
consuvcted at grade. Suucwral loading should be relalivety light with bearing walls carrying loads o1'2 to 3 kips
per toot and isolated columns carrying maximum loads of 30 to 40 kips.
']'he recommendations in the following sectirnrs 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 recoromendatians
have been properly interpreted and to supplemrent them, if required.
2.0 SCOP)/ Or \1'ORK
Our work was completed in accordance with our proposal dated July 16, 2009. On April 27, ?010, we observed
soil conditioms at 7 test pits excavated to depths ranging from 3 l0 10 feet below existing grade. Using the
inConnation obtained from the substuface exploration, w-e performed analyses to develop geoteclmical
rcconnnendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following:
• Soil and groundwater conditions
• Seismic design parameters per 2006 International Building Code (IBC)
• Geologic critical areas
• Site preparation and grading
roundatio»s
• C'loat slabs at grade
• Starmwater infiltration feasibility
• Subsurface drainage
• Utilities
• Pavemeuls
It should be noted that recommendations outlined in this report regarding drainage are associated with soil
suv ngth, desig» earth pressures, etrosion, and stability. Design and perfonuance issues with respect to moisture as
it relates to the sh'ucture environment (i.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Tema Associates' purview. A
building envelope specialist or contractor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed.
May 5, 2010
Project No. T-G437
3.0 SITC CONDITIONS
3.1 Surface
'fhe site is located at 10720 Vancil Road in Yelm, til'ashington. 'hhe approximate site location is shown on Figure
I. 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, small trees, and a few mature gees. We observed household tUbbish scattered
throughout the site. 7~he 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 grand surface on the site is
mteven suggesting some past grading may have ocewred.
3.2 Subsurface
l'w'e 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 gravel with sand,
The Geologic rldn!' ql dre Cenn•alin Qrrndrm+gle, ii~nshingkm, by Henry W. Schasse (1947), show the site is
within an area mapped as "Vashou Outwash Gravel" (Qdvg). Native soil conditions we observed at our test pill
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 encoumered. For more detailed
descriptions, please refer to the Test Pit Logs in Appendix A.
3.3 Groundwater
We did not 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 develop during the nomtally wet
winter season. However, based ou soil conditions and labot~atot}- test results, we expect these areas would be
limited in extent.
4.0 GEOLOGICAL HAI.ARDS
4.1 Seismic Considerations
Section 14.OS.130 of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC) defines Seismic hazard areas as areas subject to severe
risk of damage as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction,
lateral spreading, m' surface faulting.
Lique(action is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in
water pressure induced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained
sand that is below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergramtlar friction.
The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this
intergranular friction; duty, eliminating the soil's strength,
Page Na. 2
;`lay s, 2010
Project No. "h-6437
Based on the soil mrd groundwater conditions we 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 test borings and our kno~~dedge of the area geology, per Chapter iG of
the 2006 International Building Code (1BC), site class "C`~ should be used in structural design. Based on this site
class, in accordance wish the 2006 IBC, the following parameters should be used in computing seismic forces:
Seisuric Desi~rr Pm•aurelers (IBC'2006)
Spectral response acceleration (Short Period), S~ 1.139
Spectral response acceleration (1 -Second Period), Si 0.558
Site coefficient, F, 1.000
Site coefficient, F,. 1.402
Five percent damped .2 samtd period, SD, 0.759
Five percent damped 1.0 second period, Sr„ 0.373
Values determined using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Gromtd Motion Parameter Calculatrn
accessed on April 28, 3010 at the web site 17~~;1`iairh rgsakq.ns~c~ants'researely'hazm?psldcsian,'index.pl~.
d.2 Erosion
Section 14.OS.130 of the Y~9C defines L-rosion hazard areas as areas are at least those areas identified by the U.S.
Deportment of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a "moderate to severe," "severe,"
or "very severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard. lirosion 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 fine sand and Spanaway gravelly sandy loran by
the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Soil Classification System. R'ilh the
existing slope gradients, these soils will 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 Yelm will aced Io be in place prior to starting grading activities on the site. This wotdd 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 Ila~ard
Section 14.OS.I30 of the YMC defines Landslide hazard areas as areas potentially su~jcet to landslides 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, structure, hydrology, or other factors.
Based on the soil and topographic conditions of the site, no portions of the site are susceptible to risk of mass
movement and; therefore, no portions of the site would be considered a landside heard area.
Page No. 3
\7a}~ 5, ?010
Project No. T-6437
5.0 DISCUSSION AND I2EC'O117MENllATION'S
5.1 General
Dared on our study, there are no geotechnical considerations that mould preclude development of the site, as
currently planned. lIowever, as described earlier, our exploration indicates the upper 2 to 2 %z feet of soil is till
material 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 iuunediate support of floor slabs and pavements. The buildings
can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soils observed below this upper 2
to 2.5 feet of ortanic fill material or on stntctural fill placed and compacted above competent mineral native soils.
Pavement and floor slabs can be similarly supported.
"1'he following sections provide detailed recwumendations retarding the preceding issues and other geotechnical
design considerations. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and
construction specifications.
5.2 Site Preparation and Grading
To prepare the site for construction, all vegetation, organic surface soils, and other deleterious material should be
stripped and removed from the buildint and paved areas. Surface stripping depths of about 2 to 2.5 feet should be
expected to remove the organic surface fill. The organic fill material will not be suitable for use as sultetural fill,
but may be used f2>r limited depths in nonshvetural areas.
Once clearing and stripping operations are complete, cut and fill operations can be initiated to establish desired
building grades. Prior to placing tiff, all exposed bearing surflxes should be observed by a representative of l'erra
Associates to verify soil conditions are as expected and suitable for support of new fill or building elements, Our
representative may request a proofroll usint beefy rubber-tired equipment to determine if any isolated soft and
yielding areas are present. If excessively yieldint areas are observed, and they cannot be stabilized in place by
compaction. the affected soils should be excavated and removed to fine bearing and grade restored with new
structural fill. If the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive, the use of teotextile fabrics, such
as Mirafi 500X, or an equivalent fabric, can be used in conjunction wish clean granular stntctural fill. Our
experience has shown that, in tencral, a minimum of 13 inches of a clean, granular structural fill place and
compacted over the geotextile Fabric should establish a stable bearint surface.
The ability to use native soil from site excavations as structural 611 will depend on its moisture content and the
prevailing weather conditions at the time of consintetion. "fine fines content of the granular native oulwash
observe below the till horizon typically ranges between five to 12 percent. Gravel outwash with a fines content of
Iess than 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 611 and trench back6ll. However, the fines content of most of
ouhvash will make the soil slightly to moderately moistm'e sensitive and close moistwe control swill be required to
facilitate proper compaction. During dq~ weather conditions, the contractor should be prepared to add water in
order to facilitate compaction. lluring wet weather, the fines content of the ouhvash mny cause the soil to become
unstable in a (ill condition and unsuitable for use as fill. In this case, the contractor should be prepared to dry the
soil back to suitable moisture concur by aeration or use an additive such as cement kihn dust, Penland cement, or
lime to stabilize the moisture. if an additive is used, the p] [ of the soil will be elevated and additional measures
for monitoring pli of stornnwater nmoff along with mitigation measures will need to be included in the projects'
Stone Water Pollution Prevention Program (SW'PPl'),
Page No. 4
May $, 2010
Project No. T-6437
If importing soil fbr grading or back(illing during wet weather conditions becomes necessary, we recommend
impaling a granular soil that meets the following gtnding requirements:
U S, Riete Size
,~ .~„~, s ,K... ~~ ~. Percent Pacsin:~,,,~„~,,
.~„~..~,. _._. 0 ,.~,..
No.4 75 maximum
No. 200 5 maximum"'
Based on the 3/4-inch fraction.
Prim to use, Tema Associates, Inc. should examine and test all materials imported io the site for use as sultctmal
r u.
Shuctural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of
95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials
(AS'fM) Test Designation ll-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction
should be within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In nonsnvcutnl areas, the
degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent.
5.3 Excavations
All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility wenches, must be eoutpleted in
accordance with local, state, and federal requirements, Based on regulations outlined in the \\'ashington
Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA), the glacial sediments observed would be classified as Type C soils.
Accordingly, lentpa'ary excavations in Type C soils should have (heir slopes laid back at an inclination of 1.5:1
Q9ori-r_ontal;Vertical) or flatter, from the toe to the crest of the slope. All exposed slope faces should be covered
with a durable reinforced plastic membrane during consUuction to prevent slope raveling and noting during
periods of precipitation. Por utility trenches, a properly designed and installed shoring trench box can be used to
support the excavation sidewalls.
The above information is provided solely tax the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not
be constmed to imply That Term Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job site sai'ety. It is understood that
job site safely is the sole responsibility of the project contractor.
5.4 houudation Support
The buildings can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on competent native soils or
nn structural fills placed above competent native soils. Founda(ion subgrade should be prepared as recommended
in Section 5.2 of this report. Perimeter ('oundations exposed to the weather shrndd bear a minimum depth of 1.5
feet below final exterior grades for frost pmtcetiat. interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient
depth below the f]oor slab.
Foundations can be dimensioned for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per syuarc foot (psf). For
short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, none-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used. \4%ith
structural loading as anticipated and This bearine stress applied, estimated local settlements are less than one-inch.
Page No. 5
\Ray 5, 2010
Project No. T'-6437
1=or designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth
pressures acting on the side of the footing and buried portion of the foundatimr stem wall can also be considered.
We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight ol'300 pef. We recommend not
including the upper (2 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by
future grading activiq'. This vahte assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent native soil
or back611ed with shuchrral fill as described in Section ~.2 of this report. The values recommended include a
safety factor of 1.5.
5.5 Floor Slab-on-Grade
Slab-on-grade iloot~ can be supported on subgrade prepared as rcconunended in Section 5.2 of This report. It is
typically recmnmended to place afour-inch thick capillary break layer composed oi' clean, coarse sand or fine
gravel that has less than three percent passing the \o. 200 sieve immediately below the slab. This material
reduces the potential for upward capillary movement of water Ihroueh the underlying soil and subseyueut wetting
of the flan' Slab. F{ON'eVCi', in om• opinion, if clean native ouhvash that racers the criteria described above is
exposed at the floor subgrade elevation or used as structural fill to establish the door grade, it would not be
necessary to impml 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 anu~ash to serve as the capillary
break layer at the time of construction.
"1'he capillary break layer will not prevent moisture inuvsion through the slab caused by water vapor h'ansmission.
Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered tlom areas, n common practice is to place a
durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or
fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and to aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It
should be noted that if rite sand or gravel layer overlying the membrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it
will not be effective in assisting uniE'orm cwing of the slab and can actually serve ns n 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 grave{ should be avoided if floor slab construction occurs during the wet winter
months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. \Ve recommend floor desio rcrs and contractors refer to the
2003 American Concrete Lnstiune (ASI) ivlanuai of Concrete Practice, Part 2, 302.]R-9G, for further information
regarding vapor barrier installation below slab-on-grade floors.
5.6 Stormwatcr Iutiltratiom Feasibility
We expect that infiltration facilities wilt be considered for stormwater management. T'hc recessional ouhvash
sands and gravels we observed nt the site would be a suitable receptor formation for infiltration discharge,
Depending on the location of the intiluation facilities, it may be necessary to excavate t7ve feet m' more bebw
cun'ent site grades to reach the suitable ouhvash layer.
To determine the long-term design infiltration rate, we used Method 2 as outlined in Section 3.3.G, Vohnue Ill of
the Ecology`s S'rornnc~nrer rYlnnugenrenr ,Llmuurl,/nr I['csrcrn {['n.rlrrrrgrun. This method correlates the long-term
infiltration rate with gradation tasting of the soils iu accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-422. Gradation
curves from laboratory testing on the soils are attached in Appendix A. Based of the results of the testing and on
Figure 3.S in Ecology's Snunnrarer Mmmc»uarr Manual frn [fes«rn Tf~uslti»g!u», we reeonnueud using a long-
term design infltration rare of hvo inches par hour.
Page Ao. G
May 5, 2010
Project Ao. T-6437
The permeability of the native outwash soils will be significantly impacted by the inulrsion of soil fines (silt- and
clay-sized particles). Even a relatively minor mnount of soil fines can reduce the permeability of the formation by
a factor of ten. "I'he greatest exposure to soil fines contamination will occur dw'ing mass grading and
construction. Therefore, we reconunend that the "Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TGSC) plots
route construction stonnwater to a location other than the permanent infiltration site. If this is not possible, the
TIiSC pond bottom elevation should be kept two feet above the final infiltration elevation wish final grade
established after site areas have been substantially stabilized.
1Ve should review stornnvater management plans when they become available to verify suitability of soils in the
planned locations and to provide supplemental discussion and recommendations, if needed.
5.7 Dnxinxec
Srnface
Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away Gan the site at all times. \1'ater must not be
allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building areas. We recommend
providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feel [i'an the building periutcters. If
this gradient camtot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the shuclures and disposed to
appropriate storm facilities.
Sabsmface
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 ateay from the strueture 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 footing drains should consist of a ('our-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe that is
enveloped in clean washed /-inch drainage aggregate. The aggregate envelope should extend a minimum of six
inches above and to the sides of the pipe and three inches below the pipe invert. The drain pipe can be placed at a
mtifain grade wish an invert cyuivalent to the bottom of the adjacent fooling and tied to discharge into the
development storm 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 info the footing drains.
5.8 Utilities
Utility pipes should be bedded and backGlled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) or
City of Yelm specifications. As a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as
desuibed in Section S.2 of this report. During wet weather conditions, it may 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 ~,2 of this report. Regardless othhe degree of
relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be hint and relatively unyielding before paving. The subgrade
should be prroofrolled with heavy construction equipment to verify this condition.
Page. No. 7
May 5, 2010
Project No. T-6437
The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of dte subgrade soils and the traffic
conditions to which it will be subjected. For on-site access and parking, with u'affic consisting mainly of light
passenger vehicles with only occasional heavy trafiio, and with a stable subgrade prepared as recommended, we
recommend the following pavement sections:
• Two inches of hot mix asphalt (NMA) over four inches of crushed rock base (Cit13}
• l\vo inches of Hi41A over three inches ofasphalt-treated base (AT}3}
The paving materials used should conform to the lvashington State Departntcnt of Transportation (WSDO"I')
specifications for %:.-inch class I-IMA, ATB, and CRI3.
Long-teen 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 the subgrade soils and reducing their
supporting capability. Por optimum pavement performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least
two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected
over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occw.
6.0 ADDI'lTONAL SERVICTS
"Pena Associates, Cnc. should review the final design drawings and specifications in order to verify that earthwork
and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in project design. We should
also provide geoteclmical service during construction to observe compliance with ow' design concepts,
specifications, and recommendations. 'Phis will allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from
those anticipated prior to the start of constntction.
7.0 LTV•II'PATIONS
We prepared this report in accordance wish generally accepted geoteelmieal engineering practices. No other
warranty, expressed or implied, is made, This repotl is the copyrighted properly of'I'erra Associates, Eta and is
intended for specific application to the Salmon Run Apartments project. This repotl is for the exclusive use of
Timber River Development and its authorized representatives.
The analyses and reconttnendations present in this report are based on data obtained from the test pits and borings
done on site. Variations iu soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent ol'which may not become evident until
constntction. If variations appear evident, "fen'a ,Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the
recommendations inthis report prim to proceeding with construction.
Page No. S
~,a ~,u G4 ~"%a ? ul
!' ~° Cre'ck 4°~~ O3~ ac> q~d f
'~'r ~~
T1 `'s `G~;a kh 100th Way SE'
~6~i'p 57~~ - F:7R SIEUBII&
FlameOt~ry
~~P
n~a~ ~7
~~+ fir! ~6
~~ sr~
a
i/Psf~~ P h S~
NE 143rd Ave 1D3rtl Ave SE. Odd Ye!m-Mc Kenna F
cy • ,_
'+.i n
m
n ~~ ~ ~ G.P@~~ .
rn ~~ryi G m ASS
m ~~e q ~gN
4h Ave SE ~ m ~r?d NE `
~ 5QT ~+
a ~
ra 5t SE ~. Y
SE a ~ ~
n rn ~ ~J~~Y~r `
a "~ Safeway z I
~ ~
~ ~
/V' rn ~>~ I i
m k~fi 107th 515E
~ ~vKtanC St S~ iI
m ~ ~
n ,• ~ ~ ~I
i,
3 ~ W
1 , ~, m rn
109th Ave SE °~' ``~ d ~~
~F a j
I
-- - r
Cfark R6 Sk ~ '' ~~
REFERENCE: GOGGLE MAPS. WWW.GOOGLE.COM. ACCESSED 4-27-2010 NOT TO SCALE
-terra VICINITY MAP
'• SALMON RUN APARTMENTS
Associates? fr1C. YELM, WASHINGTON
- Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering
Geology and
Environmental Earth SGences Proj. No.T-6437 Date MAY 2010 Figure 1
°' w a z -
w
.. ~~~ ~~~ ~~ zwz
r. ~ I z
.:. -, w tea=
g -
77 I
-- ~ 1 ~, ~ ~ $ oj3 ~
°<
~J O ~
® ~=1_ ,~ o
~ ,
o ~ a
-- U
~ j ~, ~ U a~ f6~oe
~ ~ JJ
f6 s
~' ~ r' ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~
-' I
-- ~ H Q a
r
i
,, .
i.9,-
^` ~
_ - i n~
r_. ~,_.~ ~ __~ o ~~_
1 ~
~.. ~ --°QQ~~ ttI ~I`TI- nunaon v Q-~._-Q
-I
If-i-,
~~ o
~~
~- ~-~
a
I
o w
! z r
w w
iJ w
n // ~ J O
_L. _ v a
(\
..~ - ~ 1- ~ Y~ ~ h
-- ~ ~~
_l~ ~ ~~o
r~ p
wLL
a
w.
- - ~I goo
~~a
--- ~ "'°_
of =4QU m
~~ ~w;y w
.I ~~~, o
i ~~ a=°p
- 7; wozo z z
/~' i ~ yz~.z ~ 5
~__ _ .. ~.. ui mwwo w w
z ¢
APPENllIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION AND L,AllORATORY `I'ES'['ING
Salmon Run Apartments
Ye[nr, \traslaington
On April 27, 2010, a-e completed our site exploration by observing soil conditions at 7 test Ails. The test pits
were excavated using a backltoe to a maximum depth of ten I'ect below existing site grades. Test pit locations
were determined in the field by measurements lion existing site feauues. The approximate location of the test
pits are shouar nn the attached Exploration l..ocation Plan, Figure 2. Test Pit Logs are aUached as Figures A-2
tluough A-S.
A geotechnical engineer from our office conducted the field exploration. Our representative classified the soil
conditions eueountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples, and recorded water
levels observed during excavation. All sail samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classificntiat System (USCS) described nn Figure A-I.
Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to om
laboratory fa' further examination and testing. "I'he moisture content of each sample was measured and is
reportul on the individual Test Pit Logs. Grain size analyses were pcrfomtcd on selected samples. l'hc results of
the grain size analyses are shown nn Figures A-9 and A-10.
Project Nn. T-6437
MAJOR DIVISIONS ( LETTER
~, SYMBOL
J_
O
O
w
Z
Q
(~
w
a
O
U
m
m
m~
N
~ '~
~>
E `~
0
o N
0
u7 0
cZ
r
c
~. ~
m~
`o
S(~/) Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines.
SC Olayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
ML Inorganic silts, rook flour, clayey sills with slight
p18Stic+ty.
CL inorganic clays of low to med+um plasticity, (lean clay).
QL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity.
MH Inorganc silts, elastic.
CH Inorganic clays of high plastidty, fat clays.
QH Organic clays of high plasticity.
GRAVELS
More than
50% of coarse
traction is
larger than No.
4 sieve
I
SANDS
More than
50% of coarse
fraction is
smaller than
No. 4 sieve
TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
Clean GW Well-graded gravels gravel-sand mixtures 6ltie or no
Gravels fines.
- - -- _ . --
(less than
GP Poorly gradedgravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or
5% fines) ` ~ no fines
~'~ Silty gravels, gravel sand-silt mixtures, non plastic
Gravels- fines.
~
with fines _ _ _ . _ -- ... -- - _ ---
I GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
Clean
Sands SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines.
(less than j Sp Poody~raded sands. or gravelly sands, little or no
5% fines) ~~ fines.
Sands
with fines
J `D o SILTS AND CLAYS
Q ~N
m
~ E d ~ Liquid limit is less than 50%
~ ~Z N
Z ° ~ ~__ ._ ..__..- _
_
a ~
~~ ___.
~
C7 L ~~~
- SILTS AND CLAYS
~~
Z E
i
~ v Liquid limit is greater than 50%
ti
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat.
DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS
~ Standard Penetration
w Densitv Resistance_in Blows/Foot
....-_ -
J
p Very loo se 0-4
m Loose 4-10
w Medium dense 10-30
= Dense 30-50
~ Very dense >50
~-- -
Standard Penetration
Consistence Resistance in Blows/Foot
u,
'~-
Very soft _
0-2
W Soft 2-4
~ Medium s tiff 4-8
~
U Stiff 8-16
( Very stiff 16-32
Hard >32
Terra
'`~~~`~
~.~ ~ -~ Associates, Inc.
Consultants in GeolechniCal Engineering
Geology and
Environmental Earth Sciences
2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT
_~ SPOON SAMPLER
T 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER
_ OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER
'I WATER LEVEL (DATE)
Tr 70RVANE READINGS, tsf
Pp PENETROMETER READING, ls(
DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot
LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent
PI PLASTIC INDEX
N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per fool
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
SALMON RUN APARTMENTS
YELM, WASHINGTON
Proj. No. T-6437 Date MAY 2010 Figure A-1
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
1
.
FIGURE q-2
PROJECT NAME: Salmon Run Anarlments PROJ. NO: T-6437 LOGGED BY: -(:S
LOCATION: Yelm Walljnpjon SURFACE CONDS: Tall sass/ mall Tr . s APPROX. ELEV:
DATE LOGGED: ~xil ?7.9(110 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER; N!A DEPTH 70 CAVING: 3 Feet
w
V d
z
z
s ~ DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY/ a REMARKS
~ a RELATIVE DENSITY r-.
W Q ~ Y
O ur U
O
a
FILL?: dark brown sand with silt, fine grained, moist,
roots. extensive organics. Aledium Dense
16
1
.
__________________________________
Brown silty SAND, fine grained, moist, roots. (Std) ___________
Medium Dense
11
1
.
5
Bro~.vn SAND with silt and gravel, line to coarse grained. Medium Dense
moist to wet. (SP•SM)
9.0
Test pit terminated al approximarety 8 tee(.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Minor caving observed below 3 feel.
10
15
Terra
NOTE: This subsurface inloimaLOn pen2ins only to this lest C~t'c:zlion and shJU:d ,~
:„-;3..;'--^ QSSOOIa1eSr ~f1C.
rot be interpreted as be,np intli:2tive of 017•.er Icalions at the sale. COnSWlan15 in Geolechnbal Enpineennp
Geolcgy and
Envuonmenlzl Eanh Sciences
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
2
.
FIGURE A-3
PROJECT NAME: Salmon Run Apartmen<,e PROJ. N0: T-6437 LOGGED 13V: (;S
LOCATION: Yelm Washington SURFACE CONDS: Tall GrasslSmall Trees APPROX. ELEV:
DATE LOGGED: Anril 27 2010 DEPTH 70 GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH 70 CAVING: 2 Feet
LL
_ F_
F 2 Z
x m
~
DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY/ m
n.
REMARKS
~ a RELATIVE DENSITY r
w Q ~ Y
^ ~ U
O
a
i
li
rained
ts
FILL?
bl
k
ilt
d
t 26
9
,
:
ac
s
y san
,
ne g
. mo
s
, roo .
extensive organics,
__________________________________ Medium Dense
___________
i0
8
.
5 Brown SAND with silt, fine to coarse grained, moist to Medium Dense
wet, varying amounts of gravel. (SP-SM)
21
2
.
70
Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Moderate caving observed below 2 feel.
15
}~~~ Terra
NOTE: 7h~ssubsudaceinlcrmaUonFenainsonlytolhisrestpA!cwlionardshould _" ASSOC1ateS, ~rle.
not be interpreted as bung Indicative of other Io:al:ons al foe silo Ccnsullanls fi Geolechni:al Engineering
GeUcgy and
£nJronmenlal Eanh Srerces
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
3
.
FIGURER-4
PROJECT NAME: ~jaJmon Run Apartmen(s PROJ. NO: T-6437 LOGGED BY: CS
LOCATION: Yelm. Washington SURFACE CONDS: Tall ,r cc/Smal{ TrP..€,- APPROX. ELEV:
DATE LOGGED: aril 27 2010 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER; N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: 4 Feel
LL
F
O
x ~
~ DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCYI
RELATIVE DENSITY
~- a REMARKS
a
i w
~ N U
O
a
FILL?: Mack silty sand, fine grained, moist, roots,
extensive organics.
M
di
D 1E 8
e
um
ense
__________________________________ ___________
12.5
Brown SAND with sill, fine to coarse grained, moist, roots.
(SP-SM) Medium Dense
5
Brown SAND with silt and graveh fine to coarse grained,
moist. occasional cobble. (SP-SM) 6ledlum Dense
Fi.4
Test pit terminated at approximately 8 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Minor caving observed below 4 feel.
10
15
Terra
NOTE: This subsurface infcrmaUOn perlams cnly to Nis test pi(IOCal:oo and should ' ~ Associates, ~nC.
rot he role+p'eletl as being iotlica0vc of olhei Io;aUons al the slo. Ccnsullanls in Geole:hnL^al Engineering
Geology antl
Envlronmenlal EaM Sciences
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
4
.
FIGURE A-5
PROJECT NAME: S2lmon Run ADartmenla PROJ. N0: T-6437 LOGGED BY: CS
LOCATION: Yelm Washington SURFACE CONDS: Tall ,ra a/Small Tr .es APPROX. ELEV:
DATE LOGGED: 1{pril 27 201D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: , N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: Fe t
Q LL
v
~ ~ Z
x -'
F DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY/
RELATIVE DENSITY e a
~ REMAft RS
a
w a 3 w
Y
O in U
O
a
17,3
FILL7: black sand with sill and gravel, fine to coarse
grained, moist, roots, extensive organics.
__________________________________ Medium Dense
___________
3.5
Brown GRAVEL with sand antl cobbles, coarse grained,
5 moist, occasional boulder. (GP) Medium Dense
Test pit terminated al approximately 8 feet.
No groundwater seepaye observed.
Extensive caving observed below 2 feel.
10
15
Terra
,~
NOTE: TNSSObsudaceinloimalbnperlainsonlyiothisleslC~~lorafionandshould r Associates, loc.
not be interpreted as being indreaGve of orl:er {pcaEcns at the sale. Consultants in Geolechnical Erghieering
Gco'o9yard
Envircnmenlel Earth Sc:en:zs
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
5
.
FIGURER-s
PROJECT NAME: Salmon Run Apartments PROJ. NO: T-6497 LOGGED BY: CS
LOCATION: Yelm Washington SURFACE CONDB: Tall sass/Small Trews APPROX. ELEV;
DATE LOGGED: April 27. 2010 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING:
LL
D
~ ~ Z
x w
~
DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY/
°- w
a
REMARKS
i ~ RELATIVE DENSITY
y F
W
w
Q c
N ~
O
a
FILL?: black santl with sill and gravel, fine to coarse
grained, inoisL roots, extensive organics.
Medium Dense 18.9
B
SANp
i
h
d
fi
i
i Medium pense 5.4
rown
ne to coarse gra
w
t
s
l,
ned, mo
st to
wet, some sill. some gravel. (SP-SM)
5
8.5
Test pit terminated at approximately 81eet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Minor caving observed below 2 feet.
10
15
mac, t Terra
NOTE: Thissu5sudacein(o-mabonpenainscnlytoNslestpit(ecatiunaMSheuld Associates, fne.
not be interpreted as beirg md:calive of other ICOa Uons al the 5!!e. Consullantc in Gealechmcal Engireenng
Geology and
Environmerilal Eenh Sci¢nces
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
6
.
FIGURE A-7
PROJECT NAME: Salmon ftun Anariments PROD. NO: T-B437 LOGGED BY; CS
LOCA710N: Yelm Washington SURFACE CONOS: Tall Grass APPROX. ELEV;
DATE LOGGED: April 27 2010 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: 7 F .mil
0 LL
Z
x ~ DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY/ e a REMARKS
a ~ RELATIVE DENSITY
3
w
w
^ Q
N y
U
O
n
FILL?: black sand with silt and gravel, line to coarse
grained, moist, roots, extensive organics.
Medium Dense 73.1
__________________________________
Brown SAND with silt, fine to coarse grained. moist to ___________
Medium Dense
wet, some gravel, occasional cobble. (SP-SM)
ro __________________________________ ___________ 7.4
y SAND wish silt, fine to coarse grained, moist. (SP-
S~
) Medium Oense
Test pit terminated at approximately 8 feel.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Moderate caving observed below 2 (eel.
10
15
,N~<,„; Terra
~.:~~
NOTE: This subsudace infcrmalion pertains only to this test pit lccation and should ASSOGIateS, ~r1C.
not be inleipreled as being mdicalive or other localicns al the site. Consultants in Geotechn:cal Engireeiing
Geology and
Environmonlel Earth Suences
LOG OF TEST PIT NO
7
.
FIGURE A-8
PROJECT NAME; Salmon Run Ali,~g)QJ11s PROD. NO: T-6437 LOGGED BY: CS
LOCATION: Yolm VVRShington SURFACE CONDS: fall 1'rR c/Smell Tr . s APPROX. ELEV:
DATE LOGGED: ,gpril 27 2010 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/B, DEPTH TO CAVING: ~ 5 Feel
LL
v
LL ~ Z
-W'
n DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY!
RELATIVE DENSITY _ a REMARKS
w
¢
's f.
y
O In U
O
a
FILL?: black sand wish silt and gravel, fine to coarse
16
7
grained, moist, roots. extensive organics. M
i
D .
ense
ed
um
Brown silty SAND, fine grained, wet. (SM) Medium Dense
7
19.
6 __________________________________ ___________
Brown GRAVEL with sand, line to coarse grained, moist
to wet, cobbles, occasional boulder. (GP) pence 6.8
Test pit terminated a(approximalely 8.5 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
Moderate caving observed below 2.6 (eel.
10
15
~`~,~?` Terra
NOTE: This subsurface information pertains orgytathislestpiUowlicnandshocld - - ASSQCIBteSr inc.
not be interpreted as being intl¢alive o(olher looaticns a(Ihe site. Consuliartls m Gootechnical Engiceenrg
Gm.JOgy and
Environmemal Fanh Sciences
70 _. __ -
. I
i
~ , i.. .. i-_ i 1 ~ j ~
f
_-~i i 1 I __..
1
Z 1 , 1 ~ ~ ~ '
II
~
ti ~
1 .
I
I
~
~
. ~~ ~~ ~ ~ I
50 - -
i ,7 } .. ~...
f _
,
~- _.
~
Z
~
~
1
~ ' ~ 4
qa ~ -I - _ , , ' , _
_ ~
I ,
^
a I (' l i l l l l i~ I I
I
c 17.4217 i1.031R 9,1788 5,4852 1.7637 i 0,7313 3,73 15.48
cl 0.7014 OS243 0.4681 0.3539 0.2430 0.1570 1.52 3.34
-~-----
Material Description USCS AASHTO
a Poorly gl~adcd GRAVTiL with <and GI
u Poorly graded SA\'D wish gilt Sf'-SM
f Project No. '1"-6437 Client: 9 imbcr River Developn~eni Remarks:
Project: Salmon Run Apanments <>Tesled on 4.29-10
~ oresicd ol, 4-z9-1o
io Location: Tcsi Pit TP-4 Depth: -4 feel Sample Number: 2
e Location: Tcsl Pil TP-5 Depth: -7.5 feel Sample Number: 3 i
Terra Associates, Inc. I{
Figure A-9
Tested 8y:
° /° Sand ° Ines
_ Coarse FmB ~Coarse~ McBtum Fine Sdt ~ Clay
0.0 -_ -00 0.7 -.~07 ! SO1 5 I3.6 4.9
0,0 0.0 0.1 03 ' ?.9 ~ 73.3 ~ iS.4
0 0.8236 ~ 0.6465 0.5920 0.4903_ _ 0.3662 0.276.7 ].34 2.34
a --- 0.3883 ~ 0.2997 O.Z699 0,1937
Material Description
-
- USCS ~ AASHTO
'
-
e Pooi9y graded SAND with silt--- -- ~ j l
SPSP-SP
v SiIq~SAND SM
Project No. I'-6437 Client: 'l'imber Ri~•cr llevolopmem Remarks:
Project: Salmon Run Ape rtmen~s OTestcd on 4-2910
oTested on 4-29-10
~~ ~ Location: -test Yii TP-6 Depth: -5 feet Sample N umber: 2
(c~ Location: Test Pit TP-7 Depth: -4 feel Sample Number: 2
I
Terra Associates, Inc. ' '
__._ -----Kirkland, WA____-- ~ Figure A-l0
Tested By:
DRAINAGE BASIN MAP
ATTACHMENT "C"
~~
a
z
a
m
e
V
W
O tt
~ a
z ~
~ ~
3 m
Z
c O
G (~
Z
W CA
N Q
F-
O
O Z
W
~cc
Z J
O
Q
V
cacW~P
G~ ~ ~~
0~~3<
V ° o~
~ogN
z
0
a
o z
z
o w
m o
z z
~ ~
m m
w
Q
' Z
m
HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS
ATTACHMENT "D"
x^
3~
3~
~'~c
No
n96
O ~ ~ ~
3¢N~
N ~
D
n'
~Z 1
y~3 ~
'~
v
a'
o
~,
a ~~
n 3:
3i
s
g' N ~' 7.
No a
~~
tl ~ g`
<g'N:
3 ab ~
D
rv~m
~C d
s ~ _ < o_
m Oy
m O $ O
a 3 m R 9
On
az m N.
-O ^~N n~
3 i
'~~DN~
~~'v m>
of
i _
~ ~_'
'I ^.la.y
3 0 0
Nj + ~
~D~
I
Oo~j9
11 s °m
O
~3'~
o' m
N ~ 0 9
Nt- ~ ~
o°
3
O n -1
mZ~
y
d
o rv
rom
L,m
3
00000000oooo'ssooo o~
~JN NNN OJ~N(.~NmAN J~
o ~ m
~m~e~~~~em~mN~m>~~yE
d
~omc
m Z ~ d m~ N
a ¢. y
S ti 3 n O n_
N a o ~ ~i
-o~i m 8u~ ~
03 n~ Aw
_a y _ ~
mO.oo N ny n
_m> oooro m ~,
n n
~ m 3 p ~
o m z
R a ci
d3
g°,z ° ~ n
~.n o o ~ .°m P ~ n
Z°_ N
a o
m,c' ~
N o O O H m
_.. ~. N A O N V
'
n N
2 °w G~
p ~ N o
O ~ f
'o
d V
<4 f/
s 9
<4 Ns
_
~
n ~
n li li F u n i I~
.
Nm Z
~
Cy ~
D
V ui
13 n
n
m
z
4
a
O
c
A
O
ClD
dll
~~o L
m
' 3 ,
_~
aq~
v ~ ~
n p
c; s
O~ <
~y o,
N
~3_n o~nny
3n --3m~
__ ^9~;0
n~j~ TN_
__ ~ n j _ -
ay
_ ~a
3
mo
3 ~ ~
u m
py m~mm Am0
y
3 3
4
~pmp
C w ~ (N
3 3 ~o~ln
nN
z N°",DVa
o~ o^ya
m~ oomro w
n a
og oboo ~
o a `6' v'.
mp o00 >
z ooWVOV Om n
a
m ~N.A . N
`. n
no $'&
mho
„ o
m~
>°-'.3
~oo
j'9 ~
m
Duo
Od
33
o ~'
m 1°m
a < D n y'
2 ~m `m ?~]
O nc`y a
N ~ ~ N D
n Poi m
=oa ~
n
n
m
m
a
n
C
y
W H
p 'R
~ i
,~ o
N N
a ~.
o
C N
y -0
:p
3
T
d O
m F
OS
m q
F ~
ti
N
~, z ~/~
ti>~ z3
m~
o z~
x!
3~
3~
N~
NO
eta
<
,°, n '
~6Ni
D
a'
m
a
N Z
Z
p 3
- 3
N~
y N O
~ a $~
<Fa
3 n I
nn
(°.i~
1
;Z y
~:3 ~
;pm- F m ~
s,z ~ o
u ~n
L.1 O0
~ m O O
Ovr~O
Dom: ~ D~
?~ ~3 ~R
~I s z :. m..N..E
i
~~ n~~
~D~j 4F
mLq-
3 a
i
~i y 3'~
r Dp! ~~°
o= a m ~ d. ~
o glgp
i
I ~~
x'i p - 3 a y ~ ~
v N D w
b
I
m
N( m 9
soh s~
0 3
y 3 v 3
:~
o v
~ ~
i
o °
W ~ _ __
V 3 fi
J~o _ o o y
ti 3 m d
O O O o O O o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c
0 0 0 0
~`d'uo~,~mo c~u~~ou~rommmnc
o+N(~.t ~. u~mmb+uNONNNi00~u
N+ b N N U 0 b 0 A 0 J~ O 4Ni b ~n W[
41
~~m~
Z ~ d ~ ~' N
n 3 N N ~ _N
N Cp ~
g _nemog°-' m
y
_ n ~~;
_ m a o o m~ ~ m o y
- ~ k
~ o a3 A '^
o
$ ci
3
z g8gomo~"N cD~
3 y
0 o O N m J
oN c o
i~Oa, O ~ N O ~ ~
P
m v
S
4 9 s
4
O
~K <
N
II I F <
N
I
L
~
N~ ti
y
c~ m
a
ag ~
m -
~O _ ~ s N _ ~ s
yY
y
T
y
D
O
O
o~u N
N~& g
d
~ m ~
_ y
3n
i _
v ~~
n O
ri~_
~ <s
V o
I O' <
i
I
N
~` m
3, n, 3`n Oo 3wm
0 3 v
q: ~ y o
Q. N N T N_
a 3 _ -
H D
3
°oo
mo
3 ~ ~
w
om.,_~~,wmo
S
y
3
y
NOm4>
~ Cpr ~'V1
v 3 Q O e N D
in C o-e m D x? m
y D
0 oaq
o mn oomm~wo
o $
09 0000 ~ ui
0 000
m
'Q eSU'o n
e~~ m
~ F ooN
D
m
n~ ~'
~3
m~0
=. 3 5
m~
Dcw
°-3
A00
a O 3
m
D`o
o rv
3 3
o ~
A~
D K D A 4
z sm `m 3
~ n~_ y 3
N ~ ~ N Z
v o rv
m o o it
m ~ o ~ 3
9 2
> Z
1
G
n
`'n
C
T
4
mn
~ o
J
S[
Ny
A~
O `~
C f
y.C
p^
N
9i
m
t
F
ti
w
m
eta ~~
,m,a=' m3
6 m~
~ H~
j~jif 1 n C~ ~ ~ ~ ( / _ ~ 'C ~
d ~VJ f G f / _
f ~ ~ r t~ w ~~;.,, i ~ ~. 7~~~11 t ~f/ ~,
,.nL .Y ~' 1 (~ I.i I 'M
~~~r,~.~ ,f ( t
P '*'~ cv
r ~ . ~ J 21 l ~-~ \ ~> ....°..--N ~ ~ ~ ~
x
C. .1Y I 6~.~p$ry,~ ~
/T p
xl ~ '~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ I ~. ~ '°s
< < eo s sss o.
{ s w
I ^~~ it ~~_ ~Zn~ I d ~ 1 Il l~C,~' ~ ~~ u ~~u
q J
5 rl ~ ^'_-~`. !\ r ~. 4"'l ~ ~ i :~+i~ l < r+ y '`~' ' / ~1 gqN ~,~ b' S 2
I aK` ~~: . ~ e, u `. f ~ 1 ~ : `n P o 8 g
p ' p\ ~~{J~n ~f g ~ e o Ica
I ~V ~.~~( ~iA''~..5 ~~ i n. ~VA~ ~ i ~ f ~I~~~ t~ i G ni e2 ic9i
C / ~ Z ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~' M ~l O~ ~S I ~ { ,z
N ~ i ~ ~ , ~ f, /) ~ ' / ~
~ ~ 5~ c
-~ ' ! \ll
7~ ~ .,~';, } ~ ~~ ,,~ t~H~, ~
i ~ ~ ~
_n ~ i ~'~ i ~ ~ l I.<~ ~ t.t Iiz ~
_ ! ...
~,. ~1 ~ `-q (~ ~~~ ~~{n - .~~, , ~. 1, ~~.._ .n.. S~°~°
~ ~ ~ _ II_ f`J ®.r
.~. ~ . 1 I ~ w _ ~ r.: ~ y ~--~ ., o f1 - .
%'^
'`i~ ~i7 ~4 ~ ~2~..i ~i ~.r~ r y^~ ~..,
I 9~ ~.# ~)/1 ~l ~ i / I '~' z ' a ) .. "' / 'y
' <
y Ib ~ ~„ r,
1 9 ~ ~R ~ S ~ v ~ _ ~
8 ran, ~ .~'. yy"~~i ~ ! 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ n ~ ~ ~~.
I N 9~ r ~ R I yim ~~ it y ~ :-.:f" ~ `~ r wu, ~` / ~.~ / ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~
i J ~ _ ~+ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~/
~' o,~ t a ~ t i (. r. ~/ i f ~ V`
I , ~', ~ _. ~~ C~ ~; ~ - ~ 1. ~u, ~',
~~ ,
.i . o ~ ~
{ ~ ( s~ l ~ i,, ~~ .e a
~ ~
~" ~ 1 l ~ ~ .yn N
{~ ~ ~y~i ~ i ~' TS
N ..t_..~„, ~ f
~~ ~ Z N V
c_
~~ 6y 9. ~ y ~ a W~ -
/ ~LL
~~ ~C ~ ~ s~
4 ^}~
96-Z abed
~e
w ~ ~ v m m
_F ~ _~ - o
3 w w° C y
w -
~
° < <
w ~
~
y
a
`~
a
f0
H
M
O
a
IIQ
C O
N f1
9 a
y
~f
a
((Q
N
`a
w
/~6~1
cn cn v, q 5~ ~v 0 0 1
^ c °
o •n w
,p C R t~'J C .~.. n d~ io
~ ^ m
°r°, a
~ ~
m ~
C
y a
F
w W w N w A W W w w A w
~ A N w w A
W ~ (.J ~O to ~] ? O~ to
IJ CA w W O ~ U
G\ U W N J W J ~ O CT G~ W ~ ~p A N J
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
T U v, A U, A U A U N A u, U N N A A
W Cq `p J 41 N P J Vi N C O O W G1 N
U A U A A L1 U Q Cn A U A U v. U A U
GO Cv in C J O A co O oo ~-• ip A - O co G\
41 CO A U W~ W .-. W W W N~ ct C1. J
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
L1 u CT A u, A vi A in in A in in c~ C A A
W~ O V' N J V' W C~ W N W W J A
W A b G1 J O •-• U b .-• W W .. .- W N
J a J A U W A O~ G\ U U U ni J G1 v. G1
w •- w ~p J •- ~O u, -- O w w N O O~
J •V O N O V' ~ Ll O~ N J Cn Cn O W N A
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O. in O. in in in C. A V~ in A in in Orn (T p ?
A J N O W O O U J W N •-~ W A W J W
A ~D J CS W O V' ~O J O W CT .- b W A N
~O J ~D ,(1 G1 CO ~p
~ J J~ Gl J J b W G~ J
A ~O V in O
G, O J G\ Oo J O w A ~l G\ A
O A J O~ W W ~p N ~p ~D V' O J W A W J
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
U U O. u u 1 CT A U ut A u, u, a C, A A
U b A ~' w W N U Go w N •-' w L1 A J
A N Vi U~ A~ b U CD W b N A J J W
~ ~D ~ G1 J ~ ~ CO W J J J W~ ~ J W
W p b WL.` C J W W A> W r W W A O
W N U Vi G\ W GO W W W~ b O U O U
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O~ O+ O~ U U A~ A U U A in v, P D1 A A
U O U N A V' W O) b A N N W J U J A
~O O W O N CO V~ ~• O U W •~• N N A W O
N O W J~ N N O O w~ O b W •V-~ W W
A~ ~ N ,
A
W N
V ~
V V
i CO A
p ~~ J
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O~ ~ Q N in in P ? ~ ? V~ in G\ L\ A A
CT O U N A •-' A ~]V A N N W J Gl W W
W Ut O U w W W CT W~ A w N pJ O O P
o~pty
`I 2 h '
.. o ~ m n ~
~' h ~ ~ o c
w T
w '° A a
o ~ y ~ C'
C: ~ o
y ~
w N w w A J
,U W O N J
N G1 A U •
O O O O O c
U U U U U I
A CO N W O f
N W J O J C
U U A A U C
N O ~O ~-- CA J
U U O N O J
O O O O O C
Cn P U U V J
U w U A f
N A W N W C
O~ C~ G1 U L\ C
N V~ O P A
O~ ~O ~O N N -
0 0 0 0 0<
U CT U U U '
U U L1 J O f
J U Oi U VJ •
J ~p J J J -
vi U A b J
,V m U A A t
O O O O O C
U ~ U U U
O~ J J ~D N t
•- •- O A A <
W Y lJ \J W
O~ N J J C
O v VJ CA O C
O O O O O C
u, ~ 'v. b~ v, -
(T W b O N t
A N G1 C~ C
O W O ~ lJ C
W W ~ ~ J [
O O O O O<
U G\ U C~ V~
Cn W iD N t
J W. ~ ~ Vr C
o o H t7 c
w F ~ a <
a C
a H c
n °°
N
0
v
W A W N 4
b •- Ci W 2
1 L1 b V' ~ a
~ O O O O C
A U U V
U ~ V
i o0 o P o a
i U U U V~ V
N •- N ~ l
N O W 1
) O O O O <
A A vi ~ v
) N N OW 4
c yn ~ J c
r Co O L
I T A O a
) o 0 0 o c
1 L1 ~ J A C
1 ~O W U b C
1 J G1 J ~O
• A ~I m A C
~ A G1 W W
) O O O O C
? A U c C
J .~ W G1 1.
) O. A N A C
1 W J W C
) A A `~ W C
.- J O~ O V
) O O O O C
A A 'v~ o. c
W W J V
) O D U N ~
~O W O W N
VJ " O r 1.
~ ~ J (Y C
> O O O O C
A A U G, C
) W W J 3
> A T T ~ 1~
SOOZ y~AF
~enuepy sar~ne~p,
~ ~ CJ T
w
o °
o' ~
~ 3 ° a
h
y .nT ,YV h O
° w o w ~ °
y w ^
o ^o w
^
y a a
~~ x
° ~ A
p ~
w C
Y• y
H C
Vi W W A lA
O D\ J N •-
N W V'V O
7~
O O O O O
~ u, A U A ~
N O OJ A a)
CO CT O 47 OJ
L, A A U O.
00 U W U N 3
A U AV N
O O O O O
G\ ~ v, A C
w w v, w
W ~ J U W
W Cn Cn G1 J
IJ J G1 U O
A CT w ip 4l
0 0 0 0 0
L1 v, A v` A C
W N V' N W
U A O ~ J
p J ~ J W
'
~ O ~ b .._. '
~'
J O W O J
O O O O O
G, U A U A C
W W ~O P W
O O A N J
.~. J J W •V
A N J b 0
U
O O O O O
w ~ ~ rn w °
~ W a w J
N CA W V• l7
~ W N W W .~
F G1 [T W CT
O O O O O
w w e rn w
O J m J
W
H