The URL can be used to link to this page

20140213 Redline Stormwater Report #1 12182014 , � STORMWATER SITE PLAN REPORT � Yelm Physical Therapy � Yelm, Washington November 10, 2014 � Project Information � Prepared for: Sean Sipe � Contact: Sean Sipe 4740 Avery Ln. SE Lacey,WA 98503 � Reviewing Agency � Jurisdiction: City of Yelm Project Number: � Project Contact: Tami Merriman � References WSDOE Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, 2012 ed. (DOE � Manual) � Project Engineer � Prepared by: Olympic Engineering, Inc. 11/10/14 PO Box 12690 N�R �, �► Olympia, WA 98508 �--t,��!l� F �,� (360) 705-2474 �ti��'� �`'�,. (360) 705-2443 fax �` �� F�`� www.olyeng.com � � J"� � `� 3 i 401 /,.�' OE P otect: 14009 erritt, PE �� 1`��„�,� J ou��,E File Number: 14009 fdr.doc � � � I ' � APPENDICES Table of Contents Appendix 1 -WWHM Modeling Results � &Drainage Calculations STORMWATER SITE PI.AN REPORT........................................................I Appendix 2-Soils Report � TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................II � PART 1—PROJECT OVERVIEW.................................................................1 PART 2—EXISTING CONDITONS SUMMARY.........................................1 � PART 3—OFF-SITE ANAYLSIS....................................................................1 � PART 4—PERMANENT STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN...................2 Applicable Minimum Requirements..............................................................2 � PART 5—SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES .....................................12 � PART 6—OTHER PERMITS.......................................................................12 PART 7—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL......................12 � PART 8—BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET.........................................12 r r � � � � � � � �� ' � Note: For the sake of simplicity, the compass directions(north, south, east& west) stated herein (unless otherwise noted) assume Yelm Ave. runs east-west and Solberg St. runs north- � south. �. PART 1 — PROJECT OVERVIEW Site Address: Unassigned Solberg St. SW Yelm, WA 98597 �`" Parcel Number: 75300400100 � Total Site Area: ±0.28 Acres Zoning: CBD � Section, Township, Range: Section 19 Township 17 North Range 2 East, W.M. � Proposed Improvements � The proposed project will include construction of a ±2,727 square-foot physical therapy office with associated frontage, water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, parking lot, landscaping, and private utility improvements. � PART 2 — EXISTING CONDITONS SUMMARY � The project site is currently undeveloped. The site is bounded by Yelm Ave. W to the north, Solberg St. SW to the west, a developed parcel to the east, and a public alley to � the south. The project site is relatively flat and generally slopes down from the south to northwest � at an average slope of 2%. The majority of the site contains field grasses with some � bushes and two trees. � The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Grays Harbor County Elassifies the on-site soils as Spanaway Gravelly Sandy Loam (HSG B). Soils �'testing performed by Materials Testing & Consulting confirmed this classification (see � soils report in Appendix) Per FEMA FIRM Map Panel #53067C0330E, the site is within Zone X. The Zone X � designation signifies areas that are outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. � PART 3 — OFF-SITE ANAYLSIS ; � Stormwater runoff from the south half of Yelm Ave. sheetflows westerly along the curb �^ line to a catch basin located near the south corner of the intersection, it is then (w r° November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report � c�,��t ��w'� �lv+r�'iK.� '�C�"�-� � L�_, , � �?,6"""�, ''�• �l � � conveyed westerly to a ditch (located on the subject parcel), and then it a ears to be � conveyed through a series of catch basins and storm pipe to a storm drain manhole located on the west side of Solberg St., across from the south side of the project site. � Conveyance beyond this manhole is unknown and the City of Yelm has not been able to provide any records or as-builts of the storm drainage system(s) in this area. Stormwater runoff from the east half of Solberg St. appears to be sheetFlow dispersed � through vegetation adjacent to the roadway. There were no other indications of stormwater runon or runoff to or from the subject parcel. � Stormwater runoff from Yelm Ave. will continue to flow through the site after project completion. � PART 4 — PERMANENT STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN � Applicable Minimum Requirements � The minimum requirements for stormwater development and redevelopment sites are listed in Section 2.5 of Volume I of the WSDOE Stormwater Management Manual for � Western Washington, 2012. Based on the thresholds given in this section, the �.r proposed project must address or comment on Minimum Requirements #1 through #9. �;' These requirements as they apply to this project are discussed in more detail below. "'� �� \� Minimum Repuirement#1 — Stormwater Site Plans� � �' Stormwater plans have been prepared. 1� .r� , � �' , Minimum Repuirement #2 — Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan � `� �;� S .PPP : � `�. � �" ' All new development and redevelopment shall comply with Construction �� SWPPP Elements #1 throu h #13 listed below. The su � � ��r y;' 9 ggested BMPs � underlined and in bold are proposed for use in all phases of construction. ��; ,�W ' � y; Element 1: Preserve Vegetation/Mark Clearing Limits ' ,n � ':; • Prior to beginning land disturbing activities, including clearing and grading, � �~ clearly mark all clearing limits, sensitive areas and their buffers, and trees � that are to be preserved within the construction area. � � � � . ��' • Retain the duff layer, native top soil, and natural vegetation in an undisturbed � � ,��''� � r�' state to the maximum degree possible. � � � � � • Suggested BMP's: � � e BMP C101: Preserving Natural Vegetation � � �- � � ` BMP C102: Buffer Zones BMP C103: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 2 � � � BMP C104: Stake and Wire Fence ;,,, Element 2: Establish Construction Access � • Limit construction vehicle access and exit to one route, if possible. • Stabilize access points with a pad of quarry spalls, crushed rock, or other equivalent BMPs, to minimize tracking of sediment onto public roads. � • Locate wheel wash or tire baths on site, if the stabilized construction entrance is not effective in preventing tracking sediment onto roads. � • If sediment is tracked off site, clean the affected roadway thoroughly at the end of each day, or more frequently as necessary (for example, during wet weather). Remove sediment from roads by shoveling, sweeping, or pick up and transport the sediment to a controlled sediment disposal area. � • Conduct street washing only after sediment is removed in accordance with the above bullet. � • Control street wash wastewater by pumping back on-site, or otherwise prevent it from discharging into systems tributary to waters of the State. � • Suggested BMP's: BMP C105: Stabilized Construction Entrance BMP C106: Wheel Wash � BMP C107: Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization � Element 3: Control Flow Rates � • Protect properties and waterways downstream of development sites from erosion and the associated discharge of turbid waters due to increases in the velocity and peak volumetric flow rate of stormwater runoff from the project � site. • Where necessary to comply with the bullet above, construct stormwater retention or detention facilities as one of the first steps in grading. Assure that detention facilities function properly before constructing site improvements � (e.g. impervious surfaces). • If permanent infiltration ponds are used for flow control during construction, � protect these facilities from siltation during the construction phase. • Suggested BMP's: �' BMP C240: Sediment Trap �, BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond Refer to Volume 3, Detention Facilities � � � � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 3 i�. � � Element 4: Install Sediment Controls • Design, install, and maintain effective erosion controls and sediment controls „� to minimize the discharge of pollutants. • Construct sediment control BMPs (sediment ponds, traps, filters, etc.) as one � of the first steps in grading. These BMPs shall be functional before other land disturbing activities take place. • Minimize sediment discharges from the site. The design, installation and � maintenance of erosion and sediment controls must address factors such as the amount, frequency, intensity and duration of precipitation, the nature of resulting stormwater runoff, and soil characteristics, including the range of � soil particle sizes expected to be present on the site. • Direct stormwater runoff from disturbed areas through a sediment pond or other appropriate sediment removal BMP, before the runoff leaves a � construction site or before discharge to an infiltration facility. Runoff from fully stabilized areas may be discharged without a sediment removal BMP, but must meet the flow control perFormance standard in Element#3, bullet#1. • Locate BMPs intended to trap sediment on-site in a manner to avoid � interFerence with the movement of juvenile salmonids attempting to enter off- channel areas or drainages. � • Where feasible, design outlet structures that withdraw impounded stormwater from the surFace to avoid discharging sediment that is still suspended lower in the water column. "� • Suggested BMP's BMP C230: Straw Bale Barrier � BMP C231: Brush Barrier BMP C232: Gravel Filter Berm � BMP C233: Silt Fence BMP C234: Vegetated Strip BMP C235: Straw Wattles "� BMP C240: Sediment Trap BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond BMP C250: Construction Stormwater Chemical Treatment BMP C251: Construction Stormwater Filtration � Element 5: Stabilize Soils � • Stabilize exposed and unworked soils by application of effective BMPs that � prevent erosion. Applicable BMPs include, but are not limited to: temporary and permanent seeding, sodding, mulching, plastic covering, erosion control fabrics and matting, soil application of polyacrylamide (PAM), the early � application of gravel base early on areas to be paved, and dust control. • Control stormwater volume and velocity within the site to minimize soil erosion. �. November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 4 ,� � �j, • Control stormwater discharges, including both peak flow rates and total stormwater volume, to minimize erosion at outlets and to minimize � downstream channel and stream bank erosion. • Soils must not remain exposed and unworked for more than the time pe�iods set forth below to prevent erosion: � • During the dry season (May 1 -Sept. 30): 7 days • During the wet season (October 1 -April 30): 2 days � • Stabilize soils at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast. • Stabilize soil stockpiles from erosion, protected with sediment trapping � measures, and where possible, be located away from storm drain inlets, waterways and drainage channels. • Minimize the amount of soil exposed during construction activity. � • Minimize the disturbance of steep slopes. • Minimize soil compaction and, unless infeasible, preserve topsoil. � • Suggested BMP's: BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding � BMP C121: Mulching BMP C122: Nets and Blankets BMP C123: Plastic CoverinQ � BMP C124: Sodding BMP C125: Topsoilinq/Compostinq � BMP C126: Polyacrylamide for Soil Erosion Protection BMP C130: Surface Roughening BMP C131: Gradient Terraces BMP C140: Dust Control �. � Element 6: Protect Slopes • Design and construct cut-and-fill slopes in a manner to minimize erosion. � Applicable practices include, but are not limited to, reducing continuous length of slope with terracing and diversions, reducing slope steepness, and roughening slope surfaces (for example, track walking). � • Divert off-site stormwater (run-on) or ground water away from slopes and disturbed areas with interceptor dikes, pipes and/or swales. Off-site stormwater should be managed separately from stormwater generated on the site. � • At the top of slopes, collect drainage in pipe slope drains or protected channels to prevent erosion. � • Temporary pipe slope drains must handle the peak 10-minute velocity of flow from a Type 1A, 10-year, 24-hour frequency storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year and 1-hour flow rate predicted by an approved continuous runoff model, increased by a factor of 1.6, may be � � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 5 , � used. The hydrologic analysis must use the existing land cover condition for predicting flow rates from tributary areas outside the project limits. For tributary areas on the project site, the analysis must use the temporary or permanent project land cover condition, whichever will produce the highest flow rates. If using the Western Washington Hydrology Model (WWHM) to 'f predict flows, bare soil areas should be modeled as "landscaped" area. • Place excavated material on the uphill side of trenches, consistent with safety , and space considerations. • Place check dams at regular intervals within constructed channels that are � cut down a slope. • Suggested BMP's BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding � BMP C130: SurFace Roughening BMP C131: Gradient Terraces � BMP C200: Interceptor Dike and Swale BMP C201: Grass-Lined Channels BMP C204: Pipe Slope Drains � BMP C205: Subsurface Drains BMP C206: Level Spreader � BMP C207: Check Dams BMP C208: Triangular Silt Dike (Geotextile-Encased Check Dam) � Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets • Protect all storm drain inlets made operable during construction so that � stormwater runoff shall not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. • Clean or remove and replace inlet protection devices when sediment has „ filled one-third of the available storage (unless a different standard is specified by the product manufacturer). ,� • Suggested BMP's: BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection � Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets � • Design, construct, and stabilize all on-site conveyance channels to prevent erosion from the following expected peak flows: ""� • Channels must handle the peak 10-minute velocity of flow from a Type 1A, 10- year, 24-hour frequency storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, 1-hour flow rate indicated by an approved continuous runoff model, increased by a factor of 1.6, may be used. The hydrologic analysis '� must use the existing land cover condition for predicting flow rates from tributary areas outside the project limits. For tributary areas on the project � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report g � ' � site, the analysis must use the temporary or permanent project land cover condition, whichever will produce the highest flow rates. If using the Western � Washington Hydrology Model (WWHM) to predict flows, bare soil areas should be modeled as "landscaped area. • Provide stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent t� erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes and downstream reaches at the outlets of all conveyance systems. • Suggested BMP's: �"" BMP C202: Channel Lining � BMP C209: Outlet Protection Element 9: Control Pollutants � • Design, install, implement and maintain effective pollution prevention � measures to minimize the discharge of pollutants. • Handle and dispose of all pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris that occur on-site in a manner that does not cause � contamination of stormwater. • Provide cover, containment, and protection from vandalism for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other materials that have the � potential to pose a threat to human health or the environment. On-site fueling tanks must include secondary containment. Secondary containment means placing tanks or containers within an impervious structure capable of � containing 110°/a of the volume contained in the largest take within the containment structure. Double-walled tanks do not require additional secondary containment. • Conduct maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles �m using spill prevention and control measures. Clean contaminated surfaces immediately following any spill incident. • Discharge wheel wash or tire bath wastewater to a separate on-site �,,,, treatment system that prevents discharge to surface water, such as closed- loop recirculation or upland application, or to the sanitary sewer, with local � sewer district approval. • Apply fertilizers and pesticides in a manner and at application rates that will not result in loss of chemical to stormwater runoff. Follow manufacturers' � label requirements for application rates and procedures. • Use BMPs to prevent contamination of stormwater runoff by pH modifying sources. The sources for this contamination include, but are not limited to: � bulk cement, cement kiln dust, fly ash, new concrete washing and curing waters, waste streams generated from concrete grinding and sawing, exposed aggregate processes, dewatering concrete vaults, concrete � pumping and mixer washout waters. . Adjust the pH of stormwater if necessary to prevent violations of water quality standards. t" �r r November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 7 � � � • Assure that washout of concrete trucks is performed off-site or in designated concrete washout areas only. Do not wash out concrete trucks onto the ground, or into storm drains, open ditches, streets, or streams. Do not dump excess concrete on-site, except in designated concrete washout areas. � Concrete spillage or concrete discharge to surface waters of the State is prohibited. • Obtain written approval from Ecology before using chemical treatment other � than CO2 or dry ice to adjust pH. • Suggested BMP's: � BMP C151: Concrete Handlinq BMP C152: Sawcuttinq and Surfacinq Pollution Prevention � See Volume IV—Source Control BMP's Element 10: Control De-Watering � • Discharge foundation, vault, and trench de-watering water, which has similar � characteristics to stormwater runoff at the site, into a controlled conveyance system before discharge to a sediment trap or sediment pond. • Discharge clean, non-turbid de-watering water, such as well-point ground � water, to systems tributary to, or directly into surface waters of the State, as specified in Element #8, provided the de-watering flow does not cause erosion or flooding of receiving waters. Do not route clean dewatering water � through stormwater sediment ponds. Note that "surface waters of the State" may exist on a construction site as well as off site; for example, a creek running through a site. • Handle highly turbid or otherwise contaminated dewatering water separately � from stormwater. • Other treatment or disposal options may include: � 1. Infiltration. 2. Transport off-site in a vehicle, such as a vacuum flush truck, for legal �'MI disposal in a manner that does not pollute state waters. 3. Ecology-approved on-site chemical treatment or other suitable treatment technologies. 4. Sanita or combined sewer dischar e with local sewer district a ''� rY g pproval, if there is no other option. 5. Use of a sedimentation bag with outfall to a ditch or swale for small volumes � of localized dewatering. � Element 11: Maintain BMP's • Maintain and repair all temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs as needed to assure continued performance of their intended '�" function in accordance with BMP specifications. � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report g � ' �, • Remove all temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs within 30 days after achieving final site stabilization or after the temporary BMPs are no � longer needed. Element 12: Manage the Project � • Phase development projects to the maximum degree practicable and take into account seasonal work limitations. � • Inspection and monitoring — Inspect, maintain and repair all BMPs as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Projects regulated under the Construction Stormwater General Permit must conduct � site inspections and monitoring in accordance with Special Condition S4 of the Construction Stormwater General Permit. • Maintaining an updated construction SWPPP — Maintain, update, and � implement the SWPPP. • Projects that disturb one or more acres must have site inspections conducted � by a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL). Project sites disturbing less than one acre may have a CESCL or a person without CESCL certification conduct inspections. By the initiation of construction, the SWPPP must identify the CESCL or inspector, who must be present on-site or on-call � at all times. • The CESCL or inspector (project sites less than one acre) must have the � skills to assess the: • Site conditions and construction activities that could impact the quality of stormwater. � • Effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures used to control the quality of stormwater discharges. • The CESCL or inspector must examine stormwater visually for the presence � of suspended sediment, turbidity, discoloration, and oil sheen. They must evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs and determine if it is necessary to install, maintain, or repair BMPs to improve the quality of stormwater discharges. � Based on the results of the inspection, construction site operators must correct the problems identified by: • Reviewing the SWPPP for compliance with the 13 construction SWPPP � elements and making appropriate revisions within 7 days of the inspection. • Immediately beginning the process of fully implementing and maintaining � appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, addressing the problems not later than within 10 days of the inspection. If installation of necessary treatment BMPs is not feasible within 10 days, the construction site operator may request an extension within the initial 10-day � response period. • Documenting BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book �' (sites larger than 1 acre). � • The CESCL or inspector must inspect all areas disturbed by construction activities, all BMPs, and all stormwater discharge points at least once every "" calendar week and within 24 hours of any discharge from the site. (For � � November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 9 ' purposes of this condition, individual discharge events that last more than ;� one day do not require daily inspections. For example, if a stormwater pond discharges continuously over the course of a week, only one inspection is � required that week.) The CESCL or inspector may reduce the inspection frequency for temporary stabilized, inactive sites to once every calendar month. � Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development BMP's • Protect all Bioretention and Rain Garden BMPs from sedimentation through � installation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control BMPs on portions of the site that drain into the Bioretention and/or Rain Garden BMPs. Restore the BMPs to their fully functioning condition if they accumulate � sediment during construction. Restoring the BMP must include removal of sediment and any sediment-laden Bioretention/rain garden soils, and /� replacing the removed soils with soils meeting the design specification. � � \ , • Prevent compacting Bioretention and rain garden BMPs by excluding i'� construction equipment and foot traffic. Protect completed lawn and � '•- landscaped areas from compaction due to construction equipment. � � � ,.� • Control erosion and avoid introducing sediment from surrounding land uses �' �_ ?� onto permeable pavements. Do not allow muddy construction equipment on - the base material or pavement. Do not allow sediment-laden runoff onto � ` �� , permeable pavements or base materials. � � • Pavement fouled with sediments or no longer passing an initial infiltration test "� ,�t� must be cleaned using procedures in accordance with this manual or the �, manufacturer's procedures. �'� r .; • Keep all heavy equipment off existing soils under LID facilities that have been � .. excavated to final grade to retain the infiltration rate of the soils. ,,,� �� ' : ��, � Minimum Repuirement#3- Source Control of Pollution• � , If required, a Pollution Source Control Program will be prepared and provided prior to final project approval. � Minimum Repuirement#4-Preservation of Natural Drainage Svstems and Outfalls� Stormwater runoff from Yelm Ave. when continue to pass through the project site after project completion. There are no other known natural drainage � systems or outfalls onsite; however, they will be preserved if found. Minimum Requirement#5- On-Site Stormwater Management• � On-site stormwater management BMPs will include a BayFilterT"" cartridge for runoff treatment, an underground infiltration trench for flow control, and post- � construction soil quality and depth (BMP T5.13). See Minimum RequiremenYs #6 (Runoff Treatment) and #7 (Flow Control) � below for additional information. �. November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 10 � ' ' � Minimum Requirement#6—Runoff Treatment: This project will create more than 5,000 square-feet of new total effective � pollution-generating impervious surface (PGIS) area; therefore, it is required to provide stormwater treatment facilities (Runoff Treatment). � A Baysaver Technologies Vault with one BayFilterT"' cartridge will provide treatment of stormwater runoff from '/2 of Solberg St. frontage improvements, the onsite parking lot area, and the new alley improvements. �' Per WWHM modeling results, this project is required to treat a 15-minute water quality flow rate of 0.0361 cfs. � 0.0361 cfs/0.067 cfs/cartridge = 0.6 (Use 1 cartridqe) � The Washington State Department of Ecofogy issued a "General Use Level Designation for Basic(T S S)Treatment"for this filter when usin g a 0.067 � cfs/cartridge design flow rate. Minimum Reauirement#7—Flow Control: � This project will create more than 10,000 square-feet of new total effective impervious surface area; therefore, it is required to provide a stormwater Flow Control facility. �„ Treated stormwater runoff will be conveyed to an underground infiltration trench system consisting of nine Stormtech chambers surrounded by drainrock for � storage and 100% infiltration. Roof runoff will bypass the treatment facility and will be tightlined directly to the infiltration trench as treatment of roof runoff is not required. � The "Layer 1 porosity" in the WWHM model was adjusted until the "Trench Volume at Riser Head" equaled the actual storage volume of the facility (see � Stormtech spreadsheet calculations in Appendix for facility storage volumes). In addition, a hypothetical riser height was incrementally adjusted/lowered to a height where stormwater just began to flow through the riser (2.4-foot height) � which provides for 1.1-feet of freeboard in the 3.5-foot high trench. Per the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Materials Testing & � Consulting, dated June 18, 2014 (see Appendix), the initial lowest measured Ksatinitia� rate was 24.5 inches/hour. Per Table 3.3.1 of the DOE Manual, corrections factors were applied to the Ksatinitial rate to determine the final Ksat � design rate as follows: CF„= 1.0 (little to no variability) � CFt = 0.40 (grain size method) CFm = 0.90 (default factor) � � t� November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 11 � , � �' � CFT = CF�xCF,xCFm = 1.OX0.40x0.90 = 0.36 �!. ,.\�P�_ ,`� Ksat=Ksatinitia�x CFT = 24.5 x 0.36 = 8.82 inches/hour � �" � ��,� For desi n ur oses an 8 inch/hour inf � g p p , iltration was used. s � ti��, � ��' ��'�� See Appendix for WWHM modelin results. ��,-� _ � g � ��k �„£ Minimum Repuirement#8— Wetlands Protection� �� \� There are no known wetlands on-site or within the immediate vicinity of the � � `*° project site; therefore, this Minimum Requirement is not applicable. � l. \ Minimum Re uiremenf#9— O eration & Maintenance: q p � � An operation and maintenance plan will be prepared prior to final project approval, if required. PART 5 — SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES � A Geotechnical Engineering Report was prepared by Materials Testing & Consulting, � dated June 18, 2014 (see Appendix). PART 6 — OTHER PERMITS � A grading permit will be required. � PART 7 — OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL A comprehensive Operations Manual and Maintenance Checklists will be provided � prior to final project approval, if required. PART 8 — BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET � Bond Quantities will be provided if requested. � -- _ �°� � ��V'L�t�.�,.�,Z,•� '�-✓ t�t✓� �'�)$�Z�e�� C��L�'l�✓�'��'1i�� November 2014 Stormwater Site Plan Report 12 � I ' , ' ' , � � � ' ! i 1 1 1 1 1 � ;� Appendix 1 � WWHM Modeling Results & Drainage Calculations � , � Project: Yelm Physical Therapy-WA s�, � Chamber Model- SC 740 St+�rmTeGt?R Units- � Impenai cr��k Ha�e ro�rn�� . � ��an Number of chambers- 9 � Voids in the stone(porosity)- 30 % BaSe of Stone Elevation- 33970 ft �jndutle Pedmeter Stone in Calcuiations Amount of Stone Above Chambers- 6 in Amount of Stone Below Chambers- 6 in Area of system- 423 sf Min.Area- 304 sf min.area � �-_. - --�� -� �StormTech SC-740 C�me�l�tive Stc�r��i�c�l�r;°�;:�� Height of Incremental Single Incremental Incremental Incremental Ch Cumulative System Chamber Total Ghamber Stone 8 St Chamber Elevation (inches) cubic feet) (cubic feet) (cubic feet) cubic feet (cubic feet (feet) 42 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 733.49 343.20 41 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 722.92 343.12 � 40 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 712.35 343.03 39 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 701.78 342.95 38 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 691.21 342.87 37 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 680.64 342.78 36 0.05 0.49 10.42 10.92 670.06 342.70 �� 35 0.16 1.47 10.13 11.60 659.15 342.62 �s 34 0.28 2.54 9.81 12.35 647.55 342.53 33 0.60 5.44 8.94 14.38 635.20 342.45 32 0.80 7.22 8.41 15.62 620.82 342.37 31 0.95 8.56 8.00 16.56 605.20 342.28 � 30 1.07 9.67 7.67 17.34 588.64 342.20 29 1.18 10.62 7.38 18.01 571.30 342.12 2g 1.27 11.39 7.15 18.55 553.29 342.03 27 1.36 12.20 6.91 19.11 534.75 341.95 26 1.45 13.09 6.65 19.73 515.64 341.87 � 25 1.52 13.72 6.45 20.18 495.91 341.78 24 1.58 14.24 6.30 20.54 475.73 341.70 23 1.64 14.78 6.14 20.92 455.19 341.62 22 1.70 15.30 5.98 21.28 434.27 341.53 21 1.75 15.78 5.84 21.61 412.99 341.45 � 20 1.80 1623 5.70 21.93 391.38 341.37 19 1.85 16.69 5.56 22.26 369.45 341.28 18 1.89 17.04 5.46 22.50 347.19 341.20 17 1.93 17.41 5.35 22.76 324.69 341.12 16 1.97 17.77 5.24 23.01 301.94 341.03 � 15 2.01 18.09 5.14 23.23 278.92 340.95 14 2.04 18.40 5.05 23.45 255.69 340.87 13 2.07 18.67 4.97 23.64 232.23 340.78 12 2.10 18.94 4.89 23.83 208.59 340.70 11 2.13 19.19 4.82 24.00 184.76 340.62 10 2.15 19.38 4.76 24.14 160.76 340.53 � 9 2.18 19.59 4.69 2429 136.61 340.45 8 2.20 19.79 4.64 24.42 112.33 340.37 7 2.21 19.87 4.61 24.48 87.91 34028 6 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 63.43 340.20 � 5 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 52.86 340.12 4 0.00 0.00 10.57 '10.57 42.29 340.03 3 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 31.71 339.95 2 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 21.14 339.87 � 1 0.00 0.00 10.57 10.57 10.57 339.78 , � � � � r ��. � wasHiNCroN srnTE � DEPAAiMENi OF ECOLOGY December 2012 � GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATON FOR BASIC TREATMENT � CONDITIONAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR ENHANCED, AND PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT � For � BaySaver Technologies, Inc. BayFilterTM Ecology's Decision: � 1. Based on BaySaver Technologies' application submissions, Ecology hereby issues a General Use Level Designation (GULD) for the BayFilterTM. � • As a stormwater treatment device for Basic treatment (TSS) removal. � The Basic Treatment GULD is for both the BayFilter Cartridge (BFC) and � Enhanced Media Cartridge (EMC) and limited to the following ma�mum flow rates: � a. BFC Cartridge maximum flow rate of 0.7 gpm/sf �� __ ° �'�"� 0 30 gpm (0.067 cfs) per cartridge (43 sf filter area) � 0 26-inches in diameter and appro�imately 28.75-inches tall. b. EMC Cartridge ma�mum flow rate of 0.5 gpm/sf �� a� � 0 45 gpm (0.1 cfs) per cartridge (30-inch diameter) (90 sf filter area) 0 75 gpm (0.17 cfs)per cartridge (39-inch diameter) (150 sf filter area) � c. Media combinations for the BayFilter cartridges are limited to Silica Sand, Perlite, Zeolite, and Activated Alumina. (All filters are limited to 19-inch vertical .,� component to the spiral filter layers) � 2. Based on BaySaver Technologies' application submissions, Ecology hereby issues a conditional use level designation (CULD) for the BayFilterTM cartridges. ' • As a stormwater treatment device for Enhanced treatment (dissolved Cu and dissolved Zn removal) and Phosphorus treatment. � � Sized at a design rates no greater than those listed above (GULD (Basic) Flow rates). _ _ ' , , � 3. Ecology approves use of BayFilterTM Cartridges using the Silica Sand,Perlite, Zeolite, and Activated Alumina for treatment at the above flow rates per cartridge. Designers � shall calculate the water quality design flow rates using the following procedures: • Western Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, � the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using the latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecolog3�- approved continuous runoff model. � • Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using � one of the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMIVIEW) or local manual. � � Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality design flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility. � 4. The CULDs expire on December 1, 2013 unless extended by Ecology, and are subject to the conditions specified below. �j 5. The GITLD has no expiration date, but it may be amended or revoked by Ecology, and is subject to the conditions specified below. � �, Ecology's Conditions of Use: � BayFilterTM units shall comply with these conditions: l. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain BayFilterTM units in accordance with � BaySaver Technologies' applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision. 2. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stormwater treatment devices is often dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a particular drainage basin. � Therefore, Ecology does not endorse or recommend a "one size fits all" maintenance cycle for a particular modeUsize of manufactured filter treatment device. � • Typically, BaySaver designs BayFilter Cartridge systems for a target filter media replacement interval of 12 months. � • Testing results provided to Ecology for the Basic GULD approval indicate that the treatment system required maintenance after four months of operation. Ecology used the effluent flow rate decreasing to below the design flow rate as the indicator ' of the need for maintenance. Ecology determined this from the continuous flow , monitoring data. This interval does not necessarily determine the maintenance frequency for all BayFilter systems. � � , � • � Owners/operators must inspect BayFilter systems for a minimum of twelve months � from the start of post-construction operation to determine site-specific maintenance schedules and requirements. Owners/operators must conduct inspections monthly �""� during the wet season, and every other month during the dry season. (According to � the SWMMWW, the wet season in western Washington is October 1 to April 30. According to S��VMMEW, the weti season in eastern Washington is October 1 to � June 30.) After the�rst year of operation, owners/operators must conduct inspections based on the findings during the first year of inspections. �_�� Conduct inspections by qualified personnel, follow manufacturer's guidelines, and must use methods capable of determining either a decrease in treated effluent � flowrate and/or a decrease in pollutant removal ability. � 3. When inspections are performed, the following findings typically serve as maintenance triggers: � • Accumulated vault sediment depths exceed an average of 2 inches, or • Accumulated sediment depths on the tops of the carfridges exceed an average of 0.5 � inches, or • Standing water remains in the vault between rain events. • Bypass during storms smaller than the design storm. � • Note: If excessive floatables (trash and debris) are present, perform minor maintenance consisting of gross solids removal, not cartridge replacement. 4. The filter fabric used in the BayFilter is highly oleophilic (oil absorptive); therefore, � hydrocarbon accumulation on the flter may cause premature failure. Oil control BMP's should be installed upstream of BayFilter installations if warranted, and/or the � BaySaver should be inspected after any known oil spill or release. 5. BaySaver Technologies Inc. commits to submitting a QAPP for Ecology approval by ' June l, 2012 that meets the TAPE requirements for attaining a GULD for enhanced and phosphorus treatment. The monitoring site(s) chosen should be reflective of the product's treatment intent. Baysaver shall monitor sites prior to installation of the � canister to ensure concentrations of the monitored constituents are within TAPE guidelines. � 6. BaySaver Technologies Inc. shall complete all required testing and submit a TER for � enhanced and phosphorus treatment for Ecology review by Apri130, 2013. 7. BaySaver Technologies Inc. may request Ecology to grant deadline or ex iration date ' P extensions, upon showing cause for such extensions. 8. Discharges from the BayFilterTM units shall not cause or contribute to water ualit � � 9 3 standards violations in receiving waters. , , � ' � Applicant: BaySaver Technologies Inc. Applicant's Address: 1030 Deer Hollow Drive � Mount Airy, MD, 21771 Application Documents: � • Technical Evaluation Report BayFilter System, Grandview Place Apartments, Vancouver, Washington and Appendices A through O (May 18, 2011) � • Washington State Department of Ecology Technology Assessment Protocol— EnviYOnmental BayFilterTM Conditional Use Designation Application (March 2007) � • BaySaver Technologies, Inc. BayFilterTM System Washington State Technical and Design Manual, VeYSion 1.1 (December 2006) � • Efficiency Assessment of BaySeparator and Bay filter Systems in the Richard Montgomery High School January 6.2009. • Evaluation of MASWRC Sample Collection, Sample Analysis, and Data Analysis, � December 27, 2008 • Letter from Mid-Atlantic Stormwater Research Center to BaySaver Technologies, In. � dated October 22, 2009. • Letter from Mid-Atlantic Stormwater Research Center to BaySaver Technologies, In. � dated November 5, 2009. � • Maryland Department of the Environment letter to BaySaver Technologies dated Jan. 13, 2008 regarding approval of BayFilter as a standalone BMP for Stormwater treatment. � • NJCAT letter to BaySaver Technologies dated June 18, 2009 regarding Interim Certification. �. Applicant's Use Level Request: � • General use level designation as a basic, enhanced, and phosphorus treatment device in accordance with Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. � Applicant's Performance Claims: � • Removes and retains 80% of TSS based on laboratory testing using Sil-Co-Sil 106 as a laboratory stimulant. • Removes 42% of dissolved Copper and 38% of dissolved Zinc. �" • Expected to remove 50% of the influent phosphorus load. �M � ' , � Ecology's Recommendations: � Ecology finds that: � • Ecology should provide BaySaver Technologies, Inc. with the opportunity to demonstrate, through additional laboratory and field-testing, whether the BayFilterTM system (as a � single treatment facility) can attain Ecology's Enhanced Treatment and Phosphorus removal goals. Findings of Fact: � • Based on field testing in Vancouver, WA, at a flow rate less than or equal to 30 gpm per � canister, the BayFilterTM system demonstrated a total suspended solids removal efficiency of greater than 80% for influent concentrations between 100 and 200 mg/1 and an effluent „� concentration<20 mg/1 for influent concentration< 100 mg/l. • Based on laboratory testing, at a flowrate of 30 GPM per filter, the BayFilterTM system demonstrated a total suspended solids removal efficiency of 81.5% using Sil-Co-Sil 106 � with an average influent concentration of 268 mg/L and zero initial sediment loading. • Based on laboratory testing, at a flowrate of 30 GPM per filter, the BayFilterTM system � demonstrated a dissolved phosphorus removal efficiency of 55%using data from the Richard Montgomery High School field-testing. The average influent concentration was � 0.31 mg/L phosphorus and zero initial sediment loading. • Based on data from field-testing at Richard Montgomery High School in Rockville, MD the BayFilter system demonstrated a Cu removal efficiency of 51% and 41% for total and ,,,r dissolved Cu respectively. Average influent concentrations are 41.6 µg/1 total and 17.5 µg/1 dissolved. � • Based on data from field-testing at Richard Montgomery High School in Rockville, MD the BayFilter system demonstrated a Zn removal efficiency of 45% and 38% for total and "'�I dissolved Cu, respectively. Average influent concentrations are 354 µg/1 total and 251 µg/1 dissolved, respectively. Other BayFilterTM Related Issues to be Addressed By the Company: �. 1. The Washington State field test results submitted in the TER do not yet show whether the �" BayFilterTM system can reliably attain 30%removal of dissolved Cu, 60%removal of dissolved Zn, or 50%removal of Total Phosphorus found on local highways, parking lots, and other high-use areas at the design operating rate. 2. BaySaver Technologies, Inc. should test a variety of operating rates to establish conservative � design flow rates. 3. The system should continue to be monitored to measure bypass and to calculate if the system � treats 91% of the volume of the total annual runoff volume. � � , � 4. The system should be tested under normal operating conditions, such that the settling basin is partially filled with pollutants. Results obtained for"clean" systems may not be � representative of typical performance. 5. Conduct field-testing at sites that are indicative of the treatment goals. � 6. BaySaver should continue monitoring the system for a longer period to help establish a maintenance period and to obtain data from additional qualified storms. Conduct testing to obtain information about maintenance requirements in order to come up with a maintenance � cycle. 7. Conduct loading tests on the filter to determine maximum treatment life of the system. � 8. Conduct testing to determine if oils and grease affect the treatment ability of the filter. This should include a determination of how oil and grease may affect the ion-exchange capacity of the system if claims are to be made for phosphorus removal. � 9. BaySaver should develop easy-to-implement methods of determining when a BayFilter system requires maintenance (cleaning and filter replacement). � 10. BaySaver must update their O&M documents to include information and instructions on the "24-hour draw-down"method to determine if cartridges need replacing. � Technology Description: Download at www.BavSaver.com � Contact Information: � Applicant: Tom Pank BaySaver Technologies, Inc. 1030 Deer Hollow Drive � Mount Airy, MD, 21771 (301) 829-6470 � �ank@,bavsaver.com Applicant website: w��T��r.BaySaver.com �, Ecology web link: http•//www ec .y wa•gov/pro�rams/wq/stormwater/newtech/index.html � Ecology: Douglas C. Howie, P.E. Department of Ecology Water Quality Program � (360)407-6444 dou�las.howie cr,ec .Y wa.gov ' ' � � ' Revision Histor � Date Revision April 2008 Original use-level-designation document � February 2010 Revision August 2011 GULD awarded for Basic Treatment Apri12012 Maintenance requirements updated. � August 2012 Revised design storm criteria December 2012 Revised contact information and document formatting � � � ' � , ' ' ' � ' � � , ' ' �, Western Washington Hydrology Model PROJECT REPORT � Project Name: 14009_111014 Site Address: � City . Report Date : 11/10/2014 Flow Control Gage . Lake Lawrence � Data Start : 1955/10/O1 Data End 2008/09/30 Precip Scale: 0.86 WWHI�i3 Version: � PREDEVELOPED LAND USE � MITIGATED LAND USE � Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No � Pervious Land Use Acres � Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.088 ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.063 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.044 � PARKING FLAT 0.112 � �° Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater � Gravel Trench Bed 1, Gravel Trench Bed l, � Name : Gravel Trench Bed 1 Bottom Length: 67. 66ft. Bottom Width : 6.25ft. � Trench bottom slope 1: 0. 0000001 To 1 Trench I,eft side slope 0: 0. 0000001 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0.0000001 To 1 Material thickness of first layer : 3.5 � Pour Space of material for first layer : 0.53 Material thickness of second layer : 0 Pour Space of material for second layer : 0 r° Material thickness of third layer : 0 � Pour Space of material for third layer : 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate : 8 Infiltration saftey factor : 1 ' , Wetted surface area On � Discharge Structure Riser Height: 2.4 ft. � Riser Diameter: 8 in. � Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 � r� Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table � Stage(£t) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dschr (cfs) Infilt(cfs) 339.7 0.010 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 � 339.7 0. 010 0. 000 0.000 0. 079 339.8 0. 010 0.000 0. 000 0.080 339.8 0. 010 0.001 0. 000 0.082 339. 9 0.010 0. 001 0.000 0.083 � 339. 9 0.010 0. 001 0. 000 0. 084 339. 9 0. 010 0.001 0. 000 0.085 340.0 0. 010 0.001 0. 000 0.086 340.0 0.010 0. 002 0.000 0. 087 340. 1 0. 010 0.002 0. 000 0.088 � 340.1 0. 010 0.002 0. 000 0.089 340. 1 0.010 0. 002 0.000 0. 090 � 340.2 0. 010 0.002 0. 000 0. 091 340.2 0. 010 0.003 0. 000 0.092 340.2 0. 010 0.003 0. 000 0.093 � 340.3 0.010 0. 003 0. 000 0. 094 340.3 0. 010 0.003 0.000 0.095 340.4 0. 010 0.003 0. 000 0.096 340.4 0.010 0. 004 0. 000 0. 097 340.4 0. 010 0.004 0.000 0. 099 � 340.5 0. 010 0.004 0. 000 0.100 340.5 0.010 0. 004 0. 000 0.101 340. 6 0. 010 0. 004 0.000 0. 102 � 340. 6 0. 010 0.005 0. 000 0.103 340. 6 0. 010 0.005 0. 000 0.104 340.7 0.010 0.005 0.000 0. 105 � 340.7 0. 010 0. 005 0.000 0. 106 340. 8 0. 010 0.005 0.000 0. 107 340.8 0. 010 0.006 0. 000 0.108 340. 8 0. 010 0. 006 0. 000 0. 109 340. 9 0.010 0.006 0.000 0. 110 y�j 340. 9 0. 010 0.006 0. 000 0.111 340. 9 0. 010 0.006 0. 000 0.112 � 341.0 0.010 0.007 0.000 0. 113 341. 0 0.010 0. 007 0.000 0. 115 341. 1 0. 010 0.007 0. 000 0.116 341. 1 0. 010 0.007 0. 000 0.117 � 341. 1 0.010 0.007 0.000 0. 118 341.2 0.010 0. 008 0.000 0.119 341.2 0. 010 0. 008 0. 000 0.120 � 341.3 0.010 0. 008 0.000 0.121 341.3 0. 010 0. 008 0. 000 0. 122 341.3 0. 010 0.008 0.000 0. 123 341.4 0. 010 0.009 0.000 0. 124 � ' ' � 341.4 0.010 0.009 0.000 0.125 341.5 0.010 0. 009 0.000 0.126 � 341.5 0.010 0.009 0.000 0. 127 341.5 0.010 0. 009 0.000 0.128 341.6 0.010 0. 010 0.000 0.129 341. 6 0. 010 0.010 0.000 0.130 � 341. 6 0.010 0.010 0.000 0.132 341.7 0.010 0. 010 0.000 0.133 341.7 0. 010 0.010 0.000 0.134 � 341. 8 0.010 0.011 0.000 0. 135 341. 8 0.010 0. 011 0.000 0.136 341.8 0.010 0.011 0.000 0.137 341. 9 0.010 0.011 0.000 0.138 341. 9 0.010 0.011 0.000 0.139 � 342. 0 0.010 0. 012 0. 000 0.140 342.0 0.010 0.012 0.000 0.141 342.0 0.010 0.012 0.000 0.142 � 342.1 0.010 0. 012 0.000 0.143 342.1 0.010 0.012 0.008 0.144 342.2 0.010 0.013 0.073 0. 145 � 342.2 0.010 0.013 0. 172 0. 146 342.2 0.010 0.013 0.297 0.148 342.3 0.010 0. 013 0.442 0.149 342.3 0.010 0.013 0. 605 0.150 � 342.3 0.010 0.014 0.785 0. 151 342.4 0.010 0. 014 0. 979 0.152 342.4 0.010 0.014 1.188 0.153 � 342.5 0.010 0.014 1.409 0.154 342.5 0.010 0.014 1. 643 0. 155 342.5 0.010 0. 015 1. 888 0.156 342. 6 0.010 0.015 2.144 0.157 342. 6 0.010 0.015 2.411 0.158 342.7 0. 010 0.015 2. 689 0.159 342.7 0.010 0.015 2. 976 0.160 � 342.7 0.010 0.016 3.272 0.161 342.8 0.010 0. 016 3.578 0.162 342.8 0.010 0.016 3.893 0.163 342. 9 0.010 0.016 4.217 0.165 342.9 0.010 0. 016 4.549 0.166 � 342.9 0.010 0.017 4.890 0.167 343.0 0.010 0.017 5.238 0.168 343.0 0.010 0. 017 5.595 0.169 � 343.0 0.010 0. 017 5. 959 0.170 343.1 0.010 0. 017 6.331 0.171 343.1 0.010 0.018 6.710 0.172 p' 343.2 0.010 0.018 7.097 0.173 i� 343.2 0.010 0.018 7.491 0.174 � � �. ANALYSIS RESULTS �' Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) " 2 year 0 �� , ' 5 year p � 10 year p 25 year p 50 year p � 100 year p Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 � Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year p 5 year p 10 year p � 25 year p 50 year p 100 year 0 � Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Miti ated � Ranked Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated � POC #1 � The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. � Flow(CFS) Predev Dev Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass ,r 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 'r 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � � ' � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass '� 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass ,�r. ' � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC 1. On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted £or 15 min: 0 cfs. � Off-line facility target £low: 0 efs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. � Perind and Impind Changes No changes have been made. * This program and accompanying documentation is provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by the user. Clear Creek Solutions and the Washington State Department of Ecology disclaims all warranties, either expressed � or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions and/or the Washington State Department of Ecology be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss � of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions or the washington State Department of Ecology has been advised of the possibility of such damages. � , ' ' ' ' , � „ Western Washington Hydrology Model PROJECT REPORT � Project Name: 14009_treat Site Address: City . k Report Date : 11/10/2014 Water Quality Gage . Lake Lawrence � Data Start : 1955/10/Ol Data End 2008/09/30 Precip Scale: 0.86 WWHIrI3 Version: � PREDEVELOPED LAND USE � MITIGATED LAND USE Name . Basin 1 � Bypass: No GroundWater: No � Pervious Land Use Acres Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.088 � SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.044 PARKING FLAT 0.112 � � Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater � � ANALYSIS RESULTS Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0 � 5 year 0 10 year 0 25 year 0 � 50 year 0 100 year 0 � Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0 5 year 0 �' 10 year 0 � ' , 25 year p � 50 year p 100 year p � Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Miti ated �w Ranked Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated � POC #1 � The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. � Flow(CFS) Predev Dev Percentage Pass/Fail 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass „� 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � ' � �, 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0. 0000 0 0 0 Pass ' � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass 0.0000 0 0 0 Pass � Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume £or POC 1. On-line facility volume: 0.0303 acre-feet � On-line Pacility target £low: 0.01 cfs. Adjusted £or 15 min: 0.0361 cfs. O£f-line facility target £low: 0.0205 efs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0205 cfs. Perind and Impind Changes � No changes have been made. ■1 This program and accompanying documentation is provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by the user. Clear Creek Solutions and the Washington State Department of Ecology disclaims all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. � In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions and/or the Washington State Department of Ecology be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss � of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions or the Washington State Department of Ecology has been advised of the possibility of such damages. � ' ' ' , ' , ' , ' � � ' � � � � � � � � � ' � � � . Appendix 2 Soi/s Report �_ , � MTC Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. •} � Geotechnical Engineering&Consulting•Special Inspection�Materials Testing•Environmental Consulting 'ba�"'m RWo3 R t'owaiP�°�. June 18, 2014 � Sean Sipe 2523 Cedar Park Loop � Olympia, WA 98501 (360) 951-0754 sean(�a,sipetherapv r�oup.com � Subject: Final Geotechnical Engineering Report(�vtTC Pro�ect#�aso�t) Yelm Physical Therapy,Yelm Highway, Yelm, Washington � Mr. Sipe: � This letter transmits our Final Geotechnical Engineering Report for the above-referenced project. Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. (MTC) performed this geotechnical study in accordance with our � May 2, 2014 proposal. The following report is the final version for you and your project team. The site soils encountered are suitable for the proposed development if the provisions provided within this report are followed. The proposed building location consists of sand and gravel outwash with a �° substantial amount of cobbles and boulders. Groundwater was not observed during exploration. � We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical engineering services for this project. We would be pleased to continue our role as your geotechnical engineering consultants during the project planning and construction. We will be pleased to meet with you at your convenience to discuss these services. If � you have questions regarding this report or if we can provide assistance with other aspects of the project, please contact me at(360) 534-9777. � Respectfully Submitted, � Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. � `�--,`�6 —�-�,/%�f, ,�'Z�4..ti..-- J'I.G t�!��Y ✓ �" Lance G. Levine, P.E. f� Professional Geotechnical Engineer * Attachment: Final Geotechnical Engineering Report � � � Corporate • 777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington, WA 98233 • Phone 360.755.1990 • Fax 360.755.1980 � SW Region • 2118 Black Lake Blvd. S.W. • Olympia, WA 98512 • Phone 360.534.9777 • Fax 360.534.9779 NW Region • 805 Dupont Street, Suite 5 • Bellingham, WA 98225 • Phone 360.647.6061 • Fax 360.647.8111 Kitsap Region • 5451 N.W. Newberry Hill Road, Suite 101 • Silverdale, WA 98383 • Phone/Fax 360.698.6787 w Visit our website: www.mtc-inc.net � � � Final Geotechnical En ineerin Re ort g g P � Yelm Physical Therapy � Yelm, Washington Prepared for: Sean Sipe � 2523 Cedar Park Loop Olympia, WA 98501 (360)951-0754 � sean(a�siAetherapygroup.com Prepared by: � ��,AR Y�� ,�G oF wASy,y ��'L v� -" , t''� c'�` 0 - � ' Z - � , � �� y� �.� ,Q 45853 p �� ss 4NA1-E�� Signed 6-18-2014 Lance G. Levine, P.E. � SW Region Geotechnical Division Manager � MATERIALS TESTING & CONSULTING INC. MTC � � ) � 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Olympia, Washington 98512 �iTC Phone: (360) 534-9777 � Fax: (360) 534-9779 �_'?� � June 18, 2014 �¢��T�4��cp`��,�. j� MTC Project Number: 14S071 � iw *' Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. All Rights Reserved � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. � Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS � � 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................1 1.1. GENERAL. •1 1.2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................1 � 1.3. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES........................ .. .... ..... 1 ' 2.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................2 2.1. SURFACE CONDITION .............................................................................................................2 2.2. SITE EXPLORATION.................................................................................................................2 2.3. LABORATORY TESTING..........................................................................................................3 2.4. AREA GEOLOGY .......................................................................................................................3 � 2.5. SOIL CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................4 2.6. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS..............................................................................................4 3.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................5 � 3.1. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................5 � 3.2. FLOOR SLAB-ON-GRADE........................................................................................................6 3.3. SEISMIC RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................6 � 3.4. IMPERVIOUS PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................7 4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................8 4.1. EARTHWORK.............................................................................................................................8 � 4.1.1. Excavation.............................................................................................................................8 4.1.2. Clearing and Grubbing ..........................................................................................................8 4.1.3. Subgrade Evaluation and Preparation....................................................................................8 �D 4.1.4. Wet Weather Construction ....................................................................................................9 4.2. STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACTION....................................................10 4.2.1. Materials..............................................................................................................................10 �. 4.2.2. Placement and Compaction.................................................................................................10 4.3. TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND SLOPES .....................................................................11 4.4. UTILITY TRENCHES AND EXCAVATIONS........................................................................12 �. 4.5. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT..........................................................................................12 5.0 LIMITATIONS..............................................................................................................................13 � APPENDIX A. SITE PLANS �" APPENDIX B. EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX C. LABORATORY RESULTS � ' ' � � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � � 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. GENERAL � This report presents the findings and recommendations of Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc.'s (MTC's) geotechnical engineering study conducted in order to construct an approximately 3,200 ft2 wood frame � commercial structure, adjacent parking lot, and infiltration facilities. The project site does not have an address and is located at the intersection of Yelm Avenue SE (SR 510) and Solberg Street SW in Yelm, Washington. The location of the project site is shown in Figure 1 of Appendix A. These services were �° verbally requested by Sean Sipe at April 29, 2014. A proposal was provided to Sean Sipe of Yelm � Physical Therapy on May 2, 2014. The subject site occupies Thurston County parcel 75300400100 and is approximately 0.28 acres in size. � The property is currently undeveloped. The site is mostly vegetated with grasses, low shrubs, and a few trees. The property is bordered by residential houses to the southeast and southwest, a restaurant across � Solberg Street to the northwest, and a school across Yelm Avenue to the northeast. The surrounding area is a mixture of light commercial and residential development. The property is accessed by a gravel pull- out on Solberg Street. �" � 1.2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION � It is our understanding that the proposed development includes the construction of an approximately 3,200 square feet structure for use as an office building. The adjacent parking lot would accommodate � approximately 13 vehicles. The project would also contain its own storm water infiltration facility. The site is generally flat and no significant cut, fill, or retaining structures are anticipated. � 1.3. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SER VICES The purpose of our study was to explore subsurface conditions at the site and provide geotechnical � engineering recommendations for design and construction of the proposed development and develop an infiltration evaluation in accordance with Yelm's current design manual, the 2012 Stormwater � Management Manual for Western Washington. Our scope of services was consistent with our proposal dated May 2, 2014. � � , P' 1 � � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � 2.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 2.1. SURFACE CONDITION � The subject site, at the time of this investigation, is densely vegetated with low grasses and shrubs. The � site is relatively flat. A drain leading to a catch basin is located near the northern corner of the site. A small gravel pull-out exists near the west corner of the site at the intersection of an alleyway and Solberg � Street. Significant cut and fill activities are not anticipated for the proposed development. It is likely that no retaining structures will be required for the proposed scope of construction. � ~ N �.. � � t� , � � � ��iia � ,t ,!.T` �� 1 �8� # �� A k � � 4�, " ��:i n'�e�:. � � Ys+'* •i:£ w� �ft� Z .. C 5 ,: '�'.`.� il._ Y . _ �� ` _ $y�,� �� *: .. .. e�"'q�r �av _. v.�.t � `.`. -. 5�.,�` '" '�, f t � $�, �5 �x �4i�'%�r#Y,s,�� ;� � b� k .��a'� ' � `� n',. � �,�.�� .��'�. ' . . . � � x �\f �a. � �} �.itcie. �.�T. kr � : • '#°�' _,ry�'�v � ,st •.�+Ni X�"� $ �` �: '� . y,` �� `� .�" � �i <.. � � g� ° ; �� t;� �#'i{ �1 �x.'��{. ' . '¢�t, x.. . ' � ,i.� . �..� , .�#. '� y^.1 ''db ' Y2Y��,. 5:��+_„. �.._Y . },pit. �: �� 3 � .. �4 . .... °°^ ,E'.,,,, •e` .��,� ,t�� `�r�, � � f, �� V}��* ��'� � ,� �� .. . . � ;{ .f,`� � ; 51 T`�.;�i��` � '.4 �F< .,�A�� .a. �S� ,.J y ` ..� � . v p • ..rs };,1-`�„+° .. §.'�� F f R� Fr . �. \4 �` „ ��Fti � a ...� - � � }* .' L � �t�t F '� ��1` �'. � �tA °+ �'y �; , �« �°-°aa�a,� �. �. �i.�` .. '�` .. �z��+ � t�' t+. � „ �` 'i� � � .0 �� ry :•"3�"` r`,�s<?�j� F. �"��< s�c,�.?�7 i� . '�� i�rc:�p � � � '� Z, ..x�a� . � er�. .,�:x � .� � a , '�" �"r�`t�' ^>etf,#.'�'r�.. . . _ _��,�r��,� .�g ,g '+� ', }a��`r�, . 4��x` �:��i v�. < �. � i, � ;� �� ;°ti'� �3, .��._. '�"1 c 1'�,� s��..,� X' '� ,: '�`fi � n'�'a�z '"�y�,,"t � d -i� t a�',�� a:.'y ��a . �,`�wJ<t'" �`�'. `��. . .. L,°��.�. ...r . . .. ,:�"'' .w 's i*':t1't��' ii. . ��'»�i�°�, . . ., . Photo 1.Looking northeast along the northwestern edge Photo 2.Looking south from the north corner of the site � of the site � 2.2. SITE EXPLORATION We investigated the site on May 15, 2014, by documenting and directing the excavation of three test pits. � The test pit location map is included as Figure 2 in Appendix A. Test pits were excavated to depths ranging from 10.0 to 13.0 feet below the ground surface (b.g.s.). During excavation of the test pits, the � soils encountered were logged in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative soil samples were collected, sealed in plastic bags, and transported to our laboratory for re- � examination and testing. '� Additional information on the site exploration program is provided with our exploration logs for the test pits in Appendix B of this report. � � 2 � e� Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � 2.3. LABORATORY TESTING � Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples in accordance with ASTM standards to � determine index and engineering properties of the site soils. Laboratory testing included grain-size distribution and moisture content. Laboratory test results are presented on the test reports included in Appendix C. � 2.4. AREA GEOLOGY � The project site is located in a regional topographic depression commonly referred to as the Puget Lowlands. Geomorphic attributes and geologic deposits of the Puget Lowlands are interpreted to be the result of multiple phases of glaciation that occurred during and up to the end of the Pleistocene epoch, or � approximately 12,000 years ago. Glacial deposits of the Puget Lowlands, and specifically those associated with the subject site, predominantly consist of glacial outwash and glacial till. The glacial � outwash is associated with recessional and proglacial deposits in meltwater streams and deltas and, as a result, is commonly stratified, poorly to moderately sorted, and contains less fine-grained sediment. The �, glacial till is composed of unsorted and highly compacted mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel deposited as a result of direct deposition from advancing or retreating glacial ice lobes. � According to the Geologic Map of Washington —Southwest Quadrant, the geology of the site consists of Quaternary Outwash gravel (Qgog). The material is stratified pebble, cobble, and boulder gravel � deposited glacial meltwater.l � Soils at the site are mapped as Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (110).2 The soil class is described as being deep with a depth to a restrictive feature of greater than 80 inches b.g.s. The soils are described as being somewhat excessively drained and the water table is greater than 80 inches b.g.s. � Observed site soil conditions are consistent with glacial outwash deposits. � � : � � � Geologic Map of Washington — Southwest Quadrant; WA State Department of Natural Resources; � Walsh et al; 1987 2 Web Soil Survey (http://web.5oil.5u�-vey.nres.usdcr.�o��/app/WebSoilSun�e .y aspx); United States Department of Agriculture—Natural Resources Conservation Service � � � 3 � _ � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 � 2.S. SOIL CONDITIONS � A general characterization of the site soil encountered during our exploration is presented in this section. The exploration logs in Appendix B present details of the soils encountered at each exploration location. ■ As encountered in our test pits, the onsite soils are generally characterized as follows: Silty Sand with Gravel—SM-GM: Dark red to dark brown silty sand with gravel was encountered at . all test pit locations immediately below the topsoil to a depth of 2.5 to 4.0 feet b.g.s. This material � commonly contained cobbles and boulders up to 16 inches diameter as well as scattered and piled � concrete and asphalt debris. Roots and other organics were commonly found in this unit and, at TP-2, various detritus composed of asphalt and concrete. ,,,,� Sand with Gravel — SW-GW / SP-GP: Reddish brown to gray brown sand with gravel was encountered in TP-1 and TP-2 from approximately 3.5 feet b.g.s. to 5.5 feet b.g.s. At TP-3, this unit was encountered from approximately 2.5 feet b.g.s. to 8.5 feet b.g.s. Cobbles and boulders `"'� were common in this material, with diameters up to 20 inches. At TP-1, boulders were absent from this unit, instead gravel and cobbles existed up to 4 to 6-inch diameter. The material was � typically moist. � Sand — SP: Gray sand was encountered at TP-1 between approximately 5.5 feet and 8.0 feet b.g.s. This material was moist and contained some gravel. Sand with Gravel to Gravel with Sand — SP-GP / GP-SP: Gray brown sand with gravel to gravel � with sand was encountered between approximately 5.5 feet and 8.0 feet b.g.s. and extended to the "" termination depth at all test pits. This material was moist and very hard. Cobbles and boulders with diameters up to 18 inches were common in this material. 2.6. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS '� Using the information available from the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), a review of � the area uncovered few well logs for the vicinity.3 Groundwater in the logs that were available was recorded at between 17 feet and 29 feet b.g.s. Groundwater was not observed during our field � exploration. Based on field explorations, experience in the area, and available DOE well logs, the estimated depth to groundwater is 15 to 30 feet b.g.s. However, seasonal fluctuations will cause the groundwater level to vary. .rii 3 Washington State Well Log Viewer (http://apps.ec .v ��a.gov/welllog/MapSearch) Washington State � Department of Ecology � 4 � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 ,r 3.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS � MMENDATIONS 3.1. FOUNDATION RECO � Two requirements must be fulfilled in the design of foundations. First, the load must be less than the ultimate bearing capacity of the foundation soils to maintain stability; and secondly, the differential � settlement must not exceed an amount that will produce adverse behavior of the structure. The allowable settlement is usually exceeded before bearing capacity considerations become important; thus, the � allowable bearing pressure is normally controlled by settlement considerations. It is MTC's opinion that a shallow spread footing foundation system is suitable for the proposed structure. � The following parameters should be used for foundation design. • Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity: At the proposed footing depth, the existing site soils are � composed of silty sand with gravel (SM to GP) with cobbles and boulders. For footings placed on firm and unyielding glacial outwash, we recommend using an allowable bearing capacity of � 2,500 pounds per square foot (ps�. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by 1/3 for transient loading due to wind and seismic events. � • Minimum Footing Depth: All exterior footings should bear at the current grade to utilize the existing gravel mat that caps the site. A minimum of 18 inches of fill shall be placed around � the entire building so that the footings are a minimum of 18 inches below final grade. Interior footings shall be embedded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. � However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum, and no footing should �� be founded in or above organic or loose soils. � • Minimum Footing Width: Footings should be proportioned to meet the stated bearing capacity and/or the IBC 2012 (or current) minimum requirements. Interior or isolated column footings � should be a minimum of 24 inches wide. Continuous strip footings should be a minimum of 16 inches wide. � • Estimated Settlements: Anticipated settlement of footings, founded as above, should be on the order of 1 inch or less with a differential settlement of lh inch. Settlement will most likely �' occur at the time when the load is applied. ; � • Lateral Load Resistance: Resistance to lateral loads may be calculated by multiplying the � buried portion of foundation elements by an equivalent fluid pressure of 200 pounds per cubic �` foot (pc�. Unless the adjacent ground surface is protected by slabs or pavement, neglect the " upper one foot. �. �" 5 w � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � • Sliding resistance between a compacted structural fill subgrade (includes existing 2.0 feet minimum thickness gravel mat) and foundations should be evaluated using an allowable a coefficient of friction of 0.35. This value assumes concrete cast directly on the structural fill and includes a factor of safety of 1.5. � • Drainage: Footing drains are recommended for this structure. If perimeter drains are desired, the drains should consist of 4-inch diameter perforated pipe, surrounded by drain rock, wrapped ,,� in a filter geotextile and having a sufficient gradient to displace water away from the structure and directed to an appropriate outfall. Roof or other storm drains should not outfall into the � footing drains. � 3.2. FLOOR SLAB-ON-GRADE Prior to the placement of a capillary moisture break, any organic, loose, or obviously compressive � materials must be removed. The subgrade shall be proof-rolled to confirm that the subgrade contains no ++� soft or deflecting areas. Areas of excessive yielding should be excavated and backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 4.2. Any additional fill used to increase the elevation of the floor slab should „� meet the requirements for structural fill. To provide a capillary moisture break, a 6-inch thick, properly compacted granular mat should be � provided below concrete slabs. The capillary moisture break may be considered as the top 6-inches of the structural fill mat. The mat should consist of crushed rock all passing the 1 inch sieve and no more than 3 � percent(by weight)passing the U.S. No. #4 sieve. � A vapor retarding membrane such as 10 mil polyethylene film should be placed beneath all floor slabs to prevent transmission of moisture through the slab where floor coverings may be affected. Care should be taken during construction not to puncture or damage the vapor retarding membrane. To protect the � membrane, a layer of sand no more than 2 inches thick may be placed over the membrane if desired. 3.3. SEISMIC RECOMMENDATIONS � In accordance with Section 1613 of the International Building Code (IBC) and based on explorations at "'� the site and our regional experience, we recommend using a Site Class D and Seismic Design Category D for this project site. � � ■ 6 a � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 �. The Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Thurston County, Washington maps the site area as having a very � low liquefaction potential.4 The results of our field exploration support the low liquefaction potential indicated in the provided reference due to the large grain sizes encountered and deep groundwater. � � 3.4. IMPERVIOUS PAVEMENT DESIGNRECOMMENDATIONS The pavement subgrade should be proof-rolled to confirm that the subgrade does not contain soft or � deflecting areas. Areas of excessive yielding should be excavated and backfilled with properly compacted structural fill as described in Section 4.2. The subgrade shall be proved by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. The pavement design is based on a properly prepared subgrade with a minimum California Bearing Ratio � (CBR) of 15 (resilient modulus = 14,450 psi per AASHTO) and the estimated total design ESALs equal to 380,000. MTC recommends a minimum pavement structural section of 3 inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) over 3 inches of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC) over 6 inches of crushed surfacing base �' course(CSBC) for all site parking, drives, or entries that incorporate hot mixed asphalt. � � � . , , , , ,. . , , � , :� , : .. �.. � � ' � �' �, 4 Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Thurston County, Washington; WA State Department of Natural Resources; Palmer et al; 2004 � i � �'' 7 M � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 � 4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1. EARTHWORK � � 4.1.1. Excavation Excavation of the onsite soils can generally be performed with conventional earthmoving equipment such as bulldozers and excavators. Difficult excavations should not be completed in excessively wet soil or a11 near the water table without proper dewatering. Though not encountered, excavations below the water table will be unstable and will result in an unstable subgrade which may not provide proper support to � utilities, structural fill, ar foundations. � Where possible, excavations should be made within about one foot of finished subgrade level. We recommend using smooth edged buckets to minimize subgrade disturbance. 4.1.2. Clearing and Grubbing �r Stripping depths up to 16 inches should be expected for this site. During the proposed site grading, any � vegetation and other debris within the proposed development locations shall be removed and properly disposed. The final exposed subgrade should be inspected by a representative of the geotechnical "�J engineer to verify that all deleterious material has been removed. Any soft or deflecting areas should be removed to firm unyielding soils and replaced with structural fill. 4.1.3. Subgrade Evaluation and Preparation "� �. After excavations have been completed to the planned subgrade elevation and before placing fill or structural elements, the exposed subgrade soils should be evaluated by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Where appropriate, subgrade should be proof-rolled with a minimum of two passes of fully loaded dump truck or water truck. In circumstances where this seems unfeasible, the � representative of the geotechnical engineer may use alternative methods for subgrade evaluation, as � appropriate. Because MTC's recommendations involve bearing the footings at depth, the geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the subgrade meets the requirements. ,,�, Any loose soil should be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition and at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density per ASTM D1557. Any areas that are identified as being soft or yielding during subgrade evaluation should be over-excavated to a firm and unyielding condition or to the � depth determined by the geotechnical engineer. Where over-excavation is performed below building footings, the over-excavation area should extend beyond the outside of the footing a distance equal to the � depth of the over-excavation below the footing. The over-excavated areas should be backfilled with � 8 � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting,Inc. � Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 properly compacted structural fill. � 4.1.4. Wet Weather Construction � The existing on site soil can be moisture sensitive and may become soft and difficult to compact or traverse with construction equipment when wet. During wet weather, the contractor should take measures � to protect the exposed subgrades and limit construction traffic. These measures could include,but are not limited to: placing a layer of crushed rock or lean concrete on the exposed subgrade, covering the exposed � subgrade with a plastic tarp, and keeping construction traffic off the subgrade. During wet weather, earthen berms or other methods should be used to prevent runoff from draining into � excavations. All runoff should be collected and disposed of properly. Measures may also be required to remediate onsite soils in the event of wet weather. These measures can include: � • Selective drying by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during periods of dry or warm weather followed by recompaction. � • Removal of affected soils to expose a suitable bearing subgrade and replacement with suitable compacted structural fill. � • Mechanical stabilization with a crushed coarse aggregate compacted into the subgrade, possibly in conjunction with a geotextile. � • Soil-cement admixture stabilization. � The onsite soils may be difficult to work with during periods of wet weather. Since saturated and frozen soils are not suitable for use as structural fill, we recommend that earthwork activities generally take place � in late spring, summer, or early fall. � : � r � � �' 9 � # Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � 4.2. STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACTION 4.2.1. Materials � � All material placed below structures or pavement areas should be considered structural fill. Structural fill material should be free of deleterious material, have a maximum particle size of 6 inches, and be compactable to the required compaction level. Existing soils may be reused as structural fill so long as it � is placed and compacted as specified in Section 4.2.2 of this report and does not contain particles over 6 inches in diameter. � Imported structural fill material placed below structural elements and pavement areas shall conform to the most recent edition (at the time of construction) of WSDOT Section 9-03 in Standard Specifications for � Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (WSDOT Standard Specifications).5 Frozen soil is not suitable for use as structural fill. Due to vapor emissions, do not use material specified as Recycled HMA under WSDOT 9-03.21(1) for building pads. � The contractor should submit samples of each of the required earthwork materials to the geotechnical � engineer for evaluation and approval prior to use. The samples should be submitted at least 5 days prior to their use and sufficiently in advance of the wark to allow the contractor to identify alternative sources if the material proves unsatisfactory. � 4.2.2. Placement and Compaction � Prior to placement and compaction, structural fill should be moisture conditioned to within 3 percent of its *� optimum moisture content. Loose lifts of structural fill should not exceed 12 inches in thickness; thinner lifts (loose lifts less than 8 inches) will be required for walk-behind or hand operated compaction equipment. � All structural fill should be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition and to a minimum percent compaction of 95 percent based on its modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined per ASTM � D1557. General compaction requirements are specified on the following page. � � 5 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (WSDOT Standard ,,� Specifications); Washington State Department of Transportation; 2010 � 10 � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. � Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � Structural fill shall be compacted to the indicated percent compaction: Foundation and Slab Subgrades: 95 Percent Impervious Pavement Subgrades (upper 2 feet): 95 Percent �. Impervious Pavement Subgrades (below 2 feet): 90 Percent � Utility Trenches (upper 4 feet): 95 Percent Utility Trenches (below 4 feet): 90 Percent � Landscaping: 85 Percent � We recommend the structural fill placement and compaction be observed by an MTC representative. A sufficient number of tests should be performed to verify compaction of each lift. The number of tests required will vary depending on the fill material, its moisture condition, and the equipment being used. � Initially more frequent tests will be required while the contractor establishes the means and methods required to achieve proper compaction. 1� 4.3. TEMPORARY EXCA VATIONS AND SLOPES � All excavations and slopes must comply with applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for � the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. We are providing soil type information solely as a service to our client for planning purposes. Under no circumstances should the information be interpreted to mean that MTC is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's � activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. � Temporary excavations in existing native soils should be inclined no steeper than 1.SH:1V. Construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed near the top of excavations. If stability of buildings, walls, or other structures is endangered by excavation operations, � support systems such as shoring, bracing, or underpinning may be required to provide structural stability and protect personnel working within the excavation. Earth retention, bracing, or underpinning required � for the project should be designed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Washington. Temporary excavations and slopes should be protected from the elements by covering with plastic � sheeting or other similar impermeable material. Sheeting sections should overlap 12 inches or more and be tightly secured with sandbags, staking, or other means to prevent exposure of soils under the sheeting. � � � 11 � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � 4.4. UTILITY TRENCHES AND EXCA VATIONS The contractor should be responsible for the safety of personnel working in utilit trenches. We � Y recommend all utility trenches, but particularly those greater than 4 feet in depth, be supported in � accordance with state and federal safety regulations. Pipe bedding material should conform to the manufacturer's recommendations and be worked around the pipe to provide uniform support. Cobbles exposed in the bottom of utility excavations should be covered '� with pipe bedding or removed to avoid inducing concentrated stresses on the pipe. � Trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill as recommended in Section 4.2. Particular care should be taken to insure bedding or fill material is properly compacted to provide "� adequate support to the pipe. Jetting or flooding is not a substitute for mechanical compaction and should not be allowed. 4.S. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT � To manage storm water, a below parking infiltration gallery is proposed. For storm water management � and design, the city of Yelm currently uses the 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Per section 3.3.6 of the manual, the Soil Grain Size Analysis Method uses the Massmann � equation was used to determine the hydraulic conductivity of the soil tested. The uncorrected hydraulic conductivities are presented below in Table 1. The large amount of cobbles and boulders encountered � during the exploration were too large to be sampled and should be expected to reduce infiltration rates. Please note the USCS classification is based on the soil that would fit within a 1 gallon bag. � Test Pit ID TP-1 68" TP-2 74" TP-3 75" TP-3 114" De th Below Surface(ft) 68" 74" 75" 114" Mapped Soil Description(USDA) Spanaway Spanaway Spanaway Spanaway y/ gravelly sandy gravelly sandy gravelly sandy gravelly sandy loam loam loam loam � USCS Classification SP GP SP SP Dio(mm) 0.306 0.363 0.167 0.150 Dbo(mm) 12.500 14.560 0.578 6.598 �o��) 33.885 30.812 7.044 39.306 '� %Passin No.200 Sieve 2.1 2.9 3.90 3.10 Sat.H draulic Conductivit Ksat Massmann . ft/da 147.0 213.7 108.6 49.1 Sat.H draulic Conductivit Ksat Massmann . in/hr 73.5 106.8 54.3 24.5 Table 1.Pre-Design Calculated Hydraulic Conductivities i , � 12 � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � 5.0 LIMITATIONS � Recommendations contained in this re ort are based on our understandin of the ro osed development P g P P � and construction activities, our field observations and exploration, and our laboratory test results. It is possible that soil and groundwater conditions could vary and differ between or beyond the points explored. If soil or groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that vary or differ from � those described herein, we should be notified immediately in order that a review may be made and supplemental recommendations provided. If the project scope or expected bearing loads of the proposed � construction changes from that described in this report, our recommendations should also be reviewed. We have prepared this report in substantial accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical � engineering practice as it exists in the site area at the time of our study. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that an � adequate program of tests and observations will be conducted by MTC during the construction phase in order to evaluate compliance with our recommendations. Other standards or documents referenced in any � given standard cited in this report, or otherwise relied upon by the author of this report, are only mentioned in the given standard; they are not incorporated into it or"included by reference", as that latter � term is used relative to contracts or other matters of law. This report may be used only by Sean Sipe and his design team and only for the purposes stated within a r reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than 18 months from the date of the report. L Land or facility use, on- and off-site conditions, regulations, or other factors may change over time and � additional work may be required with the passage of time. Based on the intended use of the report, MTC may recommend that an additional inspection be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non- � compliance with any of these requirements by Sean Sipe or anyone else will release MTC from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party and Sean Sipe agrees to defend, � indemnify, and hold harmless MTC from any claim or liability associated with such unauthorized use or non-compliance. We recommend that MTC be given the opportunity to review the final project plans and � specifications to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly interpreted. We assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. � The scope of work for this subsurface exploration and geotechnical report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. � � � 13 � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � APPENDIX A. SITE PLANS T I ' � K y.��.. � - .. ., � <.i;.�i .'1r.1 t�..!'_. 'r' � Jfr x _ +.an1h Sf.`'� � :;i.. , Y v, �> �°1� m 'C,. � � � � 9: Y c � '1fl, y a m � K � + yP;,� ,•,c 35�nd:;-5 -- . yrq j _. � v . .. ,. ,....� .. .. ..-.�� . _. m... M1 ��....� .._ .. f _. �`{� . ...�� .�,. �Af„ � ' . . . .. .. �d�rY .. 'a y � /'{/ N �� T 4�restern �i•pa-k � ,Aar 5_ '" _ J . ,,. ;:�;':_ �,. , � '�NdSF. ' Cvar� � 1 rttl � _ 1 km ,,.,.:.. �: ., 4. � � „� � ; - : ��`� ,: ¢ � ,, v .�„ s-m a r ,rj. t ,,, �,i�� x r�� .�'�4, � ,_ �: " �� ,`�r► � '� � -� 4 � � ,$�':��;+, ' �f.R � ��t„� ;:',v� °;, �, ` # � �� ' . -ri �g�,'�` _ „�'�' .a �'�` " ` � :� -'�� ' "*. "^. � � �',�'� �, �� ,� �� `F`� • � �6 ° ,?�. � ix�� '""�„� a � R y, � ,� � �'� � ,�. /�. p � � � �`- - � � . '-'Y/. ' ,. �,� ��- . (� �.r� . '.�'M1, .�ry� � r= . '� , + p,�, .y�,h, k.,. . ;` . � 1%�'3 ` .�a. . n Y'<._-�}h� . � ,.�'_ . . . r . ��.,�� r fi:.;�" �. �� . . �` i�j .. - #�. `*�.... �.�„ ' ` » ..sy.<� �� '' �.. . �:. - '��'f' � ' ,�!r"' ��'�x�.t ��'y+�� '� ,e-�,;,.. � � , ..� rw:� � ( . �� '"�� `t%^� �''° �� "r�� ; , " . ; . .. . 1� ! y� ��,,�y, � �t�i:i �'� �'� i�' ��'"4';.�.. \'�:5.� w$.�'W\ s � .`t � � .:� � � t ...�{��. � . .e � F � T p/� C }p T � ` �}� � ��, 1)�QJVV� IJILV � � � � [ ^�� ;.1 ��+ �` .. ` � � '�� 4_- , f' �-� -�� `� f' �`� � ��, � � �`��`��,��`� ' � ``` � °' �� . �- w�1 �"`�� ' �r1',°�4 � ��ti �} �':�� .,, � �� :r� . .,_ , �� - _. _ � ...s: •� ,�, . , •,.. � , , ,.�'"+a,, �"" �r� � � � `� � Not to scale ; . ,,. �. �� y� :- 4. ..°. ��' .�,;��,� �+a�. '�"�` �"�� Not for Construction �, �' � � • �r' � ^� ,o �,; � +�,�,.� � �'_ :� �., �� ` � -� .x�' .*�' ,. �� '�t� � Imagery from Google Maps s y,,� +�� '" �, �� '� ' ��'h Accessed on May 30,2014 sr '' '�"w' .�, � � � '� � � � � �t` �k , ; ` .e� 3�aa' � Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Regional and Local Site Vicinity � FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 1 Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm, WA �� Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 r� �- � � , ; �, �.� _,`; ;, ,� $�. � � o � � ; Q • , � � , _,,,• "` ,y, ; � _. �. .. � ,�, .�. "` ,, ti��„ .;� .�r.�. j � �r n,`��. �* °"';e. � .. ,: �y�"' , + .�ta:s..�',�' .: . -_�"�-'�' -.. �t` T�.., � *.'� ' .,�q � �."��'. #�� ' / � .,� .,rr. •._/` ' ti�i'�+�� ' . �,. . . . ' . \+ _ ..:� �� m � .�, .v"� ,� � � �. �` �� fi � �,� x��° i ��Y �'M. ��`�, `,� � � .. ' �`� '�. �: =� � i , .� � ?� ,- . a�Ytdr . , . � �`�" '� . ..nt � 3 ,.;��'� . e �, " ,: .� - 1.,�w`�^.`� . � � s � � �,��}; ` „�y, �"�_ �`'��q�:s �Approx.P�oposed�St�ucture Location -.,a�� ♦ l • a r ..- s � .�� „�� -w,* �� , �� . .'` � �;'� ,� `"", �` �,�� f�'�'�'1 « �. � � '� � � � „ .�.-� �$ � n � ,, � � �. ��, „ , , `,..�� a�: _ . _ �a .. �,�,;. ' �� °`' '��, m�*.., �' �� „, ��,• Tp-2 °w TP-1�`�� ` � � �,, � � ` p '. }-r:r f � �„�> �� ..� �, � � � Y T�� .�� ,h �� $ f -� . ' .-.;.. ,� `f%�j ��"� x,, � �a . -. _ . .�', j!�r � . b �� . � . .: \ , . � . �. 3 ��;� F «�"i � � � �� #. �� *�,� Y � «. . .� `� � * k-. . . .. y ��, . , t t TP-3 � � �� ' � �� ' °�" 4'? t � o� �- �� p - . _ } , �.. , � •� � _ �' _ �.�. ' � �, � � � o � . .. a � ��, o �� , �, � , �� ,� �. � a ^�" n � ,.. 'W � , � _ � � �' $'� � � '� .a�k.� ..� ��_ a' ; � � �, .a .,� �� . rr _ 'n� �..�; � ��.; ��,"�„1 �,f�'r. � . � � -� p, ..+� c� » . � . , z - ... � . � . . '`.: _ . s- , . . x.. . y� � �, ,,-- > . . � � � e ' ' „' _ +^ ` -� '�. yr �.i,, `« � 4 � � .: a _• •.,.. - . '� � . � �� , , `�.. ,�_ �,�� . > _ _. �.� - , . - �. _ .`��r� f ` w. �: . � ��-'� -�' � --- .� , , X.� - ; �:, wp� . o . �>�y , a & a Au'� . b � S °-:�P t°Y T+� y� ' . .Y 6., . s+��y,�i � �" , ,p� .e;.� .� , d `-4� . � . 9 � �.. . �°'" . .� � ,t�. �� « � � L rgy� x.._� », . � .. . ` . j,� � '.,,„. > ._ ` _ �y� _ ' � ""+ _ . . � � � �� T�� " � � , .� � � ' � . � � � Not to scale � Not for Construction Imagery from Google Maps � Approx.Test Pit(TP) � Location � � Materials Testing& Consulting,Inc. Exploration Location Map FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 2 Olympia,WA 98512 Yelm, WA � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � APPENDIX B. EXPLORATION LOGS � Representative soil samples were collected from below the existing ground surface. Soil samples were collected by grab sampling from an excavator bucket. During the field exploration, the soils were � classified in accordance with ASTM D2487. Samples were placed in plastic bags to limit moisture loss, labeled, and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The excavations were monitored by our staff engineer who examined and classified the materials � encountered, obtained representative soil samples, and recorded pertinent information including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater occurrence. Upon � completion of fieldwork, the test pits were backfilled with the excavated soil. The stratification lines shown on the individual logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. The conditions depicted are for the � date and location indicated only, and it should not necessarily be expected that they are representative of conditions at other locations and times. � , � � , , , ' ' � ' , �. Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 � �� . Unified Soil Classification System Chart Major Divisions Graph USCS Typical Description Samoler Svmbol Descriotion � Standard Penetration Test(SPT) Coarse °o;�• G�7 Well-gradedGravels,Grave�SandMcc- G�ainedSoils Gravel o :p•°• hses Clean Gravels ' � Shelby Tube �. More Than ,�� GP Poorly-Graded GraveLs,Gmvel-Sand 50%of � ,�-• Mixtures � Grab or Bulk Coarse Frac- tionRetained -° '� GM SiltyGraveLs,Gravel-Sand-SiltMixtures More Than 50% On No.4 O� �� O 8 California(3.0"O.D.) � Retained On Sieve Gravels W ith Fines No.200Sieve °,�.�°� GC ChyeyGravels,GraveFSand-ClayMix- hves � Mod'Sied California(2.S'O.D.) • $�/ Well-graded Sands,Gravelly Sands Sand • . Stratieraohic Contact � Ckan Sands Distinct Stratigraphic Contact More Than SP Poorly-Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands Benveen Soil Shata 50%of Coatse Frao- \ Gradual Change Behveen Soil IanPassing SM SiltySands,Sand-SiltMixhues Strata No.4Sieve _____ Approximatebcationof Sands W ith Fines stratagrephic change �� SC ClayeySands,ClayMixtures Fine Crained ML lnorganic Silts,rock Fbis,Clayey Silts � Groundwater observedat time of Soils With Low Plasticity expbration � Inor nic C la of Low To Medium �7 Measured groundwater kvel in Silts&Clays Liquid Limit Less CL Sa YS Y ezpbration,well,orpiezometer Than 5p Plastic¢Y More Than 50% ♦ Perchedwa�r observedat tane PassingThe OL OrganicSilLSandOrganicSiltyClaysof ofexplora[ion No.200 Sieve Low Plasticity � MH NorganicSiltsofModeratePlasticiry Modirie rs Silts&Clays L'puid Limit C�-j Inorganic Clays of High Plasticity DeSC[iption % GrearerThan50 Tt2Ce >5 � � OH Organic Clays And Sihs ofMedium ro Some 5-12 ,j HighPlasticiry pT Peat,Aumus,SoilswithPredominantly Wlth >12 Highly O�ganic Soils Organic Conrent � Soil Consistenc Grain Size Granular Soils Fine-grained Soils DESCRIPTION SIEVE GRAIN SIZE APPROXQv1ATE SIZE SIZE � Density SPT Consistency SPT Blowcount B(owcount BouWers >12" >12" Larger than a basketball � Very Loose 0� Very Soft 0? Cobbks 3-12" 3-12" Fist to basketball Loose 4-10 Soft 2-4 Coarse 3/4-3" 3/4-3" Thumb to fist � Gravel Medium 10-30 Firm 4-8 Fme #4-3/4" O.19-0.75° Pea to thumb Dense Dense 30-50 Stiff 8-IS Coarse #l0-#4 0.079-0.19° Rocksalttopea Very Dense >50 Very Stiff 15-30 Sand Medium #40-#10 0.017-0.079" Sugar to rock salt �" Hazd >30 Fine #200-#40 0.0029-OA17" Flour ro Sugar � Fines Passing <0.0029" Flour and smaller #200 � � � Materials Testing& Consulting,Inc. Key FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 3 Olympia,WA 98512 Yelm,WA �, � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 i � Materials Testing&Consulting Test Pit 1 TP-1 Olympia,WA � � Geotechnical Services (Page 1 of 1) � Yelm Physical Therapy Date Started May 15,2014 Geotechnical Investigation Date Completed :May 15,2014 Yelm,WA Sampling Method :Excavator Bucket Grab Sample .. Location :19'SW,17'NW of East comer MTC Project#14S071 Lagged By L.Levine � m � a� LL U � d � Surf. _ ,n o a�i Q Elev. U Q DESCRIPTION o- v � o sao � � � o � �IIR �n m � 0 340 Grass,moss,roots SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Dark RED 1 339 some cobbles and boulders up to 16"diameter some roots,organics SM-GM � 2 338 SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Reddish BROWN. � 3 33� some cobbles and boulders up to 20"diameter 4 336 � � 5 335 � SP-GP °' 6 334 � � � � F 7 333 '� y d ~ 8 332 GRAVEL WITH SAND,very hard,moist,GRAY BROWN � some cobbles and boulders up to 18"diameter - 9 331 TILL `a GP-SP � E > � 10 330 � � Total depth=10.2 feet Test pit terminated at digging refusal � Groundwater not encountered „ 11 329 a` fi � � 9 12 328 a LL g 13 327 d � � � 14 326 e i� �15 Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Ex loration Lo � p g FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 4 Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm, WA .� �. Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � � Materials Testing&Consulting Test Pit 2 (TP-2) Olympia,WA � Geotechnical Services (Page 1 of 1) Yelm Physical Therapy Date Started May 15,2014 Geotechnical Investigation Date Completed May 15,2014 Yelm,WA Sampling Method :Excavator Bucket Grab Sample Location :35'SE,35'SW of North corner � MTC ProjeCt#145071 Logged By :L.Levine � � � U � � c Surf. `" U � r Elev. V Q DESCRIPTION E 3 a; o �0 � � �n m � �, o sao Grass,moss,roots SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Dark BROWN � 1 339 some cobbles and boulders up to 16"diameter some detritus:conduit,cans,metal,plastic,clay drain pipe,car floor mats,asphalt 2 338 SM-GM � 3 337 �r .c a ; SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Reddish BROWN � N 4 336 � some cobbles and boulders up to 20"diameter :€ oU� � eP ci�E N 5 335 � �I� � � GRAVEL WITH SAND,moist,very hard,GRAY BROWN 6 33a some cobbles and boulders up to 18"diameter � � TILL � � a 7 333 E a GP-SP � $ 332 n � � H �, - 9 331 a` E � n 10 330 Total depth=10.0 feet � Test pit terminated at digging refusal , Groundwater not encountered 11 329 � 6 � 9 12 328 LL � O g 13 327 d � � 14 326 0 � ° 15 �" � Materials Testing & Consulting,Inc. Exploration Log FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 5 �, Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm,WA � � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 i � Materials�Tle�ting WAOnsulting Test Pit 2 (TP-2) Y p� Geotechnical Services (Page 1 of 1) � Yelm PhysiCal Therapy Date Started May 15,2014 Geotechnical Investigation Date Completed May 15,zoia Yelm,WA Sampling Method :Excavator Bucket Grab Sample Location :10'NE,24'NW of South corner MTC Project#14S071 Logged By :L.Levine � a� � d � � � � Surf. = y p y Q 3�ao ? � DESCRIPTION £ 3 ; � � o �o cn m � 0 340 Grass,moss,roots SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Dark BROWN 1 33s some cobbles and boulders some roots � 2 338 SM-GM 3 337 � ;�, is H 4 336 �4aND WITH GRAVEL,moist,Reddish BROWN � �^/< < ��me cobbles up to 6"diameter �me roots � `=aND WITH GRAVEL,moist,GRAY BROWN N 5 335 W� =;me gravel up to 4"diameter � c aND,some gravel,moist,GRAY � F 6 334 �--�� SP a 7 333 � E > d ~ 8 332 — / ':e:€; SAND WITH GRAVEL,moist,very hard,GRAY BROWN F .;�; ;� some cobbles and boulders up to 16"diameter - Q=i:;, TILL - 9 331 =� � E � � � 10 330 � r � � " SP-GP ' 11 329 g ,� s 9 12 328 � LL 13 327 � Total depth=13.0 feet °' Test pit terminated at digging refusal � ' Groundwater not encountered � 14 326 15 � Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Exploration Log � FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 6 Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm, WA I � Yelm Physical Therapy—Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � APPENDIX C. LABORATORY RESULTS � Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples to better identify the soil classification of �^ the units encountered and to evaluate the material's general physical properties and engineering characteristics. A brief description of the tests performed for this study is provided below. The results of laboratory tests performed on specific samples are provided at the appropriate sample depths on the individual test pit logs. However, it is important to note that these test results may not accurately �,, represent in situ soil conditions. MTC cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. � All collected samples that were not tested in the laboratory will be retained for a period of three months unless directed otherwise. Most of the soil samples for this project were unable to be retained because � they were used to perform laboratory testing. SOIL CLASSIFICATION (� Soil samples were visually examined in the field by our representative at the time they were obtained. r�• They were subsequently packaged and returned to our laboratory where they were reexamined and the original description checked and verified or modified. With the help of information obtained from the � other classification tests, described below, the samples were described in general accordance with ASTM Standard D2487. The resulting descriptions are provided at the appropriate locations on the individual exploration logs, located in Appendix B, and are qualitative only. � GRAIN-SIZE DISTRIBUTION � Grain-size distribution analyses were conducted in general accordance with ASTM Standard D422 and C136 on representative soil samples to determine the grain-size distribution of the onsite soil. The information gained from these analyses allows us to provide a descnption and classification of the m- place materials. In turn, this information helps us to understand how the in-place materials will react to �„ conditions such as excavation, loading, potential liquefaction, infiltration, and so forth. The results are presented in this Appendix. � , ' ' , , , � Yelm Physical Therapy-Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 i � Sieve Report � Project:Yelm Physical Therapy Date Received: IS-May-14 �ST11 D-2a87 Unified Soils Classification System Project#: 145071 Sampled By:LL SP,Poorly graded Sand wi[h Gravel Client:Sean Sipe Date Tested: 19-May-14 ample Color: ACG(tE � Sonrce:TP-I(r�68" Tested By:FP Brown ��-� � Sam le#:S14-186 � ASTM D-2216 ASTM D-2419 ASTM D-4318 ASTM D-5821 D�s�=0.209 mm %Gracel=483% Cceff.ofCun�amre,C�,=0.14 Speci�ic�tinns Di�„�=0306 mm °�o Sand=49.7% CoetT.of Uniformin�,C� =40.90 � No Specs D��=0382 mm °�-o Silt&Clay=2.1% Fineness Modulus=4.98 Sample Meets Specs"\/A D�;,��=0.722 mm Liquid Limit=n/a Plastic Limit=n/a �,so,=3.715 mm Plasricity Index=n/a Moistiue%,as sampled=6.6% D,�,�i=12.500 mm Sand[quivalent=n/a Req d Sand Equi�alent= D,ao�=33.885 mm Practure°o,I Face=n/a Req'dFactwe°o.I Face= � Fracture°�o?+Faces�=n/a Re'd Fracture°�o '_-Faczs= ASTM G136,ASTM D-6913 C'mnulatice�llnterpola[ed _ _ ._ __ ._ ...._. ._.._ __ _. _ ._ Cum�Jative c�a��s�aa o�anm�uo� , Sieve Size Percent Percen[ Specs Specs US Metric Passin Passin Max Min mb:�.r�� y �� R�SA888�8 12.00" 300.00 '. 100% ]00.0% 0.0% 10°x,m r•.•-•:•,',.••:�rP�'}t+�hR�fT�fi i�'Rp�,�vT+Mf��+M4n n�-m n n�- 10°0� 10.00" 250.00 ��. ]00% 100.0% 0.0% �� •� � �� °11��. � °1�� °11�.�� uiiii i i uiii i i uiiii i i unii�� i urii i i uiiii i i 8.00" 200.00 ' 100% 100.0% 0.0% ,o. w��_L w�u_L i u u a_L i�u�_u i u u a_u i u i��_ ,�.a� 6.00" I50.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% °11'�� i i iiii�i� � i��i� � �iiiii i i uiii i i i 4.00" ]00.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% �� ' � °11�� °�� °�� '� � � IIIIII I I IIIIII I IIIIII I I IIIIII I I IIIIII I I IIIIII I I 3.00" 75.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% °0" u i ii ii-i-Ti i ii ii•l-Tn ii ii i-in ii i i i-ii i ii ii i-u i ii i i i- eo.ox 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% �iiiiii i iii��ili ��i i uiiiii i uinii i nniii i 2.00" 50.00 � 100% 100.0% 0.0% �� .°11�� °�� °11�� A% I H FI-I-il I H F-I -+I I H H�-H I H H�-H I H H�-H I H H i- �o oX 1J5" 45.00 100°0 100% 100.0% 0.0% i�iiii i i iiiii i i � iiii�i i � ii��ii i i i��ii i i iiiiii i i 1.50" 37.50 96% 96% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiii i i iiiii i i i• uiiii i i uini i i nini i i nini i i � 125" 3L50 86% 86% 100.0% 0.0% em� °11�� ! °�� L��i�� i_ �o% 1.00" 25.00 79% 79% 100.0% 0.0% �� °11�� °�� F iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiii i iiiiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii i F 3/4" 19.00 69% 69% 100.0% 0.0% A uiiiii i iniiii i i�,ii i uiiiii i uinii i uiiiii i a 5/8" 16.00 65% i 65% 100.0% 0.0% 5096 i�ri7-rinri7-rinl�y-rinr77-ttiniyy-nini�7- �oz 1/2" 12.50 60% � 60°0 100.0% 0.0% �� °11�� °��'• °�� °�� °��" � � iiiiiii i .iiiiiii i wnii i uiiiii i uniii i uiiiii i 3/8" 9.50 57% � 57% 100.0% 0.0% ,o,� i w U�_1lw i_i J_lliu i_i��Liu i_i�_liiu i_i�_lli u i_i i_ ,�,o„ � V4" 630 53% 53% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i uiiiii i nniii i �iniii i uinii i uinii i tt4 4J5 52% 52% 100.0% 0.0% �� '�� 011'�� #8 236 48% 100.0% 0.0% � u�� i uiiiii i i iiii i iniiii i wiiii i mn�-nmri�-�mri�- nri�-mm��-n�nn�- 30�°� #10 2.00 47°0 47% 100.0% 0.0% ninii i uiiiii i uinii i u iii i uiiiii i mii�i i #16 1.18 � 39% 100.0% 0.0% niiiii i iunii i uinii i ui ii i uiiiii i iniiii i #20 0.850 35% � 35% 100.0% 0.0% 20A �u��_ywu�_yw�u_Li�ua_Liuu�_niui��_ p.ox `� uiiii i i niiii i i nn�•i i ui:ii i i uiiii i i #30 0.600 ; 25% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i uiuii i iniiii i nni�i i uniii i uiiiii i #40 0.425 18% � 18% 100.0% 0.0% � �� iii � ��ii�ii i iiii�ii i 'oz i i____Ti i ii ii i-Ti i ii ii i-ii i ii P��i-ii i ii ii-i - ii i ii i i i- +o.ox #50 0300 10% 100.0% 0.0% �� iiiiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii� u;iii � i rv.�,iiii i #60 0250 6% 6% 100.0% 0.0% i��ii i iiiiiii i uiiiii i uiii��i i ;iiii- i .�,�iii i #80 0.180 4% 4% 100.0% 0.0% o.ox #100 0.150 3% 3% 100.0% 0.0% 10°°-°°0 10°-°°° 'o°°° ,.�� o.,00 a.a,a a.00� #140 0.106 3% 100.0% 0.0% pe,,,,,s;,a�mm� � #170 0.090 2% 100.0% 0.0% #200 0.075 2.1°0 2.1% 100.0% 0.0% . sw..s�.« -� -M � -� -M,�s�� -��s�«aa��s Capy�ht Spmn Evgireenng&TxMcel Servir�s PS.1996-98 �5 � All I apply�Jybec�uelloaeom�Mw�melntntd.Aaewbel0��alnnbchmtv,thepubLCeMourselves,ellrtyn�se�ea�bm�iidas�AewN'denlialpmpeeryofd�enis,�vdeutbe¢eiwvLorp�bbu�wnofs��emema,woclusiovvoreaimctrfiomor�egeNi�ourrywnsismsavetlpevdivgourwn4enappmv�L � ' � � Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Laboratory Test Results FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy ,, Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm,WA � � Yelm Physical Therapy-Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting,Inc. Project No. 14S071 June 18, 2014 � � Sieve Report � Projech Yelm Physical Therapy Date Received: IS-May-14 SThI D-2187 linified Soils Classification System Project#: 145071 Sampled By:LL GP,Poorly graded Gravel with Sand � Clien[:Sean Sipe Date Tested: 19-May-14 'ample Color: ACChE � Source:TP-?�iil74" Tested By:FP Brown Sxm le#:S14-187 ASTM D-2216 ASTM D-2419 ASTM A4318 ASTM D-5821 D,��=0209 mm °�oGra��e1=58.9% Coeff'.oTCun�ature.C,,=0.44 � Specifications U��„�= 0363 mm %Sand=38.?% Coeff oFUniformfty,Ci=40.11 No Specs Di��=0.527 mm °'o Silt&Clay=2.9% Fineness Modulus=5.51 Sample Meets Specs'N/.� D�w�=L523 mm Liquid Limit=n/a Plastic Limit=n/a D��=9369 mm Plasticity Index=n/a Moisture%,as sampled=6.2% D��i=14.560 mm Sand Equivalent=n/a Req'd Sand Equivalent= D��,�=30.8I2 mm Fracture%,1 Face=n/a Req'd Fracmre io,1 Face= ^ Fracture;o,?<Faces=n/a Re'd Fcaeture%,2+Faces= � ASTM D-6913 Actual Ilnterpolated �� - � c�ai�s�zao�sme�no� --�� Cnmulntive Cumulative �TM -136, Sieve Size Percent � Percen[ � Specs Specs = � � g�g � US Metric Passin Passin Ma: Min I I I I°ib �'c'��; �� $��'°' 1p0x i n r•••.•••r,•��'�fT�F i"}h1�i4'?�ft�M'n ri�-m m��- +ao.ox 12.00" 300.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% iii �ii�iii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i 10.00" 250.00 l00% 100.0% 0.0% niiiii i iuiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i 8.00" 200.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% cm� iL�i-�-Liu �_yw�u_Liu u�_yw u�_yw u�_ co.a� 6.00" 150.00 ]00% 100.0% 0.0% uiiiii i miii i uinii i wiiii i iniiii i uiiiii i iunii i uiiii � uiiiii i ninii i iunii i uuiii i � 4.00" 100.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% niiiii i iiiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii i iiiiiii i uiiiii i 3.00" 75.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% °m� iiiiii i-i Tuiiii i Tiiiiii-i Tiiiiii-i iiiiii i i Tiiiii i-i m.°s. 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% �� 1°��•� �� iiniii i iuiiii i iruiii i uniii i uiiiii i uiiiii i 2.00" 50.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% �ox �H�-i�-�i��i -�iN�i-�-�i��-i�-�iN�i�-�+i�+�i�- ro.au 1.75" 45.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i iiiiiii nniii i niiiii i iuiiii i iiiiiii i 1.50" 37.50 100% 100% 100.0% 0.0% °11�� '��" � °�� °�� 125" 31.50 92% 92% 100.0% 0.0% uiiiii_i_ uiiii_i i uinii i uiiiii i .ninii i uiiii�. i ,�ox o °m� iiiiiii i iniiii i iniiii i iiinii i niiiii i niiiii i _�__________ 1.00" 25.00 76% 76°/a 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i iuiiii i uiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i ��iii i � 3/4" 19.00 67% 67% 100.0% 0.0% � �ii�� iuiiii i ,iuiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii i miiii i a mx inriy-rinriy-•iinriy-rinriy-�ninriy-ri�riy- m.ox f 5/8" 16.00 63% 63% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i i�i�iii i �iiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i 1/2" 12.50 56% 56% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i uiiiii i u.iii i uniii i �iunii i iiiiiii i � 3/8" 9.50 50% 50% 100.0% 0.0% �ou ��li��_1W!iJ_1iiL�J_11illU_i_JWUJ_11iui_�!_ ro.ox I/4" 630 44% qq% Ip0.0% 0.0% miiii i nniii i inii i uiiiii i nniii i w�i�,i i iiiiiii i muii i wiiii•; uiiiii i uinii i iniiii i #4 4J5 41% 41% ]00.0% 0.0% iiinii i iiniii i iiniii �iniiii i uiiiii i innii i #8 236 35% 100.0% 0.0% '0% mrn-�tmn�-nmrm m�ri�-mm��-�mm��- �0X #10 2.00 34% 34°/a 100.0% 0.0% �� 011�� °�� #l6 1.18 27% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i uiiiii i uinii i niii i ruiiii i uiiiii i � pK I1J LI J=L I L LI J=L I L LI J= ll�I J_L I LJ LI J_11 I L LI J_ p o% #20 0.850 24% I 24% 100.0% 0.0% nniii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i u iii i iiiiiii i uiiiii i #30 0.600 17% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii � iuuii i iuiiii i inl`ii i uiiiii i niiiii i #40 0.425 IZ% 12% 100.0% 0.0% ,ox �� uiii i i iuii i i i uiii•�i i uiiii i i uii�i� � �oox niiiii-i Tiiiiii-i Tiiiiii-i Tiiiilv-i-Tiiiiiii-Tiiiiii-i- #50 0300 8% 100.0% 0.0% iniiii i nniii i uinii i uinif.� iniiii i uiiiii i #60 0150 6% 6% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i uiiiii i uiiiii i ninii i•••..;iiii i uiii�i i � #80 0.180 4% 4% 100.0% 0.0% ��.� �� P.^1G. �.000 a.mo o.000.ax ioaao o+ao #100 0.150 4% 4% 100.0% OA% #140 O.106 3% 100.0% 0.0% �m�mm� #170 0.090 3% 100.0% 0.0% #200 0.075 2.9% 2.9% 100.0% 0.0% • s�w•�=f ^ -^'�s�• �" -"�^� -��s�e..A�n. �� CopyngM1tSpmnEvgi�nngffiTCCMic+ISmice��S,1996�98 nemu�n � - � AII�I�epplYOVtylocN+Ibutiom�Mmeleevlvteaed.A We1P�IWUOmctievu,�beW�evdouzhu.��rtyoHauea�bmi�bd�eNamnGdcotulpmpenyofdwM�.�od�u�bm�twnforpuM1ticetwnofv�a�emevt;woclueio et�fiamor�eg�Nivgourrtpo�ts�s�vervedprndiugourwm�eo�ppmvel ' ' � � Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Laboratory Test Results FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy g T. Olympia,WA 98512 Yelm, WA � � Yelm Physical Therapy-Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 � � Sieve Report � Project:Yelm Physical Therapy Date Received: IS-May-14 ST11 D-248'7 Unified Soils Gassification Sqstem Project#: 14S071 Sampled By:LL SP,Poorly graded Sand Client:Sean Sipe Date Tested: 19-May-14 'Ample Color- ACChEO � Sonrce:TP-3 C��° Tested By:FP grown .�f�.�.. .�., Sam le#•514-188 � ASTM D-2216 ASTM D-2419 ASTM D-431S ASTM D-5821 D�s�=0.095 mm °�oGrae�el=123% CceffofCun-ature.C�.=0.97 Specifitafions D�ii,�=0.167 mm %Sand=83.8% Coefl.of Unifocmiry,Ci�=3.46 � No Specs Di�s�=0209 mm °�o Silt&CIa}�=3.9% Fineness Modulus=2.60 Sample Meets Specs°N/A D��,��=0306 mm Liquid Limit=n/a Plastic Limit=n/a D,_s��=0.421 mm Plasticity Index=r✓a Moismre°io,as sampled=10.1% D,��=0.578 mm Sand Equivalent=n/a Req'd Sand Equi�alent= D,y�,�=7.044 mm f'racture'o,I Face=n/a Req'dFracture",o,i Face= � Frae[ure=b,_'+faces=n/a Kcc'd Fcacture°o.?��Faees= ASTM G136,ASTM D-6913 Actual Interpolated --- -- _.. _ _ __ _. _.. ____. _._ Q�mulalice�Cumulafive � � c�am s�:a o�an�wro� _. ._ __ ._ .__ - _.. _. _ ._. . Sieve Size �� Percent Percent Specs Specs ` - .� US Metric Passin ' Passin Max Min m'°`�'��3 �� '°:S��:m: ,00s m r........;...,....,.�*.,�,�'�rrYfirt�4-�"fi�Fi��+Mtn n�-�m r;�- ,000x 72.00" 300.00 � 100% 100.0% 0.0% :�,.r�� i iiiiiii ,� iii!ii i iiiiii; i iii,iii i iiiiiii i � 10.00" 250.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% uiiiii i iiiiiii i �iiiiii! i iiiiii, i iiiii i i iiii,ii i 8.00" 200.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% cax w u�-y w u�_b u�u_ �w u�_L i u�u_y w u�_ �.o� 6.00" 150.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% °11�� °�� f•1� �"��'� � �'�� °11�� uiiiii i iunii i iuiiiT.; ui�iii i niiiii i uiiiii 4.00" 100.00 ��, 100% 100.0% 0.0% iiiii i i i iii�ii i i iiiii i i i iii�i i i i ii�iii i � i�iii i i . � 3.00" 75.00 I 100% 100.0% 0.0% B0% iiiiiiii-Tuiiiii-7uiiii i��iiiiiii-Tuiiiii-Tiiiiii-�.- .0% 2.50" 63.00 ��.. 100% 100.0% 0.0°o niiiii i iuiiii i iuiiii i iiiii i iniiii i uniii ��.. inuii i uiiiii i uinii i iiiiii i iuiiii i uiiiri i 2.00" 50.00 ''� 100°/a 100.0% 0.0% � iHFi�-�i�Fi�-y�i�F��- ��i�-�i�Fi�-*i�Fi�- ro.ox L75" 45.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% uiiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii i uiiii i iiiiiii i iiii;ii i 1.50" 37.50 100% 100.0% 0.0% °11�� °�� i i ��i�iii i iii�iii � iunii i niiiii_i n;.iii i iunii i mnii i_ , 115" 3L50 100% 100.0% p.p% °0% u��_�_�_ iuiii i i iuiii i i iii i i i iuiii i i uiii:. i w.°x 1.00" 25.00 100% 100% 100.0% 0.0% �iiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiii ii i iiii�ii � iiiii��..� i ° 3/4" 19.00 99% 99% 100.0% 0.0% �� i i i i��ii�i � iii�ii i i uii i i i niiii i i uii�i i i � 5/8" 16.00 98% 98% 100.0% 0.0% " 50X �Nri�-rirtriy-rinri7-nin' iy-minriy-ri�riy- so.ox inuii i uiiiii i uiiiii i uin i i iunii i uuiii i 1/2" 12.50 94% 94% t00.0% 0.0% uniii i uniii i uiiiii i inii i i iuiiii i niiiii i 3/8" 9.50 92% 92% 100.0% 0.0% wx uiiii_i_i_JiLiLiJ_lniii_i_i_iiiii i_i_iuiii_i_i_iniii_i_i_ mon 1/4" 630 89% 89% 100.0% 0.0% niiiii i iuiiii i uinii i uiiiii i iuiiii i uni�i �. iiiiii i i iiiui i i niiii i i iiiiii i uiiii i i iiiii:i �� #4 4J5 88% 88% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i iuiiii i iuiiii i uiiii i iniiii i uiiii: #6 236 84% 100.0% 0.0% 30% mrn-�nmrn-�mm��-nm .�-nmrn-nmr.�- �o* #]0 2.00 84% I 84% 100.0% 0.0% uuiii i uiiiii i iuiiii i inni�i uiiiii i uiiiii i #16 1.18 79% 100.0% p.p% uiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i niiii i iiii�ii i iiiiiii i py I L LI J_L I L LI J-L I L LI J-ll I LJ LI.J_L I L L I J-11 I L I..I J_ p.a% #ZO 0.850 76% 76% 100.0% 0.0% uiiiii i iiiiiii i ❑iiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii �. #30 0.600 61% 100.0% 0.0% �� i�ii�ii i ii�ii�i i uniii, iunii i iniiii #40 0.425 51% 51% 100.0% 0.0% ix �� °11�� °�� °'�� °i11� � � ° n i Ti i i-i-Tu i i i i-i-Ti;i i i i-i-Ti i i i i i-iF Ti i i i�.-i-i-i i��i i i-i- .ow #50 0.300 29% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i iuiiii i nniii i uiiiii i�.inii:i i uiiii� i #60 0.250 20% 20% 100.0% 0.0% �iiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i iiiiiii i r'�iiii i iiiiiii i #80 0.180 11% , 11% 100.0% 0.0% �� o.o� .� oax � #]00 0.150 8% �� 8% 100.0% 0.0% a�� oo,o o.00, #140 0.106 6% 100.0% 0.0% p.n,u.�;�,�mm� #170 0.090 5% 100.0% 0.0% i #200 0.075 3.9% 3.9% 100.0% 0.0% • s�•s�� -Me�so�� -� -M�so«s ��-s��.a a�mis CopyrigM Spmn E�gi�i�d Talw'rel5rnicee P5,1996-98 AIIm.wlteapplyoNy�oxluelbcetiowaMmeknelstcs�M.ASam�Welpmwtnvwe4rnts,thcpublicevdounelvice,ell�cponre�emAw��esiFewMdentulpmpcnyofcl�en�n,aMau�how4onforpubti�et�onofsumme ,concluaovore�ine�sfiomo et� u rwn� � r�eg ��ourrepans'reseevWprndingou teneppmvaL ' ' � � Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. Laboratory Test Results FIGURE 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy 9 Olympia, WA 98512 Yelm, WA � Yelm Physical Therapy-Final Geotechnical Report Materials Testing& Consulting, Inc. ; � Project No. 145071 June 18, 2014 4 Sieve Report � Projech Yelm Physical Therapy Date Received: 15-May-14 ASTtiI D4487 Onified Soils Classification Sys[em Project#: 145071 Sampled By:LL SP,Poorly graded Sand with Gravel Client:Sean Sipe Date Tested: 19-May-14 Sample Color: aCtREOi7EOi Source:TP-3 @ 114" Tested By:FP Brown � Sam le#•S14-189 ASTM D-2216 ASTM D-2419 ASTM D-4318 ASTM D-5821 D�s�=0.150 mm %Gravel=42.1% Cceff.ofCurvamre,C�-=0.16 Specifications D�i��=0240 mm °o Sand=54.9% Coeff.of Uniformity,Ci�=27.48 No Specs D��s,=0.298 mm %Silt&Clay=3.1% Fineness Modulus=4.52 Sample Meets Specs?N/A ��o�=0.503 mm Liquid�imit=n/a Plastic Limit=da � D,��=1.608 mm Plasricity Index=n/a Moisture%,as sampled=7.1% D�n��=6.598 mm Sand Equivalent=n/a Req'd Sand Equivalent= U,.,�,=39306 mm Eracture°o,I Face=n/a Req'd Fracmre%.l Face= Frac[ure%.I=Faces=n/a Re'd Fracture°%,2+Faces= � ASTM G136,ASTM D-6913 Actual �Interpolated -�- -- � -- / c s $�r�Su . ::�iS��S.`:: Cum�dative'Cumulative ..__ -_. _ ._ -... .__ __ Sieve Size Percent Percent Specs Specs gg^g US Metric Passin Passin Ma: Min '°�°��' 'aox m r- � rT�F�filfiifi'MM'�f'kn ri,�-r i r n�- oo.°x 12.00" 300.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i ��iiii�i i i iiiiiii i iiiii�i , iiiii�i i iiiiiii i 10.00" 250.00 l00% 100.0% 0.0% inui i i uiii i i uiiii� � iiii��i '� ii��.ii i i iiiiii i i � 8.00" 200.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% cax i L�i�-L i L i�_y w u�_y w u�_y��ll u�_L i u��_ ao.ox 6.00" 150.00 i 100% 100.0% 0.0% �� ,� � �� I�� I innii i iuui!� i uinii i uiiiii i uinii i r��,,..i�.� i 4.00" 100.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% niiiii i iinii�i uiiiii i uiiiii i uiiiii i �;'.�i�� m.ox � 3.00" 75.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% 80% iiiiiii-i-TUiiii i uiiiii i Tiiiiii-i-Tniiiii-Tiiriii-i- 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% �� °11�� iiniii i uiiiii� uiiiii i uinii i iuiiii i uiiiii i � 2.00" 50.00 I00% 100.0% 0.0% rox iN�-i�-�+iu�i�;-�iHHi�-�i��i-�-+�iN�i�-�i+��ia- �a.or 1J5" 45.00 100% 100% 100.0% 0.0% ii�ii�i � i�iiiii i��i��ii� � �� °11�� ; 1.50" 37.50 87% 87% 100.0% 0.0°/a °11�� °�� !•�� °�� 115" 31.50 84% 84% 100.0% 0.0% eox iniii_i_i_ iuiii i i__ni_i_i_ niiiii_i_ iiiiii_i i_ uiiii_i_i_ wo� iniiii i iuiiii i iu:ii i uiiiii i iuiiii i ni�ii� i �. I.00" 25.00 81% 81% 100.0% 0.0% �g iiiiiii i niiiii i iuiihi uiiiii i iuiiii i ni�iii i � 3/4" 19.00 72% 72% 100.0% 0.0% � �� °11�� •• °�� 01�� 5/8" 16.00 69% 69% 100.0% 0.0% " 50% ��riy-rinriy-t�iNriytrinriy-rinriy-ninriy- ��x innii i uiiiii i iuiiii i �iiiiii i ninii i inuii i � 1/2" 12.50 66% 66% 100.0% 0.0% uniii i uiiiii i iuiiii i uiii i uinii i nniii i 3/8" 9.50 64% 64% 100.0% 0.0% .ax,��_��1-iu�_�WU�_ i llLi�_1iiLiuJ_11WUJ_ pox 1/4" 630 60% 60% 100.0°/a 0.0% i :�� uiiii i iuiiii i unii i iniiii i uiiiii i iii i iuiiii i uinii i u iii i iuiiii i uiiiii i �+`� #4 4J5 58% 58% 100.0% 0.0% iiiii i i i niiii i i uiiii i i uiNi i i iuiii i i uiiii i i � #8 236 54% 100.0% 0.0% 3014 mn�-mm��-nmrn-rir�n�-�mn�-mm��- �o" #10 2.00 53% 53% 100.0% 0.0% �� 011�� 01�� •� � �� °�� #16 1.18 q7% lOpp% 00% nnii i i uiiii i i nnii i i inii i i iuni i i uini i i pK I L LI J_L I L LI J_L I L LI J_�l l L I J_L I L LI J_L I L LI J_ �Qµ #20 O.8SO 44% 44% 100.0% 0.0% uiiii i i iuiii i i iiiiii i i niiii i iiiiii i i iiiiii i i ��rrr #30 0.600 34% 100.0% 0.0% °11�� °�� °�� °11��• � °�� °�� #40 0.425 27% 27% 100.0% 0.0% �� niiii i iuiiii i ninii i nnii�i iniiii i uniii i �oox -i i i-i Ti i ii i i-i Ti i ii ii-i Ti i ii ii i i i i i i i Tn Ti ii-i- �____i_ #50 0300 15% 100.0% 0.0% iiiiiii i niiiii i innii i iiiiiii �,, iiniii i iiiiiii i #60 0.250 11% 11% 100.0% 0.0% �� °11�� °�� •:�� #80 0.180 6% 6% 100.0% 0.0% °,�� ,�o�o ,0000 o.,00 oa,o o.�o.ox ,.aoo #100 0.150 5% 5% 100.0% 0.0% r' #140 0.106 4% 100.0% 0.0% P.�a.s�rcmm� j #170 0.090 3% 100.0% 0.0% • �ry.�=« � _ -� �.��.R�un6 ` #200 0.075 3.1% 3.1% 100.0% 0.0% "°s°'° ""'"s0"` Cop}mighl Spun Engircniog @ TxMic+IServim P5,1996A9 Al1�ca�luepplyodytox�ualbcatioreaMmetaialsteaied.AaartuNelpmtm�uubctienln,ticWbticeMou�xseh-v,e0rzpoelceam�bmiibdaaNecoN'Weo�ulp�openyofclienis,�vd�utb�vetinnforW64utiovofateamewa,wwduriunvoru�nctsfiomormgsNivgwrnyoM1CUrevavalpevdinEe��'��eneppmveL 1" � ' ' � �M � Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Laboratory Test Results FIGURE � 2118 Black Lake Boulevard SW Yelm Physical Therapy g Olympia,WA 98512 Yelm, WA ��