Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Application Documents
5/7/20 Zone X 0060A 9/17/03 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & SIGNATURE Read and initial each of the following statements prior to sJgnlns this application: - I understand that land use and/or plaMlng permits do not authorize earth disturbing activities, the removal of vegetation, or the construction of buildings. I understand that additional permits will be required after my land use and/or planning permitting process is completed . I understand that no earth disturbing activities (including the removal of vegetation) may take place until after my land use and/or planning process is complete, and only after I have received additional permits such as Fill & Grade, Building Permit, or Right-of-Way permit(s). ---·-·-------- RVB I understand that If critical areas (wetlands, streams, steep slopes, etc.) are found on or near my property I am not authorized to impact these areas In any way and will be required to leave an undisturbed buffer area around the critical area, as determined according the City's critical areas regulations. -----t------------------------------------ J~V6 ------ RVtB t__ __ I understand that depending on the size and scope of my project, I may be required to provide maintenance and/or performance bonds for items such as landscaping, critical areas, public roads and/or public utilities that I construct or install. I understand that I am solely responsible for providing complete and accurate information to the City. I understand that if my application is missing information or if inaccurate materials are submitted, my permits will be delayed. I understand that depending on how inaccurate and how incomplete my applicaUon is or betomes, the Department may require an entirely new application be submitted. I understand that when and if conditions change from that which my application originally represented, I am responsible for letting the City staff person assigned to my project know. --- I understand that I am applying for permits from the City of Anacortes only; and that addltional permits from other Federal, State, and Local agencies could be required. I understand that the City of Anacortes cannot advise me of permits that are required from other agendes, and that I must contact these agencies to make sure I comply with their requirements. These agencies include (but are not limited to): Corps of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish & Wildlife, Department of Ecology, and Northwest Clean Air Agency. f--~---------~ I understand that I will be responsible for paying consultants that the City may deem necessary to review certain aspects of my appltcation . I understand that these consultant reviews could include special 1nspect1ons, traffic concurrency, crltlcal areas, Jandscapmg, stormwater, etc. Signature required on next page. Master Land Use Permit Application Page 3 of 4 CALIFORNIA ALL· PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who sjgned the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of Calif~a } Countyof i'.-0 ~ ~t;/t.5 On I t> 11>f'I before me, ~~....;..:..:::.+--i===*'~~~f-L-~/, (l ln .. rt llllm8 personally appeared ~ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to the person{"whose name~ is/aFe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sf:lelt~ey executed the same in his/hen<tt1eir authorized capacity(~ and that by his/Re1ltl1eir signature('1 on the instrument the person~. or the entity upon behalf of which the person'lf acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the regoing paragraph is true and correct. (Notary Public Seat) INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION Thisfontt compliu with curnmt Califarniutalutes regwt/lng notary word/ngQN/, D RIPTION OF THE ATIACHEO DOCUMENt if11eeded. 1fi011ld be co1f1Pltted andattac!tedto di~ document. A.d:nowledgmait.r {) .· L,, fnim otlttr slates 111ay be completed for docurnent.s being 6eitt to tlull state"' l011g I I , -r.' ~ _ L as the wordi11g tkNs not require ti" Ca/ifontia rrotary to violate California nol/Jry 1..e-=-""_.,~:,-:-~~Ull:.1-~V~J.>C.::.._~~H~I M~ (Tld11 or description of attached dowment) " State and County infonnation must be the State and County where the docwnent CTilie Of deJcrfplfon or atlached dOQlllient Continued) / Number of Pages.~ Document Date ·t )' ti--} 11 <(Af ACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ~Individual (s) 0 Corporate Officer (Titl e) 0 Partner(s} 0 Attorney-Jn-Fact O Trustee(s) o Other _________ _ 1ign«(1) pmonally appeared bcfcre the notary public for acknowledgment. • Date of notarization must be the date thlttbe signer(a) personally appeared which must also be tlte Slltrle date the eclcnowledgment i1 completed. • The notey public muat print his or her name as it appeara within his or her comminlon followed by a comma and then your title (notacy public). • Print the name(a) of document aignCl(s) who pcncnalty appcer at the time of nor.tization. • Indicate the COITCCt 1ing11lar or plural fonns by crossing off incorrect forms (i.e. helsheAlieiy; is /&.Fe ) or circling the oomct forms. Failure to correctly indicate this information may le&d to n:jcction of doc11D1cnt nicording. • The notary ml irnpreNion must be cleat and photogniphically rcprod11ct'11le. Impression must not oover text or lines. If seal impression smudges, re-seal if a sufficimt area permits, otherwise complete a diffemn aclalowlcdsmcnt form. • Signatwe of the notaly public mu.si 11:18tc:h the 1ignature on file with the office of the COW1ty clterlc. .)-Additional informatiOZJ is not .l'CqUircd b11t collld help to ensure this acknowledgment is not misuat<I or attuclicd to a different document ~ lndic:ate title or type of atl9Ched document, number of pqC9 and date. + lndJc•te the capacity claimed by the sign«. If th~ claimed capacity is a oorporate officer, indicate the title (i.e. CEO, CPO, SIXll'Olary). • Securely attach this document to the signed document with a staple. By affixing my signature hereto, I certify that I am tlie owner, or am acting as the Owner's authorized agent, and that the application and documents contained with this submittal are complete and accurate to the best of mv knowledge and abilities. If your title report lists a company, partnership or other owners, you must submit evidence that you are authorized to sign on behalf of the entity or others that are listed . If you are an authorized representative you must submit an Agent Authorization Form . Please attach additional signature sheets if there is more than one owner. Under penalty of perjury, J certify that the information, statements, answers above regarding the subject application{s) are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and beltef. S~ature := p .-rr<0 Ll Y. J3a,_I ~!:: Printed Name: _£0 "40-· lJ Y.. B ""Ljk STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS. COUNTY OF SKAGIT I certify that I know or have satisfactory ev id ence that ----------is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged it as the to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said -------------_for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Given under my hand and official seal this ____ day of ------,20 __ _ Notary Public Res idi ng at -------- My appointment expires ------ Master Land Use Permit Application Page 4 of4 & CUP 5/7/20 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California } County of 1-.o 5 fh;9efe 5 (' A) On r~ I }~ / 1 q before me, d,r [ Ot7-leJ0 ' 0 ~iJ Ii u personal ~ app ~ared f< 11'1'\ Md V ~e e.. 8 ;_'i~'f: who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence ~ be the person(s) whose name ~ is/Sfe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/.sf:le/th9y-executed the same in his/~#leir authorized capacity ttest, and that by his/t:ter/th eir signature}$) on the instrument the person(i), or the entity upon behalf of which the person '5) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that th foregoing paragraph is true and correct. (Notary Public Seal) INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION This form complies with mrrent cal?fornia stalutes regardir1g notary wording and. DES RIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT fh~1 ~ fVtm (Title or description of attached document continued) Number of Pages fflf., Document Date l'V f (-i-( I lf CA ~C ITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ~ Ind ividual (s) D Corporate Officer (Title) D Partner(s) D Attorney·in·Fact o Trustee( s) o Other _________ _ if needed, should be completed and attached to the document. Acknowledgmellls from other states may be completed for docwnents being sent to tltat slate so long as the wording does not require the California notary to violate California notary law. • Slate and County information must he the State and County where the document signer(s) personally appeared before the nulary public for acknowledgment. • Date of notarization mu~t he the date that lhe signe1(s) personally appeared which must also be the same date the acknowledgment is completed. • The nota')' public must print his or her name as ii appears within his or her commission followed by a comma a11d then your title (notary public). • rrint the name(s) of document signer(s) who personally appear at the time of notarization. • Indicate the correcl singular or plural fonns by crossing off income! fonns (i.e. he/sheAfley;-is /QffJ) or circling 1he correct fonns. Failure to correcUy indicate this information may lead to rejection of document recording. • The nolary seal impression must be clear and photographically n:producible. lmpression must not cover text or lines. If seal impression smudges, re-seal if a sullicient area permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment form. • Signature of lhe notary public must match the signature on file with the offici:: of the county clerk. •!• Additional information is not i:equin:<l but could hdp lo ensure this acknowledgment is not misused or attached to a different document. •!+ Indicate title or type of attached document. number of pages and dale. •!• Indicate the capacity claimed by the signer. [f the claimed capacity is a corporate officer, indicate the title (i.e. CEO, CFO, Secretary). • Securely attach this document to the signed documenl with a slaple. PLANNING, COMMUNITY, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Mailing Address: P.O. Box 547, Anacortes, WA 98221 Office Location: 904 6th Street, Anacortes WA 98821 Phone: (360) 299-1984 Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 1 of 8 PRELIMINARY LAND DIVISION APPLICATION Long Subdivisions Short Subdivisions Binding Site Plans Unit Lot Subdivisions S UBMITTAL R EQUIREMENTS Applicant Checklist Land Division Submittal Requirement Checklist See pages 2 and 3 for details about each submittal item. See AMC Ch. 19.32 Land Divisions for review and approval criteria. Office Use Only Master Land Use Permit Application Agent Authorization Form Project Narrative Stormwater Site Plan Preliminary Land Division Map Landscape Plans Tree Preservation Plan Clearing & Grading Plans Environmental Checklist (SEPA) Subdivision Guarantee Recorded property boundary survey Draft covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs), condominium declarations, reciprocal use easements, joint use and maintenance agreements, or other similar documents, if applicable. Technical Reports Critical Area Report Traffic Impact Analysis Parking Study Required Number of Copies and Plan Size 3 paper copies of each item above Plans must be minimum 18” x 24”, to scale, and legible 1 reduced size copy (maximum size 11” X 17”) of plans Digital copy of the application and all submitted materials (flash drive or to pced@cityofanacortes.org.) Application Fee See the Land Use Permit Fee Schedule X X X X X X X X X X NA - Proposed short plat map NA X - Geotechnical report - See SEPA checklistNA- see SEPA checklist X NA 5/7/20 Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 2 of 8 S UBMITTAL R EQUIREMENT D ETAILS Additional details on certain submittals is provided below to ensure Applicants are fully aware what City staff will be looking for when an application is submitted to the City. a.MASTER PERMIT APPLICATION: Form attached. Use this form to indicate all requested land use permits and other key information about your proposed project. b.AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM. Provide this completed form to authorize someone other than the property owner to apply for permits. c.PROJECT NARRATIVE: Form attached. This document contains a list of elements to be included in your project narrative to help you provide a clear and concise description of your proposal for those reviewing it. d.STORMWATER SITE PLAN: The Stormwater Site Plan is the comprehensive report containing all of the technical information and analysis necessary for regulatory agencies to evaluate your project for compliance with stormwater requirements. The level of stormwater review and contents of the Stormwater Site Plan will vary with the type and size of the project, and individual site characteristics. Use Form CG-3 to determine the level of stormwater review and then complete the applicable Stormwater Minimum Requirements Form on the Public Works - Engineering Department Forms website and provide required submittal items/plans. e.PRELIMINARY LAND DIVISION MAP: A checklist of required information to be shown on the preliminary land division map is attached. f.LANDSCAPE PLANS: A landscape plan may be required to show street trees and landscaping required within landscaped areas between the street and sidewalk, in stormwater management facilities, or parks and open space. g.TREE PRESERVATION PLAN: Tree preservation plans are required for all residential subdivisions. See AMC 16.50, Tree Preservation. h.CLEARING & GRADING PLANS: The applicable checklist is located in the Clearing/Grading Permit application packet. These plans are needed so that your proposal can be reviewed for conformance with AMC 19.78 Clearing and Grading. i.SEPA CHECKLIST: Unless a project is categorically exempt, an environmental checklist is required to be completed and submitted. j.SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE: A document prepared by a title insurance company documenting the ownership and title of all interested parties in the development and that lists all encumbrances. This document is needed to verify property ownership and to identify any encumbrances that are recorded to the property’s title. Copies of all the encumbrances listed within the certificate or report must be provided. The certificate or report must be dated within 30 days prior to the submittal of a permit to the City. k.RECORDED PROPERTY BOUNDARY SURVEY: A recorded survey is required to define the limits of the property subject to the application. All property corners must be staked/marked and visible. Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 3 of 8 l.DIGITAL COPY OF ALL APPLICATION DOCUMENTS: PDF format files for all submittal items, named as they appear on the submittal checklist, must be provided on a flash drive or emailed to pced@CityofAnacortes.org. T ECHNICAL R EPORTS Following is a list of technical reports that may be required to be submitted to the City depending on project and site-specific factors. The general triggers for each of the listed technical reports is provided below: A. CRITICAL AREAS REPORTS: In general, Critical Area reports are required when wetlands, streams, habitat conservation areas, geologically hazardous areas, shorelines, or aquifer recharge areas are located on or near a site. Critical area mitigation plans may also be required, depending on the project proposal. See Anacortes Municipal Code Ch. 17.70 for additional information. B. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. In general, a Traffic Impact Analysis is required when a development will add 10 or more PM peak hour trips to the City’s transportation system. C. PARKING STUDY: A parking study may be required to determine the parking requirements for a specific use, adjusting minimum and maximum quantitative parking requirements, determining times of peak demand, and determining impacts to on-street parking in the vicinity of a proposed development. See AMC 19.64.020 for more info. Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 4 of 8 P ROJECT N ARRATIVE R EQUIREMENTS GENERAL INFORMATION This form is intended to assist applicants in creating complete project narrative for site plan and building design review. Please fill in each space with the requested information. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. If a neighborhood meeting was held, provide the date held, general items of discussion at the meeting, and how the project proposal has been modified since the meeting, if applicable. B. Proposed use of the Site per AMC Table 19.41.040 or 19.41.050 and any special use provisions that apply. (see AMC 19.43 – 19.48) C. Current use of the Site. Date of construction for any existing structures on site, and whether they are to be removed or retained. D. Description of the site’s physical characteristics, including special site features (such as wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes, or other critical areas). E. Current uses and special site features of surrounding properties. F. Description of general design techniques you considered to implement low impact development (see AMC 19.76.050(A) and (B)) in the design of your project site and proposed stormwater facilities necessary for compliance with AMC 19.76 Stormwater. G. Description of the proposed form and intensity of the proposed development (number of lots, density, height, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.). (See AMC 19.42.) H. Describe existing and proposed site access from public streets and any proposed street and/or pedestrian improvements. I. Describe any proposed phasing. J. Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed. No meeting was held. Advised Orchards HOA President of proposal. Single family detached residential homes. Vacant pasture land. The site is generally flat, with a 16-foot long segment of Ace of Hearts Creek. Surrounding properties are primarily single family detached homes. Low impact development techniques are limited. See Geotechnical Report. 6 lots, all over 15,000 sf. Homes will not exceed 35 feet in height. A new public road, Cherry Court, and Orchards Ave frontage improvments. Subdivision construction Summer 2020. Home construction after final short plat. Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 5 of 8 K. Number, type, and size of trees to be removed. L. Description of existing site utilities and proposed utilities, including extensions, upgrades, relocations, etc. (see AMC 19.52 Underground Utilities). M. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City. See SEPA checklist 13 alders and 1 cherry tree will be remved. See Landscape Plan for details. See SEPA checklist. A new public road, Cherry Court, and stormwater pond tract will be dedicated. Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 6 of 8 P RELIMINARY LAND DIVI SION P LAN R EQUIREMENTS 1.GENERAL INFORMATION This form is intended to assist applicants in creating complete, code compliant preliminary land division plans. Please check the plans you wish to submit to make sure they contain each of the listed items. To the right of the Requirements column is space for you to list the sheet number of the plan set where the listed information is shown. Preliminary land division maps must be drawn by a State of Washington licensed surveyor.Minimum Plan Size: 18” x 24” and drawn in an engineering scale. Plans must be legible.You may use multiple sheets if needed. 2.INFORMATION REQUIRED ON PRELIMINARY LAND DIVISION MAP COMPLETE? REQUIREMENTS PAGE # ON YOUR PLANS Cover sheet must contain all of the following: ☐ Project name, if applicable. ☐ Section, township, range. ☐ Full and correct legal description of lands being subdivided. ☐ Site address and tax parcel number. ☐ Zoning designation. (see Official Zoning Map) ☐ Density & dimensional calculations. ☐ Total acreage and square feet of land to be divided. ☐ Gross acreage (see 19.12.010.G) ☐ Total number of residential units proposed and density calculations indicating maximum and minimum density requirements, if applicable. (see AMC 19.42.100) ☐ Maximum impervious surface area allowed for the lot as determined by the calculations in the stormwater report for the project. ☐ Sheet Index & Legend ☐ Date plans were prepared and/or revised ☐ Vicinity map ☐ Name, address, phone number of Applicant, Owner, Engineer, & Surveyor (include signature and seal) Scale and North Arrow Property features: Zoning. Label existing zoning and zoning boundaries on the site and immediately adjacent properties. Municipal boundaries, township lines and section lines. Existing property lines. Accurate lines showing the parcel to be subdivided, the block lines and the lot lines. Easements. All easements shown on the title report, Record of Survey, or plat must be dimensioned and shown. 2 1, 3 & 4 2 2, 3 3 2, 3& 4 Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 7 of 8 Critical areas. Location and dimensions of existing critical areas (wetlands, streams, steep slopes) and their associated buffers. Other hydrologic features. Show seeps, springs, closed depression areas, and drainage swales. Shorelines. Location of Ordinary High Water Mark and shoreline jurisdiction limits (if adjacent to a shoreline). Topography and grading. Existing and proposed contours and site elevations (i.e. finished grades) at 5-foot minimum increments. The horizontal and vertical control datum must be clearly shown. Proposed lot lines. Dimensions and numbers or description for each new lot and tract. Land area in acreage and square feet for each of the proposed lots. Setback lines. Include setback lines for all proposed lots having unusual shape, steep topography, critical areas, wetlands or other environmental or unusual limitations on its building site. Structures: Buildings. Location, dimensions and size of all existing buildings and other structures. Other structures. Location of existing and proposed retaining walls, rockeries, and fences. Public & Private Improvements Utilities. Location, size, and dimensions of existing and proposed stormwater, sanitary sewer, potable water, fiber lines/facilities, franchise utilities, power poles, etc. Wells & Septic. Location of existing septic tanks, drain fields, wells and other improvements located on the site and within 50-feet of the development; and whether such structures are proposed to remain on the property. Easements. Show the location, dimensions and purpose of all existing and proposed public and private easements. Fire hydrants. Location of all existing and proposed fire hydrants within 300 feet of the boundary of the project site. Stormwater Erosion Control. Proposed Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Measures, if not shown on other plans. Permanent BMPs. Show location of existing and proposed permanent stormwater management BMPs and required setbacks from adjacent structures, utilities, property lines. Access and Circulation Existing streets. Location, identification, and dimensions of all existing adjacent streets and alleys, including pavement and right-of-way width, and the location and dimensions of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, landscape strips, median islands, and street trees. Proposed streets. Location, identification, and dimensions of all proposed public streets including pavement and right-of-way width, location and dimensions of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, landscape strips, and parking pockets. (see AMC 19.52 & 19.53) 1, 3 & 4 3 NA 3 4 2 NA 3 NA Civilplans 2, 3 & 4 Civilplans 3 & 4 4 Land Division Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 8 of 8 Shared driveway access. Location, identification, and dimensions of all proposed shared driveways, including pavement and tract or easement width and landscape buffer screening from adjacent properties. Include notes about easement or tract ownership and maintenance. (see 19.53.040) Traffic control devices. Show proposed method of and location of “no parking” signage, where applicable. Emergency apparatus access. Location and dimensions of inside corner turning radii, required emergency apparatus turnaround areas, proposed grade. Pedestrian access. Show proposed internal pedestrian circulation, including sidewalks, pedestrian paths, crosswalks (including proposed widths and materials). Open Space / Parks Park land dedication. For residential subdivisions with 10+ lots, show location, dimensions, square footage and design of park land proposed for dedication. (see AMC 19.54.030) Lot Design Alternative lot designs. Indicate where zero-lot line, reciprocal use easement lots, shared access lots, or alley access lots are proposed. (see AMC 19.54.040) Lot 4easementfor Lot 3 Civilplans Civilplans NA NA PLANNING, COMMUNITY, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Mailing Address: P.O. Box 547, Anacortes, WA 98221 Office Location: 904 6th Street, Anacortes WA 98821 Phone: (360) 299-1984 Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 1 of 7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION S UBMITTAL R EQUIREMENTS Applicant Checklist Conditional Use Permit Submittal Requirement Checklist See pages 2-3 of this handout for information about each submittal item listed below. See AMC 19.36 for Conditional Use Permit review and approval criteria. Office Use Only Master Land Use Permit Application Agent Authorization Form Project Narrative Responses to Conditional Use Permit criteria Stormwater Site plan Site Plan & Landscape Plan Clearing & Grading Plans Building Elevation Drawings Environmental Checklist (SEPA) Subdivision Guarantee Recorded Property Boundary Survey Technical Reports Critical Area Report Traffic Impact Analysis Parking Study Required Number of Copies and Plan Size 3 paper copies of each item above Plans must be minimum 11” x 17”, to scale, and legible 1 reduced size copy (maximum size 11” X 17”) of plans Digital copy of the application and all submitted materials (flash drive or to pced@cityofanacortes.org.) Application Fee See the Land Use Permit Fee Schedule X X X X X X X X NA X NA X NA NA X - Geotechnical Report - Proposed Short Plat Map 5/7/20 Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 2 of 7 S UBMITTAL R EQUIREMENT D ETAILS Additional details on certain submittals is provided below to ensure Applicants are fully aware what City staff will be looking for when an application is submitted to the City. a.MASTER PERMIT APPLICATION: Form attached. Use this form to indicate all requested land use permits and other key information about your proposed project. b.AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM. Use this form to authorize someone other than the property owner to apply for permits. c.PROJECT NARRATIVE: Form attached. This document contains a list of elements to be included in your project narrative to help provide a clear and concise description of your proposal for those reviewing it. d.RESPONSES TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA: In order for the decision-maker to grant a conditional use permit, there must be a finding that the use would be consistent with the criteria in AMC 19.36.040. As the applicant, it is your responsibility to clearly demonstrate how each criteria is met. e.STORMWATER SITE PLAN: The Stormwater Site Plan is the comprehensive report containing all of the technical information and analysis necessary for regulatory agencies to evaluate your project for compliance with stormwater requirements. The level of stormwater review and contents of the Stormwater Site Plan will vary with the type and size of the project, and individual site characteristics. Use Form CG-3 to determine the level of stormwater review and then complete the applicable Stormwater Minimum Requirements Form on the Public Works - Engineering Department Forms website and provide required submittal items/plans. f.SITE & LANDSCAPE PLANS: These plans are needed so that your proposal can be reviewed for conformance with the applicable zoning and land use, community design, and project design provisions of the development regulations contained in AMC Title 19 Unified Development Code. (Use the site plan checklist for Single Family Residential Building Permits or Multi-Family and Non-Residential Site Plan review, as applicable (see application checklists and forms) g.CLEARING & GRADING PLANS: Checklist is located in the Clearing/Grading Permit application packet. These plans are needed so that your proposal can be reviewed for conformance with AMC 19.78 Clearing and Grading. h.BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS: Checklist attached. These plans are needed so that your proposal can be reviewed for conformance with the applicable project and building design provisions in AMC Title 19 Unified Development Code. (Use the building elevations checklist for Single Family Residential Building Permits or Multi-Family and Non-Residential Site Plan review, as applicable (see application checklists and forms). i.SEPA CHECKLIST: Unless a project is categorically exempt, an environmental checklist is required to be completed and submitted. j.SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE: A document prepared by a title insurance company documenting the ownership and title of all interested parties in the development and that lists all encumbrances. This document is needed to verify property ownership and to identify any encumbrances that are recorded to the property’s title. Copies of all the encumbrances listed Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 3 of 7 within the certificate or report must be provided. The certificate or report must be dated within 30 days prior to the submittal of a permit to the City. k.RECORDED PROPERTY BOUNDARY SURVEY: A recorded survey is required to define the limits of the property subject to the application. All property corners must be staked/marked and visible. l.DIGITAL COPY OF ALL APPLICATION DOCUMENTS: PDF format files for all submittal items, named as they appear on the submittal checklist, must be provided on a flash drive or emailed to pced@CityofAnacortes.org. T ECHNICAL R EPORTS Following is a list of technical reports that may be required to be submitted to the City depending on project and site-specific factors. The general triggers for each of the listed technical reports is provided below: A. CRITICAL AREAS REPORTS: In general, Critical Area reports are required when wetlands, streams, habitat conservation areas, geologically hazardous areas, shorelines, or aquifer recharge areas are located on or near a site. Critical area mitigation plans may also be required, depending on the project proposal. See Anacortes Municipal Code Ch. 17.70 for additional information. B. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. In general, a Traffic Impact Analysis is required when a development will add 10 or more PM peak hour trips to the City’s transportation system. C. PARKING STUDY: A parking study may be required to determine the parking requirements for a specific use, adjusting minimum and maximum quantitative parking requirements, determining times of peak demand, and determining impacts to on-street parking in the vicinity of a proposed development. See AMC 19.64.020 for more info. D. OTHER TECHNICAL REPORTS MAY BE REQUIRED TO DETERMINE /ENSURE CONFORMANCE WITH CUP CRITERIA. Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 4 of 7 P ROJECT N ARRATIVE R EQUIREMENTS GENERAL INFORMATION This form is intended to assist applicants in creating complete project narrative for site plan and building design review. Please fill in each space with the requested information. PROJECT DESCRIPTION – Required for all project types A. If a neighborhood meeting was held, provide the date held, general items of discussion at the meeting, and how the project proposal has been modified since the meeting, if applicable. B. Proposed use of the Site per AMC Table 19.41.040 or 19.41.050 and any special use provisions that apply. (see AMC 19.43 – 19.48) C. Current use of the Site. Date of construction for any existing structures on site, and whether they are to be removed or retained. D. Description of the site’s physical characteristics, including special site features (such as wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes, or other critical areas). E. Current uses and special site features of surrounding properties. F. Description of general design techniques you considered to implement low impact development (see AMC 19.76.050(A) and (B)) in the design of your project site and proposed stormwater facilities necessary for compliance with AMC 19.76 Stormwater. G. Description of the proposed form and intensity of the proposed development (height, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.). (See AMC 19.42.) H. Identification of the site’s block frontage designation(s) and description of project conformance. (see AMC 19.61) I. Description of the proposed building design, including a description of conformance with building massing and articulation, building details, building materials, and blank wall treatment requirements. (See AMC 19.63). Note: If you are proposing any departures, you must attach the applicable form. No meeting was held. Single family detached residential homes. Vacant pasture land. The site is generally flat, with a 16-foot long segment of Ace of Hearts Creek. Surrounding properties are primarily single family detached homes. Low impact development techniques are limited. See Geotechnical Report. 6 lots, all over 15,000 sf. Homes will not exceed 35 feet in height. Not applicable. The Orchards HOA President has been advised of the proposal. Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 5 of 7 J. Description of proposed parking for vehicles and bicycles, including provisions for guests, shared parking. (see AMC 19.65) K. Describe existing and proposed site access from public streets and any proposed street and/or pedestrian improvements. L. Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed. M. Number, type, and size of trees to be removed. N. Description of existing site utilities and proposed utilities, including extensions, upgrades, relocations, etc. (see AMC 19.52 Underground Utilities). O. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City. Future homes will comply with the Anacortes Municipal Code. 2 off-street parking spaces per lot and 4 guest parking spaces along Orchard Avenue. A new public road will extend south from Cherry Lane. See attached SEPA checklist. 13 alders and 1 cherry tree will be remved. See Landscape Plan for details. Utilities typical for single family. See SEPA checklist. A new public road, Cherry Court, and stormwater pond tract will be dedicated. Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 6 of 7 C ONDITIONAL U SE P ERMIT C RITERIA GENERAL INFORMATION The following section is intended to help you provide information about your project’s compliance with the CUP criteria. Please fill in each space with responses that demonstrate how your proposal complies with all each criteria found in AMC 19.36.040. P. How will the proposed conditional use comply with any specific requirements for the use found elsewhere in Title 19 Development Regulations? Q. Describe how access to the site is appropriate considering the anticipated volume of traffic resulting from the use. R. Describe how off-street parking and loading facilities are adequate in terms of location, amount, and design to service the use. S. Describe the location and intensity of outdoor lighting and how casting of light on adjacent, adjoining, or neighboring properties will be avoided. T. Describe the hours and manner of operation of the proposed use, including anticipated noise generation, and how these will not be inconsistent with adjacent or nearby uses. The new public road to serve the 6 lots is designed to comply with the City code and islocated well away from the FWHCA. The existing access across the culverted streamwill not change with the short subdivision. The development will comply with Title 19. A CUP is required due to the presence ofan existing culverted segment of Ace of Hearts Creek, a FWHCA, being located withinthe short subdivision boundaries. See AMC 17.70.560I. No changes to this area areproposed as part of the short subdivision and this area will be part of new Lot 5 . Typical exterior house porch lighting will be shielded and directed downward. Short term noise associated with construction. Long term noise typcial of a singlefamily residential neighborhood. A minimum of 2 off-street parking spaces will be provide per lot. 4 guest parking spaceswill be located along Orchard Avenue. Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist Updated September 12, 2019 Page 7 of 7 U. Describe existing or proposed public facilities that will serve the use and whether they are adequate to serve the proposed use. V. Describe the physical conditions of the site, including size, shape, topography, and drainage and their suitability for the proposed development. W. Describe any other factors deemed relevant to the decision-maker. Water and sewer services will be extended to serve the future homes. Incrementalincreases in fire, police and schools. Access improvements will be made with theshort subdivision construction. See SEPA checklist and development plans for moredetail. The site is 3 acres and generally flat, sloping to the north. A new stormwater pond isproposed for the northeastern corner of the short subdivision. No disturbance to the Ace of Hearts Creek is proposed. The short subdivision willresult in this area being included as part of new Lot 5. Page 1 of 2 May 6, 2020 Project Narrative for Cherry Court Proposed 6-Lot Short Subdivision and Conditional Use Permit Short Subdivision Tax parcel P32077 is proposed to be subdivided into 6 lots. The site is zoned R-1 with a combined total area of 3.12 acres and is currently vacant. All lots will be over 15,000 square feet and will be developed in the future with single family detached homes and related accessory structures. The short subdivision also includes a new public road (Cherry Court), Orchard Avenue frontage improvements with on-street guest parking adjacent to new Lot 1, and a public stormwater drainage pond. The portion of the existing power easement that is on the site will be relinquished (see note on short plat map below). A request was submitted to PSE for the relinquishment on May 5, 2020. See Project Narrative attached to Land Use Application Submittal Checklist for additional description of the proposal. 5/7/20 Page 2 of 2 May 6, 2020 Conditional Use Permit A 16-foot long existing culverted segment of the Ace of Hearts Creek bisects a portion of the site that is a panhandle to proposed Lot 5. Ace of Hearts Creek is designated as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area according to the City of Anacortes critical area regulations. Per AMC 17.70.560 I., the short subdivision of land in fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and associated buffers is subject to the city Conditional Use Permit process. No changes will be made to this area as a result of the short subdivision. See Project Narrative attached to Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Checklist for additional description of the proposal. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 1 of 14 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: [help] This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: [help] For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. 5/7/20 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 2 of 14 A. BACKGROUND [help] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: [help] Cherry Court 2. Name of applicant: [help] Corner 9 Properties, LLC – Landed Gentry Development, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: [help] Anna Nelson Landed Gentry Development, Inc. 504 E. Fairhaven Ave. Burlington, WA 98233 4. Date checklist prepared: [help] May 6, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: [help] City of Anacortes 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): [help] Site construction Summer 2020, with home in later 2020 and 2021. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. [help] No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. [help] Critical Area Report with Habitat Assessment by Bachman Environmental dated 12/10/19 Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation by Geotest dated 2/26/20 Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates dated 5/6/20 Landscape Plan and Tree Preservation Plan by Eccos Design dated 5/2/20 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. [help] No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. [help] Preliminary and Final Short Plat approval Conditional Use Permit Site and building construction permits NPDES TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 3 of 14 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) [help] The site is zoned R-1 with a combined total area of 3.12 acres and is currently vacant. The site is proposed to be subdivided into 6 lots for future single family detached homes and related accessory structures. All lots will be over 15,000 square feet. The short subdivision also includes a new public road and public stormwater drainage pond. See attached aerial and Short Plat map dated 4/8/20. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. [help] The site for the proposed residential development is located directly north of the intersection of Cherry Lane and Orchard Avenue in Section 25, Township 35 North, Range 1 E. Skagit County Tax Parcel P32077. See attached vicinity map and legal description on attached Short Plat map dated 4/8/20. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS [help] 1.Earth a. General description of the site [help] (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? [help] The site does not contain steep slopes. See existing topography on Short Plat Sheet 3 of 4. 3 to 8% slopes are present according to the Web Soil Survey website. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. [help] Two soil units are present on the site: Unit 18 and Unit 19 – Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes and Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 percent slopes. See Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation by Geotest dated 2/26/20. The site is in the Anacortes City limits and zoned R-1. It has not been designated as agricultural land of long-term commercial significance. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 4 of 14 d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. [help] No. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. [help] Within the property soils will be stripped from proposed roadway areas, pond areas, and within residential lots. Of this material some may be stock piled onsite for common lot fill around, but not under, structures. The quantity of excavated materials can potentially be used to partially level out the proposed residential lots, however this product will not be recognized as a structural fill upon which residential foundations can be constructed. Soils used as common lot fills will have to be excavated through for the construction of residential foundations. Within this project, approximately 230 lineal feet of new roadway construction will occur. Within the alignment of proposed roads, topsoil materials will be removed prior to the placement of the structural fill for the road base. For the purposes of roadway construction, approximately 500 cubic yards of organic topsoil materials will be excavated and approximately 850 cubic yards of gravel structural fill will be imported for the roadway construction. Gravel structural fill will consist of gravel borrow and will be obtained from a Skagit County gravel source. A portion of the excavated topsoil materials will be saved and used as common lot fills. An additional 600 cubic yards of material will be excavated for utility installation. Approximately 1,250 cubic yards of excavation will be necessary for the construction of the detention pond. A portion of these excavated materials will be used to create the proposed berming as allowed by the geotechnical engineer. Though future home site construction is specifically unknown at this time, based on an average 24-inch stripping depth over 4,500 square feet of each lot would generate approximately 2,000 cubic yards of excavated material. Assuming a 12-inch depth of gravel fill below the same area would require approximately 1,000 cubic yards of fill material. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. [help] The site topography, drier season construction and the use of temporary erosion control measures will ensure that there is a low likelihood that site construction could cause erosion. Ground disturbance during site construction will follow best management practices to prevent erosion. During the site development activities, rainfall runoff will be directed towards the partially constructed detention pond. This will provide a facility for rainfall waters to collect, sediment to settle out, and water to soak into the ground. If necessary, a temporary outfall will be made available from the partially constructed infiltration/detention pond to the adjacent drainage course. This will include provisions to filter runoff waters before they enter the referenced drainage course. Silt fences and temporary scratch ditches will also be implemented where effective. In the long term, the site will be designed to prevent erosion. See Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates, Inc. (May 6, 2020). TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 5 of 14 g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? [help] Based on 4,200 square feet of house and driveway on each lot, new roadway, new sidewalk and detention pond areas, approximately 1.4 acres of the site will be developed with a total impervious surface area of 0.9-acres (approx. 30% of the entire site). See Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates, Inc. (May 6, 2020). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: [help] Cnstruction in the drier season will reduce impacts from erosion. Prior to proceeding with any development, compliance with the necessary approval from the Department of Ecology (NPDES) and City of Anacortes for right-of-way and site construction will be required, including following best management practices to prevent erosion. See conclusions and recommendations in Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation by Geotest dated 2/26/20 and Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates, Inc. (May 6, 2020). 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. [help] Some dust and emissions may result during site demolition, grading, and construction. Over the life of the project, emissions are not expected to be significant. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. [help] No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: [help] Site preparation and construction will follow best management practices to prevent emission of fugitive dust in the vicinity. 3.Water a. Surface Water: [help] 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. [help] A 16 foot long existing culverted segment of the Ace of Hearts Creek crosses a portion of the site that is a panhandle to proposed Lot 5. See Short Plat Sheet 3 of 4 and Critical Area Report with Habitat Assessment by Bachman Environmental dated 12/10/19. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. [help] No work is required in this area for the short subdivision. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 6 of 14 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. [help] None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help] No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. [help] No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. [help] No. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help] None proposed. Water will be provided by the City of Anacortes. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. [help] None proposed. Sanitary sewer will be provided by the City of Anacortes. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. [help] Runoff from the residential development and new public road widening will be collected and conveyed to a proposed detention pond. The pond will have side slopes varying from 2.5:1 to 3:1 will be 3-feet deep (including 1-foot of freeboard). Storm water discharged to from the detention pond will be routed northeasterly to a control structure which will provide a controlled release of stormwater northeasterly, then easterly within the south side of the Cherry Court right of way to an existing culvert at the easterly end of the existing paved surface. With respect to the current onsite grass conditions, the provision of a detention pond and controlled release of stormwater, the developed site is anticipated to no discharge more stormwater runoff than what currently occurs today. See Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates, Inc. (May 6, 2020). TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 7 of 14 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. [help] No. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. The developed site will not discharge more stormwater than what currently occurs today as the project will detain and release storm water from the site at rates equal to or less than what occurs from the estimated predeveloped condition. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: A storm water detention and treatment facility will be designed and constructed per the 2014 DOE standards. The design and function of this facility will be reviewed and approved by the City of Anacortes. See measures described above and more fully described in the Preliminary Drainage Report by Ravnik & Associates, Inc. (May 6, 2020). 4.Plants [help] a.Check the types of vegetation found on the site: [help] __X_deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other __X_evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other __X_shrubs __X_grass __X_pasture ____crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. ____ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ____other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? [help] The majority of the site is pasture. 13 alders and 1 cherry tree will be removed and 1 significant Douglas Fir tree will be retained. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help] None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: [help] Landscaping will include street trees, future residential lot landscaping and planting of the stormwater pond perimeter screening. See Landscape and Tree Preservation Plan by Eccos Design (May 2, 2020). TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 8 of 14 e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known. 5.Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: [help] birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help] None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. [help] The site is within the Pacific Flyway bird migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: [help] None necessary. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known. 6.Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. [help] Electricity, natural gas and heating sources typical for a residential subdivision will be used. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. [help] No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: [help] The future homes will comply with Energy Code requirements. 7.Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. [help] No. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 9 of 14 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be required. The site is served by the City of Anacortes Fire Department. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None necessary. b.Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? [help] No significant noise exists in the area. Typical street noise from adjacent streets and residential development. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. [help] Site grading and construction will create short-term noise impacts in the immediate vicinity. Long term impacts include low levels of noise associated with cars traveling on and off the site as well as ongoing residential uses. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: [help] Noise levels during and after construction will comply with City of Anacortes Municipal Code. 8.Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. [help] The site is currently vacant pasture land. Adjacent properties are developed with single family residences and associated accessory buildings or are vacant. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 10 of 14 b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? [help] No. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. c. Describe any structures on the site. [help] None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? [help] No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? [help] R-1. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? [help] Residential Low Density 1. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? [help] Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. [help] Ace of Hearts Creek is designated as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area according to the City of Anacortes critical area regulations. Per AMC 17.70.560 I., the short subdivision of land in fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and associated buffers is subject to the city conditional use permit process. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? [help] Approximately 18 people, based on 3 people per household. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? [help] None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: [help] None necessary. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 11 of 14 l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: [help] The short subdivision has been designed to comply with the Anacortes Municipal Code. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: None necessary. 9.Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. [help] 6 detached single family dwelling units will be constructed. It is anticipated that the housing will be middle-income. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. [help] None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: [help] The development will provide for more housing opportunities. 10.Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? [help] The maximum building height in the R-1 zone is 35 feet. The exterior materials are anticipated to lap and panel siding and composite roofing. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? [help] No views would be obstructed. The view across the site would change from pasture to residential c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: [help] The buildings will comply with the City building, zoning and design requirements 11.Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? [help] Outside house porch lighting will be provided. The lighting will be directed downward and shielded from the adjacent properties. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? [help] No. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 12 of 14 c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? [help] None anticipated. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: [help] Lighting will be directed downward with shielding as necessary to avoid lighting spill over per City requirements. 12.Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? [help] The Heart Lake Anacortes Community Forest Lands is located south of the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. [help] No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: [help] A sidewalk will be built with the new public road to connect to existing pedestrian facilities. Park impact fees will also be required at the time of building permit approval. 13.Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. [help] No. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. [help] No. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. [help] Review of City mapping, County GIS data, and Assessor’s data. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None necessary. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 2014 Page 13 of 14 14.Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. [help] Orchard Avenue abuts the northern edge of the site. A new public road, Cherry Court, will extend into the site as an extension of the current Cherry Lane public road located to the north. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? [help] No. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? [help] Off street parking for each individual lot will be provided, with on-street guest parking along a portion of Orchard Avenue that abuts the site. No parking will be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). [help] No. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. [help] No, f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? [help] The trip generation for the completed homes in the proposed short subdivision has been calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7th Edition. The average trip generation rates for the ITE Land Use Code (LUC) 210, Single-Family Detached, has been used. Based on a total of 6 new single family residential lots, each single family detached house will generate approximately 9.5 trips per day for an estimated total of approximately 57 vehicle trips per day for lots herein. With the development herein proposing middle income housing, most individuals will work. As such, the peak hour traffic will generally be in the afternoon between approximately 5:30 pm and 6:30 pm. Based upon the ITE manual, each lot will generate approximately 1 peak hour trip. For this residential plat, a total of approximately 6 peak hour trips will be generated each weekday afternoon sometime between 4:00pm and 6:00pm (one of these trips is existing due to the one residence currently onsite). Due to the nature of this project, all vehicles will be cars and pickups. Other than having occasional services provided to any of the residences, the peak hour traffic will not contain any significant quantity of commercial vehicles. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: ~ The proposed p edestrian and vehicul ar c irc ulation system design w ill ensure that the s ite is developed in a safe manner. Additionall y, a traffic impact mitigation fees w ill be required at the time of building permit approval. 15. Public services a . Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection , public transit , health care , schools, other)? If so, generally describe. ~ An increm e nt al increase for fire protection, pol ice protection and schools woul d be generated from the new development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services , if any .~ Fire impact fees wo ul d be collected at the tim e of building permit approval. b . Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed .~ Wire utilities comprising electricity, (PS E), telephone and internet (Comcast of Frontier), television cable (Comcast or Frontier), and fiber optic will be in stal led underground to serve thi s residential plat from existing utilities availab le in the Orchard Avenue/Che rry Lane right of way. Natural gas by Cascade Natural Gas Corporation . City of A nacortes water for fire protection and domestic water services will in volve the installation of water lines of 8-inch and 4-inch in diameter within the proposed right of way for this project. Sanitary sewer main piping be ing 8-inch in diameter will be constructed to convey all sewage northerly from the new lots to the City of Anacortes's sewer system located north of this property. For the purposes of storm dra inage, pipe diameters up to 12-inch diameter will be used to serve this plat. c. SIGNATURE [HELP] I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under laws of the State of Washington that the above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make a decision. Signature: ~:1AA~ ~ Name of signee _ ___;A....:.n'"""n'"""a:::...:.;M"'""a""'"r=ie'"-'N....:.e=l=s=o'"'"n _______________ _ Position and Agency/Organization Land Development Project Manager, Landed Gentry _ Date Submitted : May 7. 2020 SEPA Envi ronmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) City of Anacortes Updated May 201 4 Page 14 of 14 P32125 P32126 P32131 P32130 LAMBERT 2 SHORT PLAT SPL 2016-1001 AF 2 1801110001 P32074 NELSON SHOR PLAT ANA SP04-00 AF2008020801 9 3 A'F2o~~o919ooo~i '\ • z I p 12 ~f2503 P125038 P12739> z I I P134109 P32076 P32073 P32141 P32140 I i : I I I I P114294 • 8 P127400 P127399 41ST STREET ="--'--,------- r I Lllf'I I P123983 LOf' 42 I I P12402J I 'I I I Lllf''7 I ,,124030 r Lllf' •• LDT 48 P124029 I I LOTZ I I LOf' 41 I P123985 I I I I UJf' 48 I :P124031 I P124026 Lllf' •• P124043 P12402 I Lllf'. I P123986 LOT 40 : 1 I P12402 I I LOf' 49 I I P124032 I I ~ I L/Jf' 50 . I : i I P124033 Lllf' 61 ~ Lllf' 69 Lllf'U Lllf' 46 P124042 P124027 t-------al---------.. 1 :P124028 LOf' 68 LOT 4 P124041 P124034 ,. ~ ~ : I P1 23987 LOT 39 I : I I I Lllf' 6Z e,, P124035 I I S/~6 AN - 3 P~l' _________ J LOT 67 P124040 P123988 Lllf'. P123989 L~ iJ LOT 7 P123990 . c• ~ Lllf' 8 ~ c' P123991 .. ~~ a~ Lllf' 9 C• P123992 ----------r- Lllf' 10 P123993 Lllf'll I UJf' ~8 P124~21 I LOT~7 P1-. I LOT,. I P121J19 Lllf'~6 I P124()18 I I I 1.0rls4 I P124017 I I I ,_ __ 14!".,•• P12to1s I Ltlf'l9Z I LOT ll6 LOf' 58 P124009 P124008 P124036 I ,.._,_ LOT U 1 LO~T< P124010 P124007 P124037 t-------1 I ·v vn"n.R.ni.i .R. Lllf' Z7 Lllf' BB P124011 LOT ZJJ P124012 r TRACf' .. A .. P124044 I~ LOTBS I~ P1240061~ I - Lllf' 68 P124039 Lllf' 66 P124038 I Lllf' zz P32077 P124005 SITE Lllf' 80 P124013 Lllf'., P124004 If LOT 81 I P12t015 P124014 LOT 2IJ \.. I ~ P123994 ~ '"---------~-P124003 J - - '" 6 P12739S P127397 ~ P32139 I - I OPEN SPACE TRACT '"D'" P124047 • P127398. / THE ORC ~ARDS PUD 4882i ) NGP/l I I f'IUC'l''"lf" P124048 \ OPEN SPACE TRACI' '"Ir P32079 \ ROW I P3 1 oso • • I '\ P~2082 -...J == -.... P321 ~ Lllf' IZ LOr 1s ~/ ( Lllf'l4 Lllf' 16 LOf' 18 UJ'l' ,.., LOf' 18 LDT 19 P123995 P123996 I P123997 P123998 P123999 P124000 P124001 P124002 I P124045 TRACI' '"Ir J " I I .. ,_ I ---T·--------·-----------------·------~--....,-------·--•-1UC7'--·-~--·-------P124046 -~ - - - Ravnik & Associates, Inc. lllEEf WllUN: I I -~ I I I 1• .... , .. ? ~ ~ ~ I~~ P32298 P32307 1 A p~ p S/P A~ P32318 CML ENGINEER.ING ct LAND·USE PLANNING Im LINDAMOOD LANBIP.O. BOX 3'1 BUILINO'l'ON, WA 91233 VICINITY MAP DRA• BY: D. REMSEN PB: OfO) 707°204& PAX: OfO) 707·2216 JD8 NO. 1IOl3 DA1E: OUll.20 rRavnik at Associate Inc. CIVIL OINSSRING & LANINUIIII 1 • 1 1 • SHEET onalk CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR LANDED GENTRY HOMES 1 SW U4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N, R.1 E, Wit S CALD Krs P IAUI IT: PLR DAM 01.29.20 AERIAL PHOTO LOT 24 LOT 54 - N -- 588.59'2T'E 7.3LP.2'ti' ORCHARD AV! 61,4 WOW TO PI 1) 145A1' TRAIL NR4 CI C2 G4 C5 PARK/OPEN P-124044 LOT 23 P-124006 D LOT 22 f P-124005 LOT 21 P-124004 12300' Ip• p' P EV qAlTE - a 10' PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASB81r DRAINA£E EASETB=NT O U 6 .t LOT6 gI Y 0041 ,35. I u U S I ~ET 551I�I�L�.�.ENT T�I�EE 5 EA__ -'I I I 1 I I 508'5427E 14— 12'1G0 I� it - el MONT IN CASE (DEG. 2095 LOT 55 LOT 1 16,9685312934.,8. 0.4 LOT 2 1T,4T1 Sgit. 0.4 Acres. 3_ 5' UTILITIES ESMT PY - . TO BENEFIT LOT S- r 9093205E 31 13902' 16' INGRESS, E6RE35—' — AND UTILITIES ESMT _- TO BENEFIT LOT 3 �. 5. LINE OF THE N. 159' OF THE 5E 1/4 OF THE 5W 1/4 TOE 41 ST ST. MONT IN CASE 0.145AND 0.14'W OF GALL OF GALL I/18 GORIER !p�ASPNALr ILz \ I 588.5927= 333.49' z--x-z zrz-x-z= 30(.59'2TE —z—zY I I 336.01' ▪ i \ TRACT 'Y' 12624 Sq.Pt. 03 Acres. AGEGOF H ftlE CREEK <1m I * YI APPROX. LOCATION OF 10' EASEMENT Y I [TO R16ET POWER SHORTAP. NO. 8104100027 m (PORTION WITHIN PLAT TO BE RELINGUI51®) 7D TOM' I 58932'05'E 136.02' i •\ 'ZCXJ.7i3' 589.82.05E 122.24' p q }' I a DK ME NOR NO. CI 20' STORM AND p4 g P32032 '"� m UTILITIES ESMT O � I 200.00 0 _ 4 I. 5 < P32081 W 8 LOT$ 23,T42 Sgeft. 7 ' ;;• '• I 05 Acres..i li. I3�' 5 15002051E 2 ia. 5 FE yE 2 10' PRIVATE 6 DRAINAGE EASEMENT--.,. 178A5 LOT 20 LOT 3 �=F9 I.OT 4 I06482AS6. 20,92 Sg.fk. os Acres.P-124003 EX—DRIaGatMENTL 15902 P-123g4q P-124000 LOT 16 CURVE TABLE DELTA 81.56'24' 48315T• 140114'4V 20143.39• 30.44'O8' ARC) RADIUS 2355/) 5500.00' 12234')) 5000' 18A4) 50.00' 2634 1 5000' LOT 17 NOPE N89320YW ASPHALT P-124001 P-32135 LOT 18 N8932'05"W LOT 19 P-124001 P-32050 .05 336.00' ROS AP. NO. 3105230025 P32116 N89.32'051W / 336.05. O 25 50 100 150 SCALE: 1" = 50' I:,EVELOPEi:, GON1:2 1 T I ONS MAP AREA OF OF CENTERLINE HEARTS CREEK P-32135 I 25 MOUTH 114 GGOORRNNER DEL. 2019 nt SHEET 4 OP 4 DATE' 4/013/20 CITY ON ANAGORTES SHORT PLAT NO. SPL-2020-- SURVEY IN A PORTION OP THE SE 1/4 OP THE SW 1/4 OP SECTION 25, T. 55 N., R. 1 E., W.M. SKAEaIT COUNTY, WASHINSTON POR: RONALD V. 15AYEK AND RONALD V. 5AYEK JR. FB, PG, IM0LISSER b ASSOGIATES, PLLG I9CALE: I•=50' EIIRVE1186 4 LAND -USE CONSULTATION MERIDIAN: A55UI�D 1MT vERNON, WA 93215 560-414-1442 112915, 19-130 5P CRITICAL AREA REPORT WITH HABITAT ASSESSMENT FOR CHERRY COURT Bachman Environmental Job No. 1945 December 10, 2019 Prepared for: Corner 9 Properties, LLC Attn: Anna Nelson 504 E. Fairhaven Ave Burlington, WA 98233 BY: P.O. Box 471 Anacortes, WA 98221 Ph. 206.963.2909 andrea@bachmanenvironmental.com Bachman Environmental, LLC Note to reader: This report was prepared for a prior Boundary Line Adjustmentapplication that was subsequently withdrawn. It is provided with this Short Plat applicationas a portion of the existing culverted Ace of Heart Creek is located on the site proposed tobe subdivided as shown on Short Plat Sheet 3 of 4. 5/7/20 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 SITE LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 1 2.1 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION .............................................................................................. 1 2.2 CRITICAL AREA IDENTIFICATION ..................................................................................................... 1 2.3 CLASSIFICATION AND REGULATIONS .............................................................................................. 2 2.4 FIELD INVESTIGATION ........................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 2 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................. 2 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND MAPPED SOILS ................................................................................................... 2 3.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS ............................................................. 2 3.4 HABITAT ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 USE OF THIS REPORT .......................................................................................................... 3 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT Bachman Environmental undertook this critical area report to document regulated critical areas required by the city of Anacortes Critical Areas Regulations (CAR) Chapter 17.70. The propose of this assessment is to evaluate the site conditions for a proposed boundary line adjustment application, to ensure that environmental impacts are avoided. 1.2 SITE LOCATION The 4.37-acre site consists of three parcels, labeled as Parcel A (P32080), Parcel B (P32081), and Parcel C (P32077) on associated plans. The address for Parcel A is 4302 H Avenue in the city of Anacortes, WA (within a portion of Section 25, Township 35N, Range 1E, W.M.). 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing a boundary line adjustment. Parcel A will retain an existing house and barn as well as a segment of Ace of Hearts Creek and its 50-foot protective buffer. Parcel B, which contains a portion of Ace of Hearts Creek in a culvert, will remain generally the same. Parcel C, the westernmost parcel, will be the largest parcel. This proposal results in no impact on critical areas or regulated buffers. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION The following information was considered as background information before beginning fieldwork: •Google Earth •Skagit County iMap •WDFW PHS on the web •WDNR Forest Practices Application Review System (FPARS) water type map •USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey (on GoogleEarth) •USFWS National Wetland Inventory Maps 2.2 CRITICAL AREA IDENTIFICATION The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) is identified using the methodology described in the Washington State Department of Ecology document Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State (October 2016 Final Review) (Publication no. 16-06-029). Wetland areas are determined using the routine determination approach described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). To be considered a wetland, an area must have hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. 2 2.3 CLASSIFICATION AND REGULATIONS Bachman Environmental utilized the city of Anacortes Critical Areas Regulations, Chapter 17.70, for determining critical area classifications and regulatory requirements. 2.4 FIELD INVESTIGATION Bachman Environmental performed a field reconnaissance of the subject site on October 3, 2019. During the site visit, the sky was generally clear, and the temperature was about 58 degrees Fahrenheit. The reconnaissance covered all three parcels and off-site areas that could be observed on the subject property and from public roads. Bachman Environmental also used aerial photograph interpretation and published inventories to assess off-site conditions. Bachman Environmental did not access or field-verify off-site conditions beyond what could be observed from public roads and across property or fence lines. Critical areas could occur in the areas that could not be physically observed or have not been inventoried. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is surrounded by single-family residential land use. It contains an existing single-family home with associated outbuildings in the eastern part of Parcel A. The remainder of the site is cleared of vegetation and comprised of a horse pasture with electric fencing throughout. Tightly grazed pasture species dominate the site. Identifiable dominant species included colonial bentgrass (Agrostis capillaris, FAC), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FAC), narrow-leaf plantain (Plantago lanceolate, FACU) and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FACU). No wetlands were identified on the site. A stream known as Ace of Hearts Creek flows north through the eastern portion of the site. The stream top of bank is generally 1-foot from the centerline of the stream. 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND MAPPED SOILS The site is situated on a gentle northwestern facing slope. The NRCS Web Soil Survey maps the site as Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 & 3 to 8 percent slopes. The Bow gravelly loam series is described as deep and somewhat poorly drained soil on hillslopes and terraces. It is listed as a hydric soil in Washington State. 3.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS Ace of Hearts Creek flows north through approximately the center of Parcel A and the panhandle of Parcel B. This creek is designated as a FWHCA according to the critical areas regulations, Chapter 17.70.540.A.3.7.a. It is dedicated a 50-foot buffer from the top of the bank. 3.4 HABITAT ASSESSMENT Ace of Hearts Creek is perennial, less than 2-feet between the bankfull widths with a mud bottom. It was dry at the time of the October 3rd site visit. The portion of the stream on Parcel B is 3 culverted. It does not support fish habitat. The headwater is Heart Lake, approximately one-half mile to the south. The stream flows through forested riparian areas and wetlands before entering the subject site. The on-site segment is degraded. Vegetation along the riparian corridor is established with a dominance of creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW) and bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis, UPL) in the channel, and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus, FAC) cut-leaf blackberry (Rubus laciniatus, FACU) and grazed pasture grasses above the top of the bank. There are no species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with Ace of Hearts Creek. Also, there are no federal, state, or local special management recommendations associated with the creek. No direct or potential indirect impacts are expected on Ace or Hearts Creek or its buffer because the proposed boundary line adjustment is designed to avoid it altogether. This will be achieved by a boundary line adjustment that retains the creek channel and its buffer all on Parcel A. There are no changes to the creek on Parcel B. Since the project does not propose any in-water work of any kind, it requires no mitigation measures and no other agency reviews are required. Conclusion Based on the results of the assessment and the proposed boundary line adjustment lot layout, no impacts to Ace of Hearts Creek or its buffer are anticipated. This report, therefore, meets the requirements for critical areas reporting under the Anacortes CAR Chapter 17.70. 4.0 USE OF THIS REPORT This Critical Areas Report is supplied to Corner 9 Properties as required by the city of Anacortes during the permitting process. Bachman Environmental utilized the Anacortes Critical Areas Regulations for guidance and conformed to the accepted standards and methods employed by ecologists in Western Washington. The analysis and conclusions supplied in this report represent the author's best professional judgment based on readily observable conditions and information provided by the project proponent during the study. No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions. The laws applicable to critical areas are subject to varying interpretations. They may be changed at any time by the courts or legislative bodies. Should you have any questions or concerns relating to the findings of this report, please feel free to call at (206) 963-2909. Andrea Bachman, PWS Cherry Court SFR Development Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Landed Gentry Homes and Communities 504 E. Fairhaven Ave. Burlington, WA Attn: Anna Nelson Prepared For: 5/7/20 T February 26, 2020 Project No. 19-0882 Landed Gentry Homes and Communities 504 E. Fairhaven Avenue Burlington, WA 98233 Attention: Regarding: Anna Nelson Land Development Project Manager Final Geotechnical Engineering Report Cherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, Washington Dear Ms. Nelson: 1888.251.5276 Bel l ingha m I A r lington I Oak Harbor www.geotest-i nc.com As requested, Geo Test Services, Inc. (GeoTest) is pleased to submit the following report summarizing the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Cherry Court Single-Family Residence (SFR) Development, located along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). This report has been prepared in general accordance with the terms and conditions established in our services agreement dated December 10, 2019 and authorized by Mr. Brian Gentry. We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward to assisting you during the construction phase . Should you have any further questions regarding the information contained within the report, or if we may be of service in other regards, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully, GeoTest Services, Inc. Zachary G. Click Zach Click, LG. Staff Geologist Enclosure: Final Geotechnical Report Sma ll Business Ente rpri se (SBE ) King Co unty Sm a ll Co ntractor or Supplie r {SCS ) Joe Schmidt, P.E. Proj ect Geotechnical En gin eer TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES .....................................................................................................1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................1 SITE CONDITIONS ...............................................................................................................................1 Surface Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 1 Subsurface Soil Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 2 General Geologic Conditions .................................................................................................................... 3 Web Soil Survey........................................................................................................................................ 4 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................ 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ..........................................................................................................................5 Seismic Hazard ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Liquefaction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Slope and Erosion ..................................................................................................................................... 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................7 Site Preparation and Earthwork ............................................................................................................... 7 Fill and Compaction .................................................................................................................................. 8 Reuse of On-Site Soil ............................................................................................................................ 8 Import Structural Fill ............................................................................................................................ 9 Backfill and Compaction ...................................................................................................................... 9 Wet Weather Earthwork .......................................................................................................................... 9 Seismic Design Considerations ............................................................................................................... 10 Foundation Support ............................................................................................................................... 10 Allowable Bearing Capacity ............................................................................................................... 11 Foundation Settlement ...................................................................................................................... 11 Floor Support ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Foundation and Site Drainage ................................................................................................................ 12 Resistance to Lateral Loads .................................................................................................................... 13 Temporary and Permanent Slopes ........................................................................................................ 14 Utilities ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ........................................................................................................... 15 Flexible Pavement Sections – Light Duty ........................................................................................... 15 Flexible Pavement Sections – Heavy Duty ......................................................................................... 16 Concrete Sidewalks and Hardscapes ................................................................................................. 16 Stormwater Infiltration Potential ........................................................................................................... 16 Stormwater Treatment ...................................................................................................................... 16 Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring ..................................................................... 17 USE OF THIS REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 18 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 19 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 1 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of this evaluation is to establish general subsurface conditions beneath the site from which conclusions and recommendations pertaining to project design can be formulated. Our scope of services includes the following tasks: ·Exploration of soil and groundwater conditions underlying the site by advancing 6 test pits with a client provided excavator to evaluate subsurface conditions. ·Laboratory testing on representative samples to classify and evaluate the engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. ·To provide a written report containing a description of subsurface conditions, exploration logs, findings and recommendations pertaining to site preparation and earthwork, fill and compaction, seismic design, foundation recommendations, concrete slab-on-grade construction, foundation and site drainage, utilities, temporary and permanent slopes, an assessment of on-site infiltration feasibility and stormwater pollutant treatment, geotechnical consultation, and construction monitoring. PROJECT DESCRIPTION GeoTest understands that there are plans to develop 7 lots along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington with single-family residences. New construction will likely consist of wood-framed residences, on-grade parking and associated drive lanes. Building loads are anticipated to be light and supported by conventional foundations. SITE CONDITIONS This section includes a description of the general surface and subsurface conditions observed at the project site during the time of our field investigation. Interpretations of site conditions are based on the results and review of available information, site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, and previous experience in the project vicinity. Surface Conditions The subject property is approximately 3.4 acres and L-shaped. The property is generally bordered to the north by Cherry Lane, to the south by Orchard Place, to the west by Orchard Avenue and to the east by residential and livestock-purposed properties. The site is relatively level but slopes gently to the northeast. Site vegetation consists of short grass covering with sporadic trees located at the perimeter of the property. The site is currently occupied by a series of electric GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 2 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 fences and gates utilized for livestock which reside on the property. No surface water was observed during our site visit on December 18, 2019. Image 1. View of the excavation process at test pit # (TP-#) showing the typical overall site conditions. Subsurface Soil Conditions Subsurface conditions were explored by advancing 6 test pits (TP-1 through TP-6) with a client provided excavator and operator on December 18, 2019. The explorations were advanced to depths of between 9 and 10 feet below ground surface (BGS). Approximate locations of these explorations have been plotted on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2). The on-site near surface soils generally consisted of approximately 1 foot or less of topsoil, underlain by approximately 2 to 3 feet of a dense, brown, slightly gravelly, silty sand, interpreted as weathered glacial till. At approximately 3 to 4 feet BGS the soils grade to a very dense, gray gravelly, silty sand. GeoTest interprets these soils to be unweathered glacial till. Within test pit 1 (TP-1), fill was observed overlying undisturbed glacial till. This test pit was performed on a soil mound at the southwestern corner of the project site. GeoTest interprets GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 3 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 the fill at this location to be indicative of native borrow fill, likely from past construction activities in the immediate vicinity, consisting of previously excavated, disturbed glacial till. More detailed logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the exploration locations are presented in the attached Test Pit Logs (Figures 5 through 7) at the end of this report. General Geologic Conditions General geologic conditions at the site are mapped as Pleistocene aged Vashon Stade glacial till within the northwest portion of the site and advance outwash deposits within the southeast portion of the site (Pessl, et. al, 1989). Glacial till consists of nonstratified, dense to very dense diamicton consisting of clay, silt, sand, and gravel in various proportions, with scattered cobbles Image 2. View of test pit 3 (TP-3) showing the typical subgrade soil profile for the project site. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 4 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 and boulders; and rare lenses of sand or gravel indicating subglacial meltwater processes during deposition. Advance outwash deposits typically consist of sand, gravel, silt and clay deposited by meltwater flowing from the advancing ice margin of the Puget lobe of Vashon age. Advance outwash deposits are typically moderate to well-sorted and distinctly stratified. The subsurface soils encountered in our explorations underlying the site topsoil and uncontrolled fill soils appear to consistent with the mapped glacial till deposits. No soils indicative of advance outwash deposits were encountered within our explorations. Web Soil Survey According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey website, two relevant soil units are present on the subject property and vicinity. Please reference Table 1 below for general characteristics. The mapped soils on the property consist of Unit 18 and Unit 19 – Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes and Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 percent slopes. Both units can be prone to poor drainage and wetness based on their land capability classification ranking of 4w by the USDA. Although the susceptibility to erosion rating of 0.24 is considered moderate by the USDA scale, it is GeoTest’s opinion that due to the relatively flat topography, the project site presents a low vulnerability to sheet and rill erosion. Table 1: USDA NRCS Soil Classifications Map Unit Symbol 18 19 Map Unit Name Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 percent slopes General Location Western ¾ of the site Eastern ¼ of the site Soil Description Gravelly ashy loam over very gravelly ashy loam over clay loam over silty clay Gravelly ashy loam over very gravelly ashy loam over clay loam over silty clay Landform Hillslopes, terraces Hillslopes, terraces Parent Material Volcanic ash, glaciolacustrine deposits, and glacial drift Volcanic ash, glaciolacustrine deposits, and glacial drift Land Capability Classification 4w 4w Erosion K Factor, Whole Soil 0.24 0.24 Values of the erosion factor “K” range from 0.02 to 0.69; the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. Soils found within the project vicinity GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 5 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 could be susceptible to erosion based on their rating, but their vulnerability to sheet and rill erosion are considered low based on slope inclination. Additional commentary on potential geologic hazards follows herein. Groundwater Slight Groundwater seepage was observed at depths of approximately 1.5 to 4 feet below the existing ground surface within test pits TP-3, TP-4 and TP-6 at the time of our explorations. No groundwater seepage was observed within the remaining explorations. The groundwater was noted as a slight seep that entered the excavation from the sidewall. The groundwater seepage observed during our explorations is not indicative of a regional groundwater table or aquifer and no indications of a regional groundwater table or aquifer were observed within our subsurface explorations. The slight seepage observed within the explorations is indicative of perched, laterally flowing groundwater conditions. Laterally flowing groundwater typically develops when relatively permeable soil is underlain by more dense and/or less permeable soil. The depositional pattern of these soils is such that the looser or more granular soils allow water to pass through it, only to be restricted once it encounters the denser or siltier soils at depth. It should be noted that interflow (the lateral movement of perched groundwater) likely exists locally on top of the hard glacial till soils where groundwater migrates horizontally down grade perched upon a very dense restrictive soil layer. The groundwater conditions reported on the exploration logs are for the specific locations and dates indicated, and therefore may not be indicative of other locations and/or times. Groundwater levels are variable and groundwater conditions will fluctuate depending on local subsurface conditions, precipitation, and changes in on-site and off-site use. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Seismic Hazard The Pacific Northwest region is seismically active. Large Cascadia subduction zone earthquakes with possible magnitudes of 8 or 9 could produce ground shaking events with the potential to significantly impact the region. Cascadia subduction zone earthquakes have occurred 6 times in the last 3,500 years with the most recent taking place in 1700, approximately 300 years ago. They have been determined to have an average reoccurrence interval of approximately 300 to 700 years. The project site is classified as a potential seismic hazard per Anacortes Municipal Code (AMC) Section 17.70.190(C) because the area proposed for development is at risk of earthquake induced ground shaking. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 6 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 The project location is mapped by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources online Geologic Information Portal as Seismic Site Class D. The International Building Code addresses design standards for new construction in this seismic design category. Incorporation of these mitigations into project design is the responsibility of the structural engineer. Refer to the Seismic Design Considerations section of this report for additional information. Liquefaction Liquefaction is defined as a significant rise in pore water pressure within a soil mass caused by earthquake-induced cyclic shaking. The shear strength of liquefiable soils is reduced during large and/or long duration earthquakes as the soil consistency approaches that of semi-solid slurry. Liquefaction can result in significant and widespread structural damage if not properly mitigated. Deposits of loose, granular soil below the groundwater table are most susceptible to liquefaction. Damage caused by foundation rotation, lateral spreading, and other ground movements can results from soil liquefaction. The subject site is mapped (Palmer et al. 2004) as having a liquefaction susceptibility of “very low”. However, this map only provides an estimate of the likelihood that soil will liquefy as a result of earthquake shaking and is meant as a general guide to delineate areas prone to liquefaction. Based on our field explorations in which dense to very dense, gravelly and silty sands (glacial till) were encountered and only localized, slight groundwater seepage was observed, it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions are at a very low risk of liquefaction. Therefore, no specific liquefaction mitigations are recommended for this project. Slope and Erosion Due to the relatively flat nature of the project site, GeoTest does not anticipate any slope or erosion hazards as defined by the AMC. Thus, no specific erosion mitigations are recommended for this project. However, the project site is classified as an erosion hazard per AMC 17.70.190(A) due to being classified as a “moderate” erosion hazard by the USDA NRCS. The following recommendations are best practices intended to prevent excessive erosion from occurring: ·All clearing and grading activities for future residence construction will need to incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion control in compliance with current City of Anacortes codes and standards. ·We recommend that appropriate silt fencing be incorporated into the construction plan for erosion control. ·We recommend that onsite BMP’s be implemented during construction. Areas of native vegetation should be left in place and could also be enhanced by adding additional native GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 7 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 plant species and/or other vegetation enhancements. ·Removal of vegetation and trees without proper mitigation may increase the risk of failure for the surficial soils during periods of wet weather. Planting additional brush and vegetation within the subject site and in areas disturbed by excavation activities will help maintain near surface slope stability by providing a stable root base within the near surface soils. ·Proper drainage controls have a significant effect on erosion. ·All areas disturbed by construction practices should be vegetated or otherwise protected to limit the potential for erosion as soon as practical during and after construction. Areas requiring immediate protection from the effects of erosion should be covered with either plastic, mulch or erosion control netting/blankets. Areas requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved grass seed mixture, hydroseeded with an approved seed-mulch-fertilizer mixture or landscaped with a suitable planting design. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the evaluation of the data collected during this investigation, it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions at the site are suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations contained herein are incorporated into the project design. Based on our explorations we anticipate that on average about 12 inches of topsoil will need to be removed from across the site to reach suitable native soils. Localized stripping depths will increase in the area surrounding test pit TP-1 due to existing uncontrolled fill soils. In this area we anticipate that up to approximately 5.5 feet of topsoil and uncontrolled fill soils will need to be removed to reach undisturbed native soils. On-site stormwater infiltration through traditional means will not be feasible due to the highly compact condition of the native unweathered glacial till soils. However, a limited amount of infiltration may be achieved through dispersion or other similar methods. It is our understanding, based on conversations with Ravnik and Associates, that a curtain drain will be installed on the along the western border of the site to intercept offsite groundwater and a stormwater retention pond is planned for the northeast corner of the property. Additionally, the project will utilize roof drain dispersion. Site Preparation and Earthwork The portions of the site proposed for foundation(s), floor slabs, pavement and/or sidewalks development should be prepared by removing existing fill, topsoil, deleterious material and significant accumulations of organics. Prior to placement of any foundation elements or structural fill, the exposed subgrade under all areas to be occupied by soil-supported floor slabs, spread, or continuous foundations should be recompacted to a firm and unyielding condition. Verification of compaction can be accomplished through proof rolling with a loaded dump truck, GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 8 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 large self-propelled vibrating roller, or similar piece of equipment applicable to the size of the excavation. The purpose of this effort is to identify loose or soft soil deposits so that, if feasible, the soil distributed during site work can be recompacted. Proof rolling should be carefully observed by qualified geotechnical personnel. Areas exhibiting significant deflection, pumping, or over-saturation that cannot be readily compacted should be overexcavated to firm soil. Overexcavated areas should be backfilled with compacted granular material placed in accordance with subsequent recommendations for structural fill. During periods of wet weather, proof rolling could damage the exposed subgrade. Under these conditions, qualified geotechnical personnel should observe subgrade conditions to determine if proof rolling is feasible. Proof rolling may not be feasible for certain locations within excavated footings, trench areas, or other difficult access zones when using a full-size dump truck or other large machinery. In this situation, we recommend alternate means of verification such as Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing or soil probe methods be employed to verify suitability of field conditions. Fill and Compaction Structural fill used to obtain final elevations for footings and soil-supported floor slabs must be properly placed and compacted. In most cases, any non-organic, predominantly granular soil may be used for fill material provided the material is properly moisture conditioned prior to placement and compaction, and the specified degree of compaction is obtained. Material containing topsoil, wood, trash, organic content, or construction debris is not suitable for reuse as structural fill and should be properly disposed offsite or placed in nonstructural areas. Soils containing more than approximately 5 percent fines are considered moisture sensitive and are difficult to compact to a firm and unyielding condition when over the optimum moisture content by more than approximately 2 percent. The optimum moisture content is that which allows the greatest dry density to be achieved at a given level of compactive effort. Reuse of On-Site Soil Due to excessive silt content of the on-site soils, these soils are not recommended for use as structural fill during wet weather/site conditions due to the difficulties associated with moisture conditioning. GeoTest recommends any reuse of the native soils during periods of wet weather/site conditions be limited to landscape and other non-structural areas. Reuse of the on-site native soils may be feasible during the dry summer months, typically July through September, provided that they are properly moisture conditioned and placed within approximately 2 percent of the optimum moisture content determined by ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 9 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Import Structural Fill GeoTest recommends that imported structural fill consist of clean, well-graded sandy gravel, gravelly sand, or other approved naturally occurring granular material (pit run) with at least 30 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve, or a well-graded crushed rock. Structural fill for dry weather construction may contain up to 10 percent fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) based on the portion passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. The use of an imported fill having more than 10 percent fines may be feasible, but the use of these soils should generally be reviewed by the design team prior to the start of construction. Imported structural fill with less than 5 percent fines should be used during wet weather conditions. Due to wet site conditions, soil moisture contents could be high enough that it may be difficult to compact even clean imported select granular fill to a firm and unyielding condition. Soils with an over-optimum moisture content should be scarified and dried back to a suitable moisture content during periods of dry weather or removed and replaced with drier structural fill. Backfill and Compaction Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts. The structural fill must measure 8 to 10 inches in loose thickness and be thoroughly compacted. All structural fill placed under load bearing areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D1557. The top of the compacted structural fill should extend outside all foundations and other structural improvements a minimum distance equal to the thickness of the fill. We recommend that compaction be tested after placement of each lift in the fill pad. Wet Weather Earthwork Native glacial till soils are particularly susceptible to degradation during wet weather. As a result, it may be difficult to control the moisture content of site soils during the wet season. If construction takes place during wet weather, GeoTest recommends that structural fill consist of imported, clean, well-graded sandy gravel or gravelly sand with low fines content as described above. If fill is to be placed or earthwork is to be performed in wet conditions, the contractor may reduce soil disturbance by: ·Limiting the size of areas that are stripped of topsoil and left exposed ·Accomplishing earthwork in small sections ·Limiting construction traffic over unprotected soil ·Sloping excavated surfaces to promote runoff ·Limiting the size and type of construction equipment used ·Providing gravel ‘working mats’ over areas of prepared subgrade ·Removing wet surficial soil prior to commencing fill placement each day GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 10 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 ·Sealing the exposed ground surface by rolling with a smooth drum compactor or rubber- tired roller at the end of each working day ·Providing up-gradient perimeter ditches or low earthen berms and using temporary sumps to collect runoff and prevent water from ponding and damaging exposed subgrades Seismic Design Considerations The Pacific Northwest is seismically active, and the site could be subject to movement from a moderate or major earthquake. Consequently, moderate levels of seismic shaking should be accounted for during the design life of the project, and the proposed structure should be designed to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology. For structures designed using the seismic provisions of the 2018 International Building Code, the very dense/hard silty sand/sandy silt soils underlying the site within the upper 100 feet is classified as Site Class D, according to ASCE 7-16. The structural engineer should select the appropriate design response spectrum based on Site Class D soil and the geographical location of the proposed construction. Foundation Support Continuous or isolated spread footings founded on proof-rolled, undisturbed, stiff/dense native soils or on properly compacted structural fill placed directly over undisturbed native soil can provide foundation support for the proposed improvements. We recommend that qualified geotechnical personnel confirm that suitable bearing conditions have been reached prior to placement of structural fill or foundation formwork. To provide proper support, GeoTest recommends that existing topsoil, uncontrolled fill, and/or loose/soft, upper portions of the native soil be removed from beneath the building foundation area(s) or be replaced with properly compacted structural fill as described in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Localized overexcavation, if necessary, can be backfilled to the design footing elevation with structural fill or controlled density fill (CDF), or foundations may be extended to bear on undisturbed native soil. In areas requiring overexcavation to competent native soil, the limits of the overexcavation should extend laterally beyond the edge of each side of the footing a distance equal to the depth of the excavation below the base of the footing, if structural fill is used. If CDF is used to backfill the overexcavation, the limits of the overexcavation need only extend a nominal distance beyond the width of the footing. In addition, GeoTest recommends that foundation elements for the proposed structure(s) bear entirely on similar soil conditions to help prevent differential settlement from occurring. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 11 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Continuous and isolated spread footings should be founded 18 inches, minimum, below the lowest adjacent final grade for freeze/thaw protection. The footings should be sized in accordance with the structural engineer’s prescribed design criteria and seismic considerations. Allowable Bearing Capacity Assuming the above foundation support criteria are satisfied, continuous or isolated spread footings founded directly on stiff/dense native soils or on compacted structural fill placed directly over undisturbed native soils may be proportioned using a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The "net allowable bearing pressure" refers to the pressure that can be imposed on the soil at foundation level. This pressure includes all dead loads, live loads, the weight of the footing, and any backfill placed above the footing. The net allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for transient wind or seismic loads. Foundation Settlement Settlement of shallow foundations depends on foundation size and bearing pressure, as well as the strength and compressibility characteristics of the underlying soil. If construction is accomplished as recommended and at the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure, GeoTest estimates the total settlement of building foundations to be less than one inch. Differential settlement between two adjacent load-bearing components supported on competent soil is estimated to be less than one half the total settlement. Floor Support Conventional slab-on-grade floor construction is feasible for the planned site improvements. Floor slabs may be supported on properly prepared native subgrade or on properly placed and compacted structural fill placed over properly prepared native soil. Prior to placement of the structural fill, the native soil should be proof-rolled or otherwise verified as recommended in the Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this report. A Subgrade Modulus (k) of 300 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for the native glacial till or structural fill overlying native soils is recommended for use in design of concrete slab elements. These values are assuming site preparations including removal of existing topsoil and any uncontrolled fill (if encountered) to native soil and potential replacement with imported structural fill prior to slab installation. For proper slab support, GeoTest recommends that interior concrete slab-on-grade floors be underlain with at least 6 inches of clean, compacted, free-draining gravel. The gravel should contain less than 3 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 12 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 of that portion passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve). The purpose of this gravel layer is to provide uniform support for the slab, provide a capillary break, and act as a drainage layer. To help reduce the potential for water vapor migration through floor slabs, a continuous 10 to 15- mil minimum thick polyethylene sheet with tape-sealed joints should be installed below the slab to serve as an impermeable vapor barrier. The vapor barrier should be installed and sealed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade, such as sidewalks, may be supported directly on undisturbed native soil or on properly placed and compacted structural fill; however, long-term performance will be enhanced if exterior slabs are placed on a layer of clean, durable, well-draining granular material. Foundation and Site Drainage Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to the proposed building to direct surface water away from the building and toward suitable drainage facilities. Roof drainage should not be introduced into the perimeter footing drains but should be separately discharged directly to the stormwater collection system or similar municipality-approved outlet. Pavement and sidewalk areas, if present, should be sloped and drainage gradients should be maintained to carry surface water away from the building towards an approved stormwater collection system. Surface water should not be allowed to pond and soak into the ground surface near buildings or paved areas during or after construction. Construction excavations should be sloped to drain to sumps where water from seepage, rainfall, and runoff can be collected and pumped to a suitable discharge facility. To reduce the potential for groundwater and surface water to seep into interior spaces, GeoTest recommends that an exterior footing drain system be constructed around the perimeter of new building foundations as shown in the Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section (Figure 3) of this report. The drain should consist of a perforated pipe measuring 4 inches in diameter at minimum, surrounded by at least 12 inches of filtering media. The pipe should be sloped to carry water to an approved collection system. The filtering media may consist of open-graded drain rock wrapped in a nonwoven geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 140N or industry equivalent. For foundations supporting retaining walls, drainage backfill should be carried up the back of the wall and be at least 12 inches wide. The drainage backfill should extend from the foundation drain to within approximately 1 foot of the finished grade and consist of open-graded drain rock containing less than 3 percent fines by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve). The invert of the footing drain pipe should be placed at approximately the same elevation as the bottom of the footing or 12 inches below the adjacent floor slab grade, whichever is deeper, so that water will be contained. This process prevents GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 13 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 water from seeping through walls or floor slabs. The drain system should include cleanouts to allow for periodic maintenance and inspection. Resistance to Lateral Loads The lateral earth pressures that develop against retaining walls will depend on the method of backfill placement, degree of compaction, slope of backfill, type of backfill material, provisions for drainage, magnitude and location of any adjacent surcharge loads, and the degree to which the wall can yield laterally during or after placement of backfill. If the wall is allowed to rotate or yield so the top of the wall moves an amount equal to or greater than about 0.001 to 0.002 times its height (a yielding wall), the soil pressure exerted comprises the active soil pressure. When a wall is restrained against lateral movement or tilting (a nonyielding wall), the soil pressure exerted comprises the at rest soil pressure. Wall restraint may develop if a rigid structural network is constructed prior to backfilling or if the wall is inherently stiff. GeoTest recommends that yielding walls under drained conditions be designed for an equivalent fluid density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), for structural fill and undisturbed native glacial till in active soil conditions. Nonyielding walls under drained conditions should be designed for an equivalent fluid density of 55 pcf, for structural fill and undisturbed glacial till in at-rest conditions. Design of walls should include appropriate lateral pressures caused by surcharge loads located within a horizontal distance equal to or less than the height of the wall. For uniform surcharge pressures, a uniformly distributed lateral pressure equal to 35 percent and 50 percent of the vertical surcharge pressure should be added to the lateral soil pressures for yielding and nonyielding walls, respectively. For structures designed using the seismic design provisions of the 2018 International Building Code, GeoTest recommends that retaining walls include a seismic surcharge in addition to the equivalent fluid densities presented above. We recommend that a seismic surcharge of approximately 8*H (where H is the height of the wall in feet) be used for design purposes. The seismic surcharge should be modeled as a rectangular distribution with the resultant applied at the midpoint of the wall. Passive earth pressures developed against the sides of building foundations, in conjunction with friction developed between the base of the footings and the supporting subgrade, will resist lateral loads transmitted from the structure to its foundation. For design purposes, the passive resistance of well-compacted fill placed against the sides of foundations is equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pounds per cubic foot. The recommended value includes a safety factor of about 1.5 and is based on the assumption that the ground surface adjacent to the structure is level in the direction of movement for a distance equal to or greater than twice the embedment depth. The recommended value also assumes drained conditions that will prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure in the compacted fill. Retaining walls should include a drain system constructed in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the Foundation and GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 14 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Site Drainage section of this report. In design computations, the upper 12 inches of passive resistance should be neglected if the soil is not covered by floor slabs or pavement. If future plans call for the removal of the soil providing resistance, the passive resistance should not be considered. An allowable coefficient of base friction of 0.35, applied to vertical dead loads only, may be used between the underlying imported granular structural fill and the base of the footing. If passive and frictional resistance are considered together, one half the recommended passive soil resistance value should be used since larger strains are required to mobilize the passive soil resistance as compared to frictional resistance. A safety factor of about 1.5 is included in the base friction design value. GeoTest does not recommend increasing the coefficient of friction to resist seismic or wind loads. Temporary and Permanent Slopes The contractor is responsible for construction slope configurations and maintaining safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability. All applicable local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open cuts should be monitored during and after excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability is detected, the contractor should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring. Temporary excavations in excess of 4 feet should be shored or sloped in accordance with Safety Standards for Construction Work Part N, WAC 296-155-66403. The dense to very dense glacial till encountered at the project site is classified as a Type A soil according to WAC 296-155-66401. Therefore, temporary unsupported excavations and may be sloped as steep as ¾:1 (Horizontal: Vertical). All soils encountered are classified as Type C soil in the presence of groundwater seepage. Flatter slopes or temporary shoring may be required in areas where groundwater flow is present and unstable conditions develop. Temporary slopes and excavations should be protected as soon as possible using appropriate methods to prevent erosion from occurring during periods of wet weather. GeoTest recommends that permanent cut or fill slopes be designed for inclinations of 2H:1V or flatter. Due to the dense to very dense, low permeability soils, permanent cuts or fills used in detention ponds, retention ponds, or earth slopes intended to hold water may be sloped at an inclination of 2H:1V or flatter. All permanent slopes should be vegetated or otherwise protected to limit the potential for erosion as soon as practical after construction. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 15 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Utilities Utility trenches must be properly backfilled and compacted to reduce cracking or localized loss of foundation, slab, or pavement support. Excavations for new shallow underground utilities are expected to be placed within very dense glacial till soils. Trench backfill in improved areas (beneath structures, pavements, sidewalks, etc.) should consist of structural fill as defined in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Outside of improved areas, trench backfill may consist of reused native material provided the backfill can be compacted to the project specifications. Trench backfill should be placed and compacted in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Surcharge loads on trench support systems due to construction equipment, stockpiled material, and vehicle traffic should be included in the design of any anticipated shoring system. The contractor should implement measures to prevent surface water runoff from entering trenches and excavations. In addition, vibration as a result of construction activity and traffic may cause caving of the trench walls. The contractor is responsible for trench configurations. All applicable local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open cuts should be monitored by the contractor during excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability is detected, the contractor should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring. If groundwater or groundwater seepage is present, and the trench is not properly dewatered, the soil within the trench zone may be prone to caving, channeling, and running. Trench widths may be substantially wider than under dewatered conditions. Pavement Subgrade Preparation Site grading plans should include provisions for sloping of the subgrade soils in proposed pavement areas, so that passive drainage of the pavement section(s) can proceed uninterrupted during the life of the project. Flexible Pavement Sections – Light Duty GeoTest recommends that a minimum pavement section consist of 2.5 inches of Class ½-inch HMA asphalt above 2 inches of WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3] Crushed Surfacing Top Course (CSTC), overlying 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) meeting criteria of the WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3]. Asphalt, CSTC and CSBC sections should be founded on existing firm and unyielding native glacial till or on properly placed and compacted structural fill overlying firm and unyielding native deposits. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 16 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Flexible Pavement Sections – Heavy Duty Areas that will be accessed by more heavily loaded vehicles such as semi and garbage trucks, etc., if any, will require a thicker asphalt section and should be designed using a pavement section consisting of 4 inches of ½-inch HMA above 2 inches of CSTC meeting the WSDOT Standard Specification of 9-03.9[3], overlying 8 inches of WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3] CSBC. Concrete Sidewalks and Hardscapes We anticipate that Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) will be used for walkways and hardscapes. We recommend a concrete sidewalk and hardscape section consisting of 4 inches of PCC surfacing above a minimum of 4 inches of CSTC. It is assumed that sidewalks and hardscape section will be placed over a firm and unyielding subgrade and will be designed by the Structural Engineer. Stormwater Infiltration Potential Due to the elevated fines content and the very dense nature of the glacial till soils, it can be expected that the native soils constitute a restrictive layer as defined by the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, amended 2014. As such, full infiltration through conventional infiltration systems will not be feasible for the project site. It is our understanding that a stormwater detention pond is planned for the northeast corner of the project site. The less dense weathered glacial till have a very limited amount of infiltration capability and are suitable to support low impact development facilities such as dispersion. We understand that a limited amount of stormwater will be managed through roof drain dispersion. Stormwater Treatment Potential stormwater facilities on-site may require some form of pollutant pretreatment with an amended soil prior to on-site infiltration or offsite discharge. The reuse of on-site soil is often the most sustainable and cost-effective method for pollutant treatment purposes. Cation exchange capacities, organic contents, and pH of site subsurface soils were also tested to determine possible pollutant treatment suitability. Cation exchange capacity, organic content, and pH tests were performed by Northwest Agricultural Consultants on two soil samples collected from the explorations shown in Table 2. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented in Table 2 below. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 17 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 TABLE 2 Cation Exchange Capacity, Organic Content, and pH Laboratory Test Results Test Pit ID Sample Depth (ft) Geologic Unit Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/100 grams) Organic Content (%) pH TP-2 2.0 Weathered Glacial Till 7.4 1.85 6.1 TP-5 0.5 Topsoil 17.7 8.62 5.7 Suitability for onsite pollutant treatment is determined in accordance with SSC-6 of the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Soils with an organic content of greater than or equal to 1 percent and a cation exchange capacity of greater than or equal to 5 meq/100 grams are characterized as suitable for stormwater treatment. Based on the results shown in Table 2, soils within the upper 2 feet are suitable for stormwater treatment. However, low rates of infiltration should be anticipated in the native glacial till soils due to these soils’ high silt contents and density. On-site soils can be amended by mixing higher silt content soils or adding mulch (or other admixtures) to elevate the cation exchange capacity and organic contents. On-site amended soil requires additional testing to confirm compliance with ecological regulations. GeoTest is available to perform additional laboratory testing as part of an expanded scope of services if the soil is to be amended. Alternatively, the owner may elect to import amended soils with the desired properties for planned treatment facilities. Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring GeoTest recommends that we be involved in the project design review process. The purpose of the review is to verify that the recommendations presented in this report are understood and incorporated in the design and specifications. We also recommend that geotechnical construction monitoring services be provided. These services should include observation by GeoTest personnel during structural fill placement, compaction activities and subgrade preparation operations to confirm that design subgrade conditions are obtained beneath the areas of improvement. Periodic field density testing should be performed to verify that the appropriate degree of compaction is obtained. The purpose of these services is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations of this report. In the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated before the start of construction, GeoTest Services would be pleased to provide revised recommendations appropriate to the conditions revealed during construction. GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 18 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 GeoTest is available to provide a full range of materials testing and special inspection during construction as required by the local building department and the International Building Code. This may include specific construction inspections on materials such as reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, wood framing and structural steel. These services are supported by our fully accredited materials testing laboratory. USE OF THIS REPORT GeoTest Services has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Laned Gentry Homes and Communities and their design consultants for specific application to the design of the proposed Cherry Court SFR Development located along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington. Use of this report by others is at the user’s sole risk. This report is not applicable to other site locations. Our services are conducted in accordance with accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. Our site explorations indicate subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated. It is not warranted that these conditions are representative of conditions at other locations and times. The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions to the limited depth and time of our explorations, a geological reconnaissance of the area, and a review of previously published geological information for the site. If variations in subsurface conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those contained within this report, GeoTest should be allowed to review the recommendations and, if necessary, make revisions. If there is a substantial lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions change due to construction operations at or adjacent to the project site, we recommend that we review this report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. The earthwork contractor is responsible to perform all work in conformance with all applicable WISHA/OSHA regulations. GeoTest Services, Inc. is not responsible for job site safety on this project, and this responsibility is specifically disclaimed. Attachments: Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3 Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section Figure 4 Soil Classification System and Key Figures 5 – 7 Test Pit Exploration Logs Figures 8 – 9 Sieve Analysis Attached CEC, pH and Organic Content Test Results (1 Page) Attached Report Limitations and Guidelines for its Use (4 Pages) GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes 19 February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 REFERENCES Bakeman, S., Dan, G., Howie, D., Killelea, J., Labib, F., & Ed, O. (n.d.). 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, as Amended in December 2014 (The 2014 SWMMWW) (pp. 1-1042) (United States, Washington State Department of Ecology). City of Anacortes Municipal Code – Geologically Hazardous Areas, Sections 17.70.190 – 17.70.260 Palmer, et al., 2004. Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Skagit County, Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Open File Report 2004-20. Seismic Design Maps Tool. Structural Engineers Association of California/Office of Statewide Health, Planning and Development (SEAOC/OSHPD), Retrieved December 2019 from https://seismicmaps.org. Pessl, Jr., Fred, Dethier, D.P., Booth, D.B., and Minar, J.P., 1989. Surficial Geologic Map of the Port Townsend 30- by 60- Minute Quadrangle, Puget Sound Region, Washington. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey. Folio of the Port Townsend Quadrangle, Washington Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Map I-1198-F. USDA Web Soil Survey. (2017, August 21). Retrieved December 2019, from https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Geologic Information Portal. (n.d.). Retrieved December 2019 from https://geologyportal.dnr.wa.gov/. Mapper Burrow s Island Mange, Alan Ward N 1 Mile GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 741 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 phone: (360) 733-7318 fax: (360) 733-7418 Date: 1-13-20 PROJECT LOCATION resaro Refining and fast ',Ming Co By: ZC VICINITY MAP CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES, WASHINGTON Simsh Ithrxl Scale: As Shown Project 19-0882 Figure 1 LOT 27 LOT 2a LOT 29 LOT 3O LOT 31 LOT 15 LOT 24 seee59m I 23 carcwvV S• PARK/OPEN, LO7 23 LOT 54 1 /ff%f/ /�� LOT 16 LOT 1 a�o9 art. 145 q' Ig LOT 2 LDr 22 19 TP-2m11. 5e47''.427-E 6_25' L3T2T LOT 20 gLOT 3 Sa.k. $ a,4 Aaei 166Y4 1 19 TP-1 650.54 J s5e05v 77'E 555 mr 'l7�+: •' II6 Se • t jj — b' LOT 7 San b TP-5 Pf TRAcr •x• - g4 urr I II8,14' LOT ToP-6 (F 11B.16' NB9.52t.w fa TP-3, AARLEL A ?1 O-}7Q11 LOT 4 + i7? %At Nerve K'R VAIE SKAMED DRIYBYAY NT OF "THE Of LOT 17 G1-1Ai2D5 PLO LOT ►S 0. )571 sLixiones e 4 Agtr. 06OY _� r NB997471 41 — .� � LOI 5 94 Ar 15514.5 3¢2. 'pr 19 TP-4 9 rcyr—A ai c�nenlrc onw "1a 34 1 xso- 772so.6 le. LOT B 11H6E.7 '+0.R xi L7ooco. o-32O81 N P{ He7 T5Ob15 aka A.F. 1=P. Pam,: 11( - LOT 19 4654,219514 o a so nu S62 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY LANDED GENTRY HOMES AND COMMUNITIES TP-# = Approximate Test Pit Locatiul I GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 741 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 phone: (360) 733-7318 fax: (360) 733-7418 Iwrr 25 > QF I am LW' MAr fk A rd{Y1Or S ,4 ec,nai 25, T. •.>6 N., R i A., rum L1tr OF ANAGOlc+e6 5.K.A11T GOMM% PROTW*TC 4 roler aTtlIti � . �' e1 IAThCONPIL.o -LG �'Ixhfc - 5J N Atorrojirow ARMwazn x6.w'M41 faw• .rt,b - 1 - Date: 1-6-20 By: ZC Scale: As Shown SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES, WASHINGTON Project 19-0882 Figure 2 SHALLOW FOOTINGS WITH INTERIOR SLAB -ON -GRADE • Compacted Impervious Soil • , • , • , • , (12 inch minimum) •,•,•, or Pavement • • • Slope to drain away from structure. _ L Suitable Soil Approved Non -woven Geotextile Filter Fabric (18 inch minimum fabric lap) Drainage Material (Drain Rock or Clear Crushed Rock w/ no fines) Typical Framing Floor Slab (2 inch minimum) i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�. i•i•i•i•i•i•i•i•i•i.C.I.••ii•ii .'.i•i•.1.1 Vapor Barrier 1. 1. 1. 1 I -i -I -I -i -I -I -i -I -I -i -i -i 1 -i -i 1 1 i. -E. -I. -I. -E. -I. -I. -i. -I. -I. -i. -C --_____-_________Y/ '7 7 7 7`i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i•r�rtifti�ti�tifti�ti�tifti�ti�tii•i�i�i�i�i�i •..r•1•r•r .,.... •1•r•r•1•r •r•1•r•r•1• r1•r•r•1•r•r•1•r•r•1•r•r•1.1 00.00 40000 A PAP 40000 el I fp 9.06000 ,' ,' ,' ,' ,' , 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' 1 Four Inch Diameter, Perforated, Rigid PVC Pipe (Perforations oriented down, wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric, directed to suitable discharge) I Coarse Gravel Capillary Break (6 inch minimum typically clear crushed) Free Draining Sand and Gravel Fill Suitable Soil Appropriate Waterproofing Applied to Exterior of Wall Notes: Footings Should be properly buried for frost protection in accordance with International Building Code or local building codes (Typically 18 inches below exterior finished grades) The footing drain will need to be modified from this typical drawing to fit the dimensions of the planned footing and slab configuration GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 741 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 phone: (360) 733-7318 fax: (360) 733-7418 Date: 1-6-20 By: ZC Scale: None TYPICAL FOOTING & WALL DRAIN SECTION CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES, WASHINGTON Project 19-0882 Figure 3 4 Cherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA 1 Silty gravel; gravel/sand/silt mixture(s) Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/clay mixture(s)GC 1. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), as outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487. 2. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined as follows: SW ROCK ML Field and Lab Test DataDrilling and Sampling Key Portion of Sample Retained for Archive or Analysis Sample Depth Interval Recovery Depth Interval Code Description Code Sample Identification Number a b c d e 1 2 3 4 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL CLEAN GRAVEL Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean clay Soil Classification System Organic silt; organic, silty clay of low plasticity 50% - "GRAVEL," "SAND," "SILT," "CLAY," etc. 50% - "very gravelly," "very sandy," "very silty," etc. 30% - "gravelly," "sandy," "silty," etc. 12% - "slightly gravelly," "slightly sandy," "slightly silty," etc. 5% - "trace gravel," "trace sand," "trace silt," etc., or not noted. Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content OLCOARSE-GRAINED SOIL(More than 50% of material islarger than No. 200 sieve size)Poorly graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines > 30% and < > 12% and < > 5% and < < Primary Constituent: Secondary Constituents: Additional Constituents: (Liquid limit less than 50) Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement Well-graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines (More than 50% of materialis smaller than No. 200 sievesize)FINE-GRAINED SOILInorganic silt and very fine sand; rock flour; silty or clayey fine sand or clayey silt with slight plasticity PT OH SAND AND SANDY SOIL GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOIL SP MH (Liquid limit greater than 50) Notes: > _ _ _ _ (Little or no fines) GRAVEL WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) (Little or no fines) CLEAN SAND SAND WITH FINES GRAPHIC SYMBOL LETTER SYMBOL GP GM Organic clay of medium to high plasticity; organic silt Inorganic silt; micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand Well-graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines GRAPHIC SYMBOL (Appreciable amount of fines) DB AC or PC SM SC RK Description SAMPLER TYPESAMPLE NUMBER & INTERVAL CL GW CH SILT AND CLAY 3.25-inch O.D., 2.42-inch I.D. Split Spoon 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50-inch I.D. Split Spoon Shelby Tube Grab Sample Other - See text if applicable 300-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop 140-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop Pushed Other - See text if applicable PP = 1.0 TV = 0.5 PID = 100 W = 10 D = 120 -200 = 60 GS AL GT CA (More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve) (More than 50% of coarse fraction passed through No. 4 sieve) Pocket Penetrometer, tsf Torvane, tsf Photoionization Detector VOC screening, ppm Moisture Content, % Dry Density, pcf Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, % Grain Size - See separate figure for data Atterberg Limits - See separate figure for data Other Geotechnical Testing Chemical Analysis SILT AND CLAY WOOD DEBRIS Rock (See Rock Classification) Wood, lumber, wood chips Construction debris, garbage Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines USCS LETTER SYMBOL Silty sand; sand/silt mixture(s) Clayey sand; sand/clay mixture(s) PAVEMENT WD OTHER MATERIALS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS(1)(2) Soil Classification System and Key Figure Groundwater ATD Approximate water elevation at time of drilling (ATD) or on date noted. Groundwater levels can fluctuate due to precipitation, seasonal conditions, and other factors. d d d d d d d SM/OL ML ML Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Medium stiff, light brown and tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, very sandySILT with occasional gravel (Native BorrowFill) - Soil at this location was variegated in colorand grainsize distribution as well as lessdense than was typical within test pits 2through 6. Hard, gray, damp, gravelly, slightly sandySILT (Glacial Till) W = 18GS W = 26GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.5 ft. Groundwater not encountered. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-1 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. 5Log of Test Pits FigureCherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA d d d d d d d d SM/OL SM SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Dense, brown transitioning to tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, silty SAND(Weathered Glacial Till) - Rootlets present to ~3' BGS Very dense, gray, damp, slightly gravelly togravelly, very silty SAND (Glacial Till) W = 9GS W = 10GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 10.0 ft. Groundwater not encountered. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-2 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER d d d d d Slight groundwater seepage encountered at2.5 ft. SM/OL SM SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Dense, brown transitioning to tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, slightlygravelly, silty SAND (Weathered Glacial Till) - Rootlets present to ~3' BGS - Slight seepage and weepholes observed at~2.5' and 4' BGS Very dense, gray, damp, gravelly, slightlygravelly, very silty SAND (Glacial Till) W = 15GS W = 11GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.5 ft. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-3 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. 6Log of Test Pits FigureCherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA d d d d Slight groundwater seepage encountered at2.5 ft. SM/OL SM SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Dense, brown transitioning to tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, slightlygravelly, silty SAND (Weathered Glacial Till) - Rootlets present to ~3' BGS - Slight seepage and weepholes observed at~2.5' and 3' BGS Very dense, gray, damp, gravelly, very siltySAND (Glacial Till) W = 31GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.0 ft. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-4 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER d d d d d SM/OL SM SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Dense, brown transitioning to tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, slightlygravelly, very silty SAND (Weathered GlacialTill) - Rootlets present to ~3' BGS Very dense, gray, damp, slightly gravelly,very silty SAND (Glacial Till) W = 20GS W = 11GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.0 ft. Groundwater not encountered. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-5 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. 7Log of Test Pits FigureCherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA d d d d d Slight groundwater seepage encountered at1.5 ft. SM/OL SM SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND withorganics (Topsoil) Dense, brown transitioning to tan withsome red/orange staining, damp, silty SAND(Weathered Glacial Till) - Rootlets present to ~3' BGS - Slight seepage and weepholes observed at~1.5' and 2' BGS Very dense, gray, damp, gravelly, very siltySAND (Glacial Till) W = 17GS Test Pit Completed 12/18/19Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.0 ft. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeExcavated By: TP-6 Test DataExcavation Method:Graphic SymbolNot DeterminedGround Elevation (ft): R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click Tracked Excavator Depth (ft)USCS SymbolSAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110100 Grain Size Test Data 6 103 Depth U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 8 %Coarse Gravel 2 143/4 2006 Cc = D30 2/(D60* D10) Cu = D60/D10 1 medium % Coarse Sand finecoarse 4 40420 D10D30 % Fine Sand PointPercent Finer by Weight140 PI % FinesD60 fine D50 Cc 100 Silt or ClaySand coarse 60 Grain Size in Millimeters GravelCobbles 3 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES 1.5 % Fine Gravel 1/2 ClassificationDepth 3/8 Cu 50 To be well graded: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW LL PL % Medium Sand 16 Point 30 HYDROMETER D90 51.4 92.5 38.1 41.8 28.2 0.7 0.0 2.4 3.0 2.4 39.1 6.8 37.9 34.4 46.3 6.8 0.7 12.0 9.5 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 9.6 11.2 5.7 0.148 0.113 0.207 0.083 VERY SANDY SILT (ML) SLIGHTLY SANDY SILT (ML) SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, SILTY SAND (SM) 3.0 6.5 4.0 8.0 2.0 3.0 6.5 4.0 8.0 2.0 TP-1 TP-1 TP-2 TP-2 TP-3 TP-1 TP-1 TP-2 TP-2 TP-3 0.105 0.227 0.184 0.284 0.416 4.151 5.837 1.476 FigureCherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA 8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110100 Grain Size Test Data 6 103 Depth U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 8 %Coarse Gravel 2 143/4 2006 Cc = D30 2/(D60* D10) Cu = D60/D10 1 medium % Coarse Sand finecoarse 4 40420 D10D30 % Fine Sand PointPercent Finer by Weight140 PI % FinesD60 fine D50 Cc 100 Silt or ClaySand coarse 60 Grain Size in Millimeters GravelCobbles 3 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES 1.5 % Fine Gravel 1/2 ClassificationDepth 3/8 Cu 50 To be well graded: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW LL PL % Medium Sand 16 Point 30 HYDROMETER D90 36.9 42.3 42.5 43.3 41.2 2.9 4.2 1.5 2.4 3.4 37.6 27.5 43.1 36.3 34.6 12.1 10.7 12.8 11.1 10.4 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 5.0 0.1 6.9 10.4 0.152 0.132 0.101 0.111 0.126 SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) VERY SILTY SAND (SM) SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SAND (SM) 5.5 1.5 2.7 6.0 3.3 5.5 1.5 2.7 6.0 3.3 TP-3 TP-4 TP-5 TP-5 TP-6 TP-3 TP-4 TP-5 TP-5 TP-6 0.237 0.25 0.15 0.186 0.207 5.304 19.1 0.611 1.684 5.073 FigureCherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA 9 2545 W Falls Avenue Kennewick, WA 99336 509.783.7450 www.nwag.com lab@nwag.com Sample ID pH Organic Matter Cation Exchange Capacity TP-2 @ 2.0’ 6.1 1.85% 7.4 meq/100g TP-5 @ 0.5’ 5.7 8.62% 17.7 meq/100g Method SM 4500-H+ B ASTM D2974 EPA 9081 GeoTest Services Inc. 741 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 Report: 50199-1-1 Date: January 6, 2020 Project No: 19-0882 Project Name: Cherry Court SFR Development 1 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR ITS USE1 Subsurface issues may cause construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help: Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects At GeoTest our geotechnical engineers and geologists structure their services to meet specific needs of our clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of an owner, a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one – not even you – should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors GeoTest’s geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the clients goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless GeoTest, who conducted the study specifically states otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: •not prepared for you, •not prepared for your project, •not prepared for the specific site explored, or •completed before important project changes were made. 2 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: •the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed, for example, from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, •elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed construction, •alterations in drainage designs; or •composition of the design team; the passage of time; man-made alterations and construction whether on or adjacent to the site; or by natural alterations and events, such as floods, earthquakes or groundwater fluctuations; or project ownership. Always inform GeoTest’s geotechnical engineer of project changes – even minor ones – and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on the findings and conclusions of this report, whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact GeoTest before applying the report to determine if it is still relevant. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis will help determine if the report remains applicable. Most Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions Our site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoTest’s engineers and geologists review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ – sometimes significantly – from those indicated in your report. Retaining GeoTest who developed this report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with anticipated or unanticipated conditions. 3 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) A Report’s Recommendations are Not Final Do not over-rely on the construction recommendations included in this report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers or geologists develop them principally from judgment and opinion. GeoTest’s geotechnical engineers or geologists can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. GeoTest cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s recommendations if our firm does not perform the construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report may be Subject to Misinterpretation Misinterpretation of this report by other design team members can result in costly problems. Lower that risk by having GeoTest confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also, we suggest retaining GeoTest to review pertinent elements of the design teams plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having GeoTest participate in pre-bid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do not Redraw the Exploration Logs Our geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors of omissions, the logs included in this report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable; but recognizes that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, consider advising the contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with GeoTest and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A pre-bid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. 4 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) In addition, it is recommended that a contingency for unanticipated conditions be included in your project budget and schedule. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering or geology is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding can create unrealistic expectations that can lead to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce risk, GeoTest includes an explanatory limitations section in our reports. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions and we encourage our clients or their representative to contact our office if you are unclear as to how these provisions apply to your project. Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered in this Geotechnical or Geologic Report The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated containments, etc. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on environmental report prepared for some one else. Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Biological Pollutants Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts biological pollutants from growing on indoor surfaces. Biological pollutants includes but is not limited to molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional biological pollutant prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe biological infestations, a number of prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of this study, the geotechnical engineer or geologist in charge of this project is not a biological pollutant prevention consultant; none of the services preformed in connection with this geotechnical engineering or geological study were designed or conducted for the purpose of preventing biological infestations. 5/7/20 Stormwater Management Requirements: o Refer to the 2012\14 Department of Ecology Manual, as amended in 2014 for further required information. o See also, City of Anacortes Municipal Code 19.76 for additional information o See also, current Engineering Development Standards, Chapter 2-Storm Drainage for additional information. Project Description and Summary: ummar 1 a S T bl e Existing Proposed Development Type None/Grass/Pasture Sing.le Famil-r. Residential Number of Lots 1 Q Lot Acreage in SF 135.648 sf f3.l acresJ Soil Type(s) #18 & #19 e.er NRCS -Bow GravellJ!. Loam-Reier to NRCSISCS in£o in Al!Jl.endix 9 and the Geotechnical Ree.ort within Annendix #2. Site Sediment Transport Score (High\Low) 100 [O[.note this number however includes [.uture house construction on the 6 lots which will not occur at simontaniousll!. at the same time as fl.lat in(!astf'UCture SO this number actuallJ!. is lessl. Re(!r to worksheet attached in Avvendix 4 Depth to Ground Water Table (Feet and Inches) Ref§r to Geotechnical Reeort (See completed SoHs Analysis (Volume 1, Chapter 3. 1. 1) ereeared br_ Geotest SeMJices (vag_e 51 p_,rovided at the end o[.tliis reoort in ADDendix #2 Infiltration Rate during Rainy Season (l nch\Per Hour} Restrictive lar_er1 thus infiltration not (§asible eer Geotechnical Ree.ort (oag_e 161 cOl!.J!.1!.l'Ovided at the end oitliis re11..ort in AtlJ!.emlix #2 Impervious Surface (on-site) None 0.93-acres Impervious Surface (off-site) None None New and Replaced Hard Surface Total (SF) 0.93-acres o[New1 0-aaes Ren/aced Lot Coverage (Percentage) 0% 18-30% Based on 2014 DOE Rg_mt to assume use ol 41200 slhard sur£ace e.er lot BMP (Required Minimum Requirement 5) BMP TS.13 Post Ccnstruction Soils1 BMP 5.JOB Downs12.out Disl!.ersion1 & BMP TS.JI and T5.12 Hard Surface Disversion Water Quality Method (Minimum Requirement 6) Dead Storage Cell to be 12.rovided i11 oond bottom Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date : Feb ruary 20, 2019 Water Quantity Method (Minimum Requirement 7) Existing Site Conditions Summary: Detention Pond with control structure release to existin ditch (Additionally, provide information on previous permits, if any, like Grade and Fifi, Clear and Grade, topography, vegetation, drainage, Critical Areas adjacent to the site and how it may affect this project if soils are disturbed, Soils Type {Included in Soils Analysis Report), Erosion Problem Areas, Construction Phasing\Sequence) This drai11age report has bee11 prepared to addre.fis the stormwater design necessary to mitigate tire increa.1i·ed amount of runoff from the proposed Cherry Court Short Plat which proposes to create 6 single-family lots on a single parcel ofland. The short plat proposed herein is to occur on parcel P32077 located within the Citv of Anacortes, Washington. The subject parcel is approximately 3.1 acres in size. In addition to serving the proposed new plat road and residential infrastructure, drainage facilities noted herein have been sized to mitigate runoff waters from future residential development upon the 6 propm.·ed lots as noted. Subdivisionally, the project area is located within Section 25, Township 35 N, Range 1 E. The project is located .fioutherlv of Cherry Lane and Orchard Avenue, approximately 750 feet south of 41st Street The propertv is generallv high in the southwest corner slopes downhill t.o the tiortheast to the low point at the northeast corner of the site. The project area is currently covered with gra~·s and contains no existing buildings. Along the north side of the parcel is existing Orchard Avenue, with an asphalt surface that is cross- sloped downhill downhill northerly, and is to remain. To the south o[the site is Orchard Place, a private road serving lots to the south. There are existing single familv resid~nces located surrounding the proiect area, with maintai11ed open grass areas to the east Refer to the accompanying Existing Conditions Exhibit (or the existing development and terrllin conditions on and surrounding the site. Per the Citv o(Anacones 2007 Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, this site is located within the southerly portion ofstormwater Sub-basin F4. Approximately 125 feet to the east of the proposed development area is Ace of Hearts Creek which has an associated 50-(oot buffer. Per the DOE Volume 1-Figure 1-2.4.1 Flow Chart (or Determining Requirements for New Development, all DOE Minimum Requirements (MR) # 1-9 apply to "new inmervious surfaces a11d co11.verted pervious surfaces". Existing slwrt grass areas within the site will remain grass. with the exception of the areas denoted below, such as the new road, new sidewalk, house sites, etc. Grass areas, to remain grass/landscape area, other than the 0.5-acre forest/scrub area ill the southerly portion of the site have not been included in the development envelope as it is assumed that existing grass areas will simply be regraded, perhaps enhanced witli grass seed at tJie time of home construction, and these actions will not change the drainage characteristics of the surfaces from what is in place today. In order to design the detention system to accommodate the increase in runoff from the proposed residential development using a continuous model software! WWHM. as required by DOE. For the ana.lysi~. it is necessary to first determine the target flow duration curve (or the existing, or pre-developed condition that must be met For this analysi~·. one overall drainage basin comprised o(developed surfaces; rooh·, driveways, new road, concrete sidewalk, and tire basin area will also include the 0.5-acre area in southerly portion of the site being converted from tree/scrub covered area to grass. These converted surface areas will be used in this model for the pre-developed condition. As previously noted, DOE Figure I-2.4.J Flow Chart for Determining Requirem.e11ts for New Development. states "Minimum Requirements applv to the new impervious surfaces and converted pervious surfaces." Grass areas are anticipated to remain surrounding (iuure house sites on each lot Although these areas will be graded (or drainage purposes and mav be improved with additional grass and la1ulscaping at the time of individual lot development, due t.o underlyi1tg restrictive soil conditions these areas wil.l continue to have "like" drainage characteristics as what exists todav. and thus are not considered to be "converted." Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Per DOE Volume I, the existing land cover condition will be used for the predeveloped cottditi.on since the drainage area of the immediate stream and all subsequent downstream basins have had at least 40% total impervious a1·ea since 1985. The City o(Anacortes's Stormwater Comprehensive Plan itlentifies the project as being in sub-basin F4, and furthermore denotes the F4 sub-basin as having 68% impervious coverage as of 2007, and it is well known that the majoritv of the existirig development in this urban developed sub-basin did not occur po~t-1985. A predeveloped basifl area ofl.41-acres will be used as specificallv detailed below. This ha~·in area includes new impel'vious al'eas comprised of the proposed 20-foot wide pl'ivate road exten.~ion southe,.lv from Cherry Lane/Orchard Avenue, a concrete sidewalk, 6 future residential developmet1t lot areas, and the 0.5-acre area in the southerlv. portion of the site to he converted from saub/tree covered condition as detailed below. Per the 2014 DOE Manual, Volume 3. Chapter 2.2, 4,200 square feet of impervious surfaces will be assumed for each residential lot, with 1,000 ~·quare feet of that being driveway, walkway, patio, and the remainder being rooftop. The pre-develooed compliance curve generated from the basin area assuming a pasture/short lawn cover is noted in the WWHM information as 501 POCJ. This pre-developed compliance curve determines the allowable release rates that must be achieved by the proposed development to meet the new flow control standard and obtain a "passing" detention svstem. The following is a detailed list of the 1.41-acre basin area used to create the pre-developed target compliance curve: 0.43-acres C, Pa~1:ure, Flat (Area of future residential house -6 lots@3,200 sf each) 0.14-acres C, Pasture, Flat (Area/or future driveway.,· -6 lots@l,000 .if each) 0.19-acres C, Pasture, Flat (Area ofpropo.ved 10-ft wide roadway) 0.05-acres C, Pasture, Flat (Area o.f proposed sidewalk) 0.50-acres C, Forested, Flat (Area converted from forest/scrub to grass) 0.10-acres C, Pasture, Flat (Area tor detention pond) 1.41-acres Based on the conditions representing the design in(ormation for the 1.41-acres of a pasture Pre-developed basin, the following flow information was determined using WWHM software: Flow Frequency Return Periods for Pre-developed. (501 POC #1) Return Period Flow (c(s) 2 year 0.0192 5 year 0.0364 10 year 0.0493 25 yea,. 0.0666 50 year 0.0801 100 year 0.0938 Developed Conditions Summary: Development of this propertv to create six new residential lots will include the construction of a new 20-foot wide l"Oadway. This road will extend southerly from the existing Cherry Lane into the property approximately 235-feet This project will also include the installation o[new sidewalk and necessary utilitv iri(rastmcture as needed to provide utilities to each of the 6 new residential lots. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Using the previously established 1.41-acre basin area and WWHM software. a flow duration curve was created (or the post-developed cottdition. This uses the combined flow generated by the proposed development of this ~·hort plat, which are required to meet the 2014 DOE flow control standard. R1'noff from the new hard surfaces within the plat will be collected and routed to a detention system prior to being released northea~·terly from the site via a control structure. The above ground detenti011 pond is to be located within the northeast corner of the site. Road runoff will he collected and directly conveved to the detention pond system, whereas hard surfaces from individual lot development will be dispe1·sed as noted, prior to being connected to the onsite stormwater system. Roof downspout shall be disper!)·ed per BMP T5.1 OB and with these facilities located so that they have at least 25-feet of down-gradient dispersion kngth. Once 25-feet of dispersion has been achieved, these dispersed runoff waters can then be collected and conveyed to the detention system as noted on the attached exhibits. Since there is a minimum 25-feet of flow path down-gradient of the dispersio11 trenches, the 0.43-acres of roof surface can therefore modeled as tlispersed, "DISP FLAT" (50% roo(and 50% landscaping). i11 tlze WWHM model. Private driveways shall be cross-sloped to disperse sheet flow from these surfaces onto a minimum 50- feet of area as noted within 1014 DOE BMP T5.11 and T5.12 which allows these sur[ces to be modeled as "lawn". Due to site configuration and existing topography. there is not sufficient room onsite to tlisperse runoff from the proposed 20-foot wide roadway. or sidewalk, therefore, no credit will be applicable to these new hard surfaces. The resulting Post-developed. unmitigated fl.ow information is 1wted as "701 inflow to POC 1" on the attached WWHM exliibits in Appendix 10. DOE BMP TS.JOB. TS.I I, T5.12 and T5.13 are i1icluded in Appendix 11 at the end of this report. Though overall individual lot development is unknown at this time, to be conservative, the small 0. 5-acres of scrub/tree area along the south side of the site will be assumed to be converted from fm·est to pasture (or the developed condition to l'eplicate a lawn condition per BMP T5.13. The following is the land cover characteristics of the 1.41-scre basin area used to model the post-developed duration curves within WWHM Software: 0.43-ac C IMP D~p, Flat (Future roof areas-dispersed -6 Lots@3,200 !)f each) 0.14-ac C Lawn, Flat (Future driveways-dispersed -6 Lots@ 1,000 sf each) 0.19-ac Roads, Flat (10-ft wide roadway) 0.05-ac Sidewalks, Flat 0.50-acres Pasture C, Pasture, Flat (Area converted from forest to grass per BMP T5.13) 0 . .10-ac Pond 1.41-acres Based 011 the proposed development previously noted and ~ing the information represented above, the following runoff rates were e~timated to occur from the post-developed site condition as determined by WWHM software: Flow F1'equency Return Periods (or Post-Developed, Unmitigated Condition. (701 POC #1) Return Period 2year 5 year JO year 25 year 50year JOO year Flow (cfs) 0.0952 0.1395 0.1767 0.2264 0.2707 0.3203 Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Lastly, WWHM uses the~·e pre-developed and post-developed flow duration curves to determine the required size ofproposed detention ~y~"tem and allowed control release required to mitigate the stormwater release from development of the site as required by DOE. The resulting design will provide required flow control for the increase of runoff gener<1ted by the proposed roadway, sidewalk. and future residential development proposed Oil the new resideintial lots within the project area. Re(er to MR #7 further within thi!J· report (or specifics addressing the proposed detention pond a11d f1,ow control structure proposed for this project Drainage Basin (2007 Storm Comp Plan -City website\publicworks\engineering\comprehensive plans): What Drainage Basin are you in? Anacorte,,· Subbasin F-4. Identify any downstream drainage issues (Storm Comp Plan: Noted below If so, describe: Per the City o[Anacortes 2007 Comprehe11sive Storm water Management Plan tlae·re is drainage issue noted app1•oximately 0.8-mil.es downstream of the Cheny Court Project, at M Avenue & 33rd Stl'eet and is noted as Area #20 on the City's Comprehensive Plan exhibit titled "Problem Areas" (Figure 2-3). The Comprehensive plan states '~ce of Hearts Creek (lows (rom private property into a culvert. across 34th Street and then 1111der a fence back onto erivate property. .The creek is tight lined approximately 100-(eet southwest o(the intersection o(33rd and M Avenue. There is flooding at the pmpertv to the west.. This inlet of the pipe may be constraining (low into the pipe. The Solutio11 (as noted by the Citv,s Comprehensive Plan): If the City 1ias an existing easement for the creek area. control vegeta.tion around the fence and maintain the easement, keeping it clear and accessible. Install trash racb similar to the one described for Project Area #5. The comprehensive plan notes estimated project costs $800/Year for Vegetation Control and $21,000 for the installation of trash racks. We are unclear on if the City has impleme11ted this suggested maintainance. Complete the Applicability Requirements -Flow Chart (Figure 1-2.4.1 Attached, and Figure 1-2 .5 .1 Attacheg) Re(er to attached highlighted Figure I-2.4.J and Figure 1-2.5.1 which are applicable to this project Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Stent Here L Does th>e site h ave 35% or more o f e xis ting impervious coverage? Yes See Redevelop~m Minmurn ... Requi rem ents and Row Chart (Fjgure f-2.4 .2 }. ., , Does the .project result in 5 .000 square feet or {tJeater, d new pkls repl aced hard s wface area? No .... AU M inimum R~irements appiy t o the new and replaced ; hard s u rfaces a nd converted vegetation .ve_.s _ .. Yes Does 1he ~tro.~-et convert 1 .:o acres Ot more of vegetation to lawn or landscaped a rea s. or convert 2 .5 acres or more of native vegetation '<> pasture? 'No Does the prqect result in 2.000 square feet. or greater. of new pf us replaced h ard s urface area? Yes , No Mi nimum Requirements #1 through #5 .appty to ttle new and repaKeet tur d surfaces and the land disturbed. Yes Does the project have land d isturbing actMties of 7 ,000 square feet or greater? No DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOG Y ~t a t e of W 3tifl l n g to11 I Minimwn Requirement 112 1 apphes . Figure 1-2 .4 . 'I F low C hart for Detem1in ing Req u ir e ment s f or N ew Developme nt P!Ns.e see IUfp.:,~.,. .. ._. ec-y.•·a 90wco ~~l'Jt.l!!'1rtt fa r oopy•t notice lnttuatng pennlf.&IOl'ls . entltatol'l o1' llabtrlt)-. ama d lfitlal'noer. version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 I Doe' tr .$! ;.cr~::~ cJJSC~ 10 Fto.· COl"llJOI Exerr.f)t w~ {p~ M in.mum Requtr@f'T11Mt {MR I \t7)? I ~Yes REQU IRED : lftlplerf!.ent me 1DllO•.,g S MPti No where feal>le: • SMP TS.13: P06t..COn6troellorr !:OH Q ual 'iy . NID ~me ana~ Ooe& Ute ;iroj?(;.'! ~ • SMP TS.1QA. 8 , Of C : Oosnr.po!ll Fun trtgger ool )" llJ fl~ ::i • -~re<t l<t11tratt on. Do~ 0 1~ '5! t:Per Flgl.lr e 3.2 or o«!ly Ml\ ~ J ~)5~..S . or ~ec S1UtKMtt AglJre J 3 tn Ape>ert<il ~ .. No adcHllOnal .,.., CGiniecaonG 1 ar 1!'2 20' 3-20 1 e requ irements .. BMP TS.1 1 or TS ., 2'.; Concentlatea Flo.w WWA Pt!~ U ~inlt u l~ or Sttee-1 F IDW Dllpetti!O!l & Pha6e I Permt ~. - NOT REQUI RED: Ac~eveme«it Of Ille LI O I i No i:1t1e J.'4'otect mggl!'feG Pelforn'•a:Ti ce StaDaanJ. Apptyl Dg me ()(fler Ya , BMP$ Ir !..ii ~ f!-" t.Y UrA: !t'J2 . ~ ., ooty MRg #f -'9) ' I I 0111 the ~ Geo;'efOper c:hoo6e to meet • tlJe LIO Pe~ ~"tl1•1cta1~· i · Rf::QU.RE'.t>: for eaoo ;ui"la~:e . t:or.:.. l:'J' }fl::- flMP$ ln the-~ ~1ed ti l lla1 ., ltJr 1'\it type ar a:rf'ac:e. ~e Yes the 1'1f1it &Ml=> tllat 'fl Yet con~~tte . NOT R.EQ\J tRED; Aet.Je>t-emt!"lt of t!1e LI O Pertormar.ce standara. •• ... REQUJREO: Meet~ uo Performance stall~ lllrnugh the USE Of m_ B ilf P (5 ) In lite 2014. SWMMWW exct!ilt l'Df ~'I ~6 f 1i"!-! i..._.~ ., .. r>or~~n or · t . ~rt.-tei;.ta:i1e RE QUI RED !'or P~ T~eM,g MR '"-9": ApfMy BMP TS. 1 l Po6t CDt'151RlctlOn SDll a.talrl} ana ~ NOT R EQUIRED: Ap~~ U1f: BVP& i'!I 1.l&t «I J tJj !J ~. J #2. 0);1 . tr~ flft'.~ :'(:! ~~ ~ £1QT~f ooseo: ro m~t m;:. tm ~ce Stanaare!"' I r..'1r No R m 1\)1' EQUfffE.O : Of NCt'l ~. cons oer~ B MP5 !he Ofdef Jtajb!<f :.-It l l&t ~.2 1Nllt t)'f)e Of wrfalee. U':5e the ft1i1I 6MP 1hM I& OCJnlildm!<f 1'H5t>le . MOT REQUIRED: Ad!le' .. ement Of Ute UD PeffOfmNice Stlf'<la.rtt . ti ~ proJeC:t on a Pa'Q!!I Of s aert6 or arger? No YeJ RfOUIRED: M~ Ifie LIO Pe~1:e S'U!melard lhl"OiJ9h t:ne Liff Of .filll 8VP(i } In tile 2014 SWMMWW exeept ft>f ftaln ~ 4\Jle U&e Of 8 1 ~ 115 acceptabfe f , If tha proJICC c:an1 mM1 the uo Pettormanc• stancard. n muat tMl Md be gnntM en •xcept:loftNWl&ftee. REQU I RED :~)' SMP T5, 13 Pogt-Cons1i'UCIJorf Soti ~ a:1.:~ t'er:tt MOT REQUlRe:D: App l)1ng Irle BMP& In U&t 1!1 o r U51 n . F igure J -2.5~ ·1 F l ow Chart for Determining L ID f\1R #5 Re q uire n1 ents D E PARTMENT OF Reveea J une 2015 E C Q l Q G Y t---P te--a5e--M-e-tl ...... ~-:-/t1t_"_w_ec_}' .-w-a .-go-\'-,..C-OO_Y'_:1d_tJ_f_fl_rmt_' TOr_cop_y_ngn_u _to-t1ce-tn_Cl_Uaf...,:.:;;.n9;;....:penn;.:..=...:.:..:l65::.:...:.IDl'l.:;.'::..:·.,.:._-1J s t a t e of Wati1t11t g roin ~mltaton Of l ~Jlt)'. arid dl &elatmer. Version Date: Oct ober 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: Febru a ry 20, 2019 TAB 1 (MINIMUM REQUIREMENT #1) • 1·2.5.1 Minimum Requirement #1-Prepare a Stormwater Site Plan 1 .3 -Preparation of a Stormwater Site Plan -1.3.1 -Stormwater Site Plans: Step-by-Step Note: The level of detail needed for each step depends upon the project size. Provide a narrative description of each step. 1-3.1.1 Step 1 -Site Analysis: Collect and Analyze Information on Existing Conditions Site analysis shall be submitted as part of the Existing Conditions Summary above. Part of the information in this step should be used to help prepare the Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Purpose of the Site Analysis is to provide for a Low Impact Development site design that is intended to compliment the predeveloped conditions of the site. Existing Conditions on site consist of short grass/pasture a1·eas on a parcel generallv measuring 393 feet north-soutli x 333 feet east-west. sloped downhill from the site's SW corner to the NE corner at approximately 4 -5%. A geotechnical investigation has been conducted on.Yite which identified an underlving very dense, brown, slightlv gravelly silty sand (weathered glacial till) at 3-4 feet below ground surface which has very limited infiltrati.on capacity at depth. Per the geotechnical report (page 16), '"conventional infiltration of stormwatel' on this site is 1tot feasible". Dispersion methods for roofs and dl'ivewavs will be promoted as noted further on within this report. Refer to the Geotechnical Report prepared by Geotest for this project located within Appendix 2 at the end o(tl1is report. 1-3.1.2 Step 2 -Prepare Preliminary Development Layout Based upon the analysis of existing site conditions, locate the buildings, roads, parking lots, landscaping features, on-site stormwater management BMP's, and preliminary location of stormwater treatment and retention/detention facilities for the proposed development. Refer to the attached Overall Site Plan Exhibit .~howing the proposed location of new lots, the new private roadwav. sidewalks, storm water piping. detention pond. control structure and outlet piping from the site. 1-3.1.3 Step 3 -Perform Off-site Analysis (at Local Agency's Option): Use additional Sheets, if necessary, Per the Citv o(Anacortes Stonnwater Comprehensive Plan runoff (rom this project is discharged to Ace of Hearts Creek, which convevs runo{f northeasterlv approximately 0. 7- miles, towards 32nd and M Avenue, then easterly approximately 0.5-miles east to "T" Avenue. From 32nd and "T" runoff waters are conveyed north ill "T" Avenue another 0.2- mile~·. before being discharged to Fida/go Bay to tire northeast. Refer to the Downstream Exhibit attached with this report. 1-3.1.4 -Determine Applicable Minimum Requirements Per the attached Minimum Requirements (or new development Figure 2.4.J. Minimum Requirements #1 through #9 apply to new and converted surfaces proposed with this short plat. Refer to attached highlighted Figure 2.4.1. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 1-3.1.5 Step 5 -Prepare a Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Refer to the attached Overall Site Plan Exhibit showing the proposed location of new lots, the new private roadwav. sidewalks, storm water piping, detention pond, control structure and outlet piping from the site. 1-3.1.6 Step 6 -Prepare a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (MR#2 -13 Elements) Refer to Chapter 11-3 -Planning for a detailed description of each element. See also attached Tables 4.1.1 (Source Control BMP's by SWPPP Element) and Table 4.2.1 (Runoff Conveyance and Treatment BMP's by SWPPP Element). See attached 13 Elements of a SWPPP , please complete and attached Refer to the Civil Site Plan prepared for this project in Appendix 5. Prior to issuance of final permits to allow the commencement of construction. a SWPPP to address each of the 13 requfred elements will be prepared and submitted to the Citv for this project At this time the ston11water engineer has denoted ha.vie sedimentation and ero!i·ion control requirements withill the attached civil plans to assure basic elements and specifications to denote the performance required. 1-3.1. 7 Step 7 -Complete the stormwater site plan The Stonnwater Site Plan encompasses the entire submittal to the Local Agency with drainage review authority. Refer to this section of the Manual for further clarification of each item and what is required. See below: • Project Overview • Existing Conditions Summary • Off-site Analysis Report • Permanent Stormwater Control Plan • Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan • Special Reports and Studies • Other Permits • Operation and Maintenance Manual • Declaration of Covenant for Privately Mainta ined Flow Control and Treatment Facilities. (See attached Drainage BMP Maintenance Covenant BMP Agreement) • Declaration of Covenant for Privately Maintained On-site Stormwater BMP's (See attached Drainage BMP Maintenance Covenant BMP Agreement) • Bond Quantities Worksheet, if applicable Once a contractor has been selected and coordinated with regarding their management of the .ttite, a SWPPP will be prepared for this project (addressing items 1-13) and be submitted to the City prior to the City's final issuance ofa Fill atid Grade Permit to commence construction. Also, refer to the attached Existing a11d Developed Conditions Civil Site Plan showing informati011 prepared for this protect located in Appendix 5. This document provides a great deal of the requested in(ormation and will be used as the basis for the SWPPP when it is prepared. 1-3.1.8 Step 8 -Check Compliance with all App licable Minimum Requirements Version Date: October 7 , 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 A Stormwater Site Plan as designed and implemented should specifically fulfill all Minimum Requirements applicable to the project. The Stormwater Site Plan should be reviewed to check that these requirements are satisfied. Refer t() the Civil Plans within Appendix 5 and the following sections of this document. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: Fe bruary 20, 2019 TAB 2 {MINIMUM REQUIREMENT #2) • 1-2.5.2 Minimum Requirement #2 -Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP) All projects are required to complete Minimum Requirement 2. Refer to the 13 Elements of the SWPP (See document below, complete and attach) See attached Table 4 .1.1, Table 4.2.1 and Table Provide Engineering Calculations as an attachment for Sediment Ponds\ Traps, Diversions, Waterways and Runoff/Stormwater Detention Calculations. As previouslv noted. once a contractor has been selected and coordinated with regarding theil' management of the site, a SWPPP will be prepared for this project (addressing items 1-13) and be submitted to the City prior to the Citv's final issua1tce ofa Fill and Grade Permit to commence construction. Also refer to the Civil Site Plan in(ormati.on prepared for this project located in Appendix 5. This document provides a great deal o[the requested information and will be used as the ba:ids for the SW PPP when it is prepared. Version Date: October 7 , 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 -·----·-·----·--··Table 4.Ll?~~~~-~-~~n!_~_!_!3MP'~.Y.~~~~!.1.~~~.!1_! .. _ -··· -e1e.;;;t'1 Element 12 Element 115 Element ff Element#!I Elementfl11 Element #12. -Ele~nt-ifi Preseive Establish StabUize Protect Control Maintain Man11gethe Protect low VegetationlM11tk Construction Soils Slopes Pollulilnts BMPs Project l~llCt C l&arino L lmits 11r~~· Oev<>l~n-nt BMPorElement Name BMP C101: Preseiving Nat11r11IVeget<11ion ./ B MP C102: B lfffer Zones BMP C103: High V"eslbiHty Plastic or Metal Fence BMP C105: Slab~ize<I Construction E ntr a nee I E xii BMP C106: 'Mleel Wmh BMP C107: Construction Road/Parking Aten Stabili:z.lllion BMP C120: T emporlll}' and Permment Seeding BMP C121: Mulching BMP C122: tlets !Ind Blankeu BMP C 123: Plastic Covering BMP C124: Sodding BMP C125: Topsolling /Composting B MP C126; Polyacrytamide for Soll Erosion Pr'O(ecllon BMP C130: Suif..::e Roughening BMP C131: GradientTerreces BMPC140: OustControl BMP CtSO: Materials On Hand BMP C151: Concrete Handling BMP C152: SZ1WCulting ond Surfacing Polution Prevention BMP C153: Material DeMvery, Storage end Contmnment B MP C1S4; Coner ere Wls hout Area B MP C 160: Certified E roslon end Sed..-ient Control Lead BMP C162: ScheduNng Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Table 4.2.1 Runoff Conveyance and Treatment BM P's by SWPPP Element ~ ----r---=---~-"' -· --·---~ ---~1-----+-----I 9MP C231: 8r1o1sti l!larlicr ~-M-P_c_2_M_:_v._~_t_MM._. -~-lf>------4!--=· ._:_ ____ ·--+---------~J_._. --~~-· -----~ BMP C23S: 'Wattln -·~·---~ ---··· -------~. L_ __ ---~ ~ ~ I ·--..,, I -i-. -----· i l ~ -·~ Version Date: Octobe r 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 13 Elements of SWPPP (Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan) Please check off boxes to show that each element has been read and understood . Provide details where applicable and if certain aspects are unnecessary or exempt, clearly justify. Details of the 13 Elements and the correlating BMPs are l isted Above from the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW). A link is provided on the City of Anacortes website, under Planning , Community, & Economic Development Department, as well as under Stormwater on the Engineering Division of Public Work's page. Owner Name P1·opertv Owner: Ronald Bayek I Project Owner: 9 Properties. LLC Contact: Anna Nelson Site Address: South of Orchard Avenue. south of Cherry Lane, Anacortes, WA Prepared By: __ C_o_r_n_er ____ 9 ..... P .... r ..... o .... p....,er_ti_·e_s,._L_L_C ___________________ _ The Stormwater checklist or building permit determined that: The 13 elements must be addressed for construction activity adding under 2,000 sq. ft. of hard surface area. X These elements must be addressed for construction activity adding 2,000 sq. ft. or more of hard surface area. This means that an attached narrative and site plan are required with this document. Under each element. provide the BM P's that will be applicable to vour project. Use the attached Tables provided. ELEMENT 1: Preserve Vegetation/Mark Clearing Limits M Before 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. M Retain the duff layer, native top soil, and natural vegetation in an und isturbed state to the maximum degree practical. Refer to the attached Existing Conditions, Erosion Control Plan Sheet showing clearing limits, and existing vegetation. ELEMENT 2: Establi sh Construction Access tt Limit construction vehicle access and exit to one route, if possible. M Stabilize access points with a pad of quarry spalls, crushed rock, or other equivalent BMPs, to minimize tracking onto roads. Locate wheel wash or tire baths on site , if the stabilized construction entrance is not effective in preventing tracking sediment onto roads. M If sediment is tracked off site, clean the affected roadway thoroughly at the end of each day, or more frequently as necessary (ex: wet weather}. Remove sedime nt from roads by shoveling, sweeping, or pick up and transport the sediment to a controlled sediment disposal area. M Conduct street washing only after sediment is removed in accordance with the above bullet. M Control street wash wastewater by pumping back on site or otherwise preventing it from discharging into systems tributary to waters of the State. A quarry spall construction road and associated detail is proposed to extend into the site from the north !J·ide to provide construction access. The project specifications on the civil plans denote that no dirt or sediment Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: F ebruary 20, 2019 can be tracked offsite, and if this doe:l' occur that the roads shall be cleaned while avoiding any dirty water from being discharged from the site. ELEMENT 3: Control Flow Rates M Protect properties and waterways downstream of development sites from erosion and the associated di scharge of turbid waters due to increases in the velocity and peak volumetric flow rate of stormwater runoff from the project site. M 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 improvement (e.g. impervious surfaces). • If permanent infiltration ponds are used for flow control during construction, protect these facilities from siltation during the construction phase. At the onsite of construction, the proposed detention pond s·hall be constructed to detain developed runoff and provide time for filter sediment to be filrered out prior to being discharged (rom the site. A pea gravel filtering structure will be included on the outlet end of the site. ELEMENT 4: Install Sediment Controls • Design, install, an d maintain effective erosion control s 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, in cludi ng 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. M 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. M Provide and maintain natural buffers around surface waters, direct stormwater to vegetated areas to increase sediment removal, and maximize stormwater infiltration. • 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. At the onsite of construction, the proposed detention pond shall be constructed to be used as a sediment pond which will detain developed runoff and give it time to filter sediment prior to b eing discharged from the site. A sand filtering structure will he included 011 the outlet end o(the site ELEMENT 5: Stabilize Soils M 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. M Control stormwate r volume and velocity within the site to minimize soil erosion . M 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. M Soils must not remain exposed and unworked for more than the time periods set forth below to prevent Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 erosion. o During the dry season (May 1 -Sept 30): 7 days o During the wet season (Oct 1 -Apr 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, protect 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. (NA) • Minimize soil compaction and, unless infeasible, preserve topsoil. 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 (Ex: 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 slop drains or protected channels to prevent erosion. o •Temporary pipe slope drains must handle the peak volumetric flow rate calculated using a 10- minute time step from a Type 1A, 10-year, 24-hour frequency storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, 1-hour flow rate predicted/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 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. o Where 15-minute time steps are available in an approved continuous runoff model , they may be used directly w itho ut a correction factor. M Place excavated material on the uphill side of trenches, consistent with safety and space considerations. M Place check dams at regular intervals within constructed channels that are cut down a slope. M Consider soil types and its potential for erosion. M Stabilize soils on slopes , as specified in Element 5. M BMP combinations are the most effective method of protecting slopes with d isturbed soils. Ex: Use both mulching and straw erosion control blankets. Version Date: Octob e r 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: Febn..iary 20, 2019 ELEMENT 7: Protect Drain Inl e ts • Protect all storm drain inlets made operable during construction so that stormwater runoff does 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). • Where possible, protect all existing storm drain inlets so that stormwater runoff does not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. · • Keep all approach roads clean. Do not allow sediment and street wash water to enter storm drains without prior and adequate treatment unless treatment is provided before the storm drain discharges to waters of the State. • Inlets should be inspected weekly at a minimum and daily during storm events. ELEMENT 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets • Design, construct, and stabilize all on-site conveyance channels to prevent erosion from the following expected peak flows: o *Channels must handle same peak volumetric flow rate as temporary pipe slope drains listed in Element 6, above. • Provide stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent streambanks, slopes, and downstream reaches at the outlets of all conveyance systems. • The best method for stabilizing channels is to completely line the channel with a blanket product first, then add check dams as necessary to function as an a nchor and to slow the flow of water. 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% of the volume contained in the largest tank within the containment structure. Double-walled tanks do not require additional secondary containment. • Conduct maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment a nd vehicles 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 land application, or to the Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: Feb ru a ry 20, 2019 sanitary sewer, with local sewer district approval. Wheel wash or tire bath wastewater should not include wastewater from concrete washout areas. • 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 the water quality standards. • 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 o r concrete discharge to surface waters of the State is prohibited. Do not use upland land applications for discharging wastewater from concrete washout areas. • Obtain written approval from Ecology and provide to the City before using chemical treatment other than C02 or dry ice to adjust pH. M Woody debris may be chopped and spread on site. M Conduct oil changes, hydraulic system drain down , solvent and de-greasing cleaning operations, fuel tank drain down and removal , and other activities which may result in discharge or spillage of pollutants to the ground or into stormwater runoff using spill prevention measures, such as drip pans. • Clean contaminated surfaces immediately following any discharge or spill incident. Emergency repairs may be performed on-site using temporary plastic placed beneath and, if raining, over the vehicle. ELEMENT 10: Control De-Watering Not Applicable, no dewatering is a1rticipated Discharge foundation, vault, and trench dewatering water, which have characteristics similar 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 or interfere with the operation of the system. 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 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 disposal in a manner that does not pollute state waters. 3. Ecology-approved on-site chemical treatment or other suitable treatment technologies . 4. Sanitary or combined sewer discharge with local sewer district approval, 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. Construction equipment operation, clamshell digging, concrete tremie pour, or work inside a cofferdam can create highly turbid or contaminated dewatering water. Discharging sediment-laden (muddy) water into waters of the State likely constitutes a violation of water quality standards for turbidity. The easiest way to avoid discharging muddy water is through infiltration and preserving vegetation. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 ELEM ENT 11: Maintain BMPs M 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. M 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. Some temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs are bio-degradable and designed to remain in place following construction such as compost socks. • Provide protection to all BMPs installed for the permanent control of stormwater from sediment and compaction. All BMPs that are to remain in place following completion of construction shall be examined and placed in full operating conditions. If sediment enters the BMPs during construction, it shall be removed and the facility shall be returned to the conditions specified in the construction documents. • Remove or stabilize trapped sediment on si te. Permanently stabilize disturbed soil resulting from removal of BMPs or vegetation. ELEMENT 12: Manage the Project -Projects subject to Minimum Requirements 1-9 must have a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) for site inspections. Projects subject to Minimum Requirements 1-5 do not require the inspector to be certified. By the initiation of construction, the SWPPP must identify the CESCL or inspector, who shall be present on-site or on-call at all times. M Phase development projects to the maximum degree practicable and take into account seasonal work limits to prevent soil erosion and prevent transporting sediment from the site during construction. • Inspection and monitoring -Inspect, maintain, and repair all BMPs as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. • Maintain, update, and implement the SWPPP. M Clearing and grading activities for developments shall be permitted only if conducted using an approved site development plan (e .g., subdivision approval). • From Oct 1 through Apr 30, clearing, grading, and other soil disturbing activities is permitted only if shown that the site operator will prevent silt-laden runoff from leaving the site through a combination of the following: 1. Site conditions including existing vegetative coverage, slope, soil type, and proximity to receiving waters. 2. Limit activities and the extent of disturbed areas. 3. Proposed erosion and sediment control measures. Weather conditions can influence the seasonal limitation on site disturbance. The City of Anacortes has the authority to take enforcement action per AMC 19. 76 Stormwater. M The following activities are exempt from the seasonal clearing and grading limitations: 1. Routine maintenance and necessary repair of erosion and sediment control BMPs; 2. Routine maintenance of public facilities or existing utility structures that do not expose the soil or result in the removal of the vegetative cover to soil 3. Activities where there is 100% infiltration of surface water runoff within the site in approved and installed erosion and sediment control facilities. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 ELEMENT 13: Protect Low Impact Deve lopment BMPS If implement ing any bioretention facilities or rain gardens, refer to the applicable BMP sections of the Manual for requirements . This project does not propose the use of rain gardens or bi01·etention facilities. Th e otrlv LID p1·ovis ion proposed it she et flow dispersion for future driveways and roof drain dispersion for future roof are as. I Applica nt Signature Date Ve rsion Date: Octob e r 7, 2019 Previous Ve rsion Date: F ebruary 20, 2019 TAB 3 (MINIMUM REQUIREMENT #3) • 1-2.5.3 Minimum Requirement #3-Source Control of Pollution All known, available and reasonable source control BMP's must be applied to all projects. Source control BMP's must be selected, designed, maintained according to the reference Ecology Manual. The intent of source control BM P's is to prevent stormwater from coming in contact with pollutants. They are a cost-effective means of reducing pollutants in stormwater, and, therefore, should be considered in all projects . There is no source control pollution anticipated within thi~· Residential Subdivi~·ion and is thus this Minimum Requirement is not necessary Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 TAB 4 (MINIMUM REQUIREMENT #4) • Minimum Requirement #4 -Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls Natural drainage patterns shall be maintained and discharges from the project shall occur at the natural location, to maximum extent practicable. The manner by which runoff is discharged from the project site must not cause a significant adverse impact to downstream receiving waters and down gradient properties. All outfalls require energy dissipation. The objective is to preserve and utilize drainage systems to the fullest extent because of the multiple stormwater benefits these systems provide; and to prevent erosion at the downstream of the discharge location. Refer to the reference manual for supplemental guidelines and additional information under this section. Will this project disturb the Natural Drainage System or Outfall of the project Site? Yes\No. If yes, refer to section 1.2.5.4 for Supplemental Guidelines for additional information. No this m·oject will not disturb the natural drainage system or 011t{all from the p,.oject site. Runoff will be detained prior to being released via a control structure at tile site's 1tortheast corner, as occurs todav. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20. 2019 TAB 5 (MINIMUM REQUIREMENT #5) • Minimum Requirement #5 -On·site Stormwater Management Since this project triggers Mi11im11m Requirements #1 through #9, and is on a parcel located within the Citv limits, this project has the choice to eithe1· utilize the On-site Stormwate1· Managemellt BM P's from List #2 for each type of surface noted on the list; or, can demonstl'ate compliance with the LID Performance Standal'd. This project will use List #2 to meet the 1·equirements of On-site Stormwater Management as specified below. Is this project Flow Control Exempt? No (Yes\No) (See Appendix 1-E: Flow Control-Exempt Surface Water). If yes, provide reasoning from the applicability section of 1-2.5. 7 Minimum Requirement #7: Flow Control). If No, then the project triggers Minimum Requirement #7 ( 1-2.5. 7} and possibly Minimum Requirement #8 (1-2.5.8). Projects triggering Minimum Requirements 1through9, must meet the requirements in 1-2.5.5 Minimum Requirement 5-0n-site Stormwater Management. To meet the requirement11 of MR #5 for this m·oject. each surface on List #2. as listed below. will be reviewed and BMP's will be considered in the order listed for that type of surface. The first BMP for the surface that is considered feasible shall be implemented. Lawn and Landscaped Area: • BMP T5.13: Post-Construction Soil Quality and Depth. (Refer to DOE Figure V-5.3.3) Refer to this site for requirements and specifications. All projects are required to utilize this BMP . http://www.soilsforsalmon.org/pdf/Soil BMP Manual.pdf See Appendix 3 for the "Model Soil Management Plan for BMP T5.13" to be submitted with Drainage Report and Application Material. An alternate document acceptable to the City of Anacortes is a Test Report provided by the Soils Supplier that identifies the soils to be used meet the specifications outlined under Minimum Requirement 5. The specifications are in both WSDOT and CSI Formats. For specifications, refer to the above referenced PDF. This submittal can be a deferred submittal since most projects are not sure who the supplier will be at the time of building permit application. Since this project triggerings Minimum Requirements 1 through 9, the Test Report will be provided to the Engineering Department. This submittal will be deferred since this project is not sul'e who the supplier will be at this time. Since this project triggers Minimum Requirements .1 through 9, the Test Report will be provided to the Engineering Departme11t as de1ioted in directions above. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 List #2 -Project Triggering Minimum Requirement 1through9 For each surface, consider the BMPs in the order listed for that type of surface. Use the first BMP that is considered feasible. No other On-site Stormwater Management BMP is necessary for that surface. Provide feasible detail under each BMP with maintenance and operations specifications in Minimum Requirement 5. Roofs: 1. BMP T5.30: Full Dispersion Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Full Dispersion. BMP TS.30. is not feasible as the site is not retaining at least 65% of its natural forested or native co11ditio11. Or, T5.1 OA: Downspout Full Infiltration Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Full Infiltration. BMP TS.JOA, is not feasible as the site does not have outwash or loam soils. and the underlving soils have an infiltration rate less than 0.3 inches per hour. 2. BMP T7.30: Biorention Cells, Swales and Planter Boxes Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Bioretentum is not feO,Sible as the site's underlying soils have an infiltration rate less tha11 0.3 inches per hour. 3. BMP T5.10B: Downspout Dispersion Systems Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Downspout Dispersion System are onlv functional when havilig a vegetated flow path of 25 -50 feet. The proposed lots will have sufficient room to provide for dispersion S'ystem for new home roofs to provide at least 25-fr!et of down-gradient area available, thus Dispersion is being proposed {ol' roof runoo: 4. BM P T5.1 OC: Perforated Stub-out Connections Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Not applicable since Downspout Dispersion Svstems are proposed Other Hard Surfaces: List #2 1. BMP T.5.30 Full Dispersion Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Full Dispersion. BMP TS.30. is not feasible as the site is not 1·etaining at least 65% o(its natural (prested or native condition. 2. BMP T5.15: Permeable Pavements Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Permeable Pavement is not feasible per the 2014 DOE .Manual as the site's lack of infiltration capacity is less than 0.30 inches per hour. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 3. BMP T7.30: Biorention Cells, Swales and Planter Boxes Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Just as for Permeable Pavement, Bioretendon is infeasible per the 2014 DOE Manual as the 1mde1·lving soils within the site has a lack ofinfiltradon capacity aess than 0.30 inches per hoUJ'). 4. BMP T5.12: Sheet Flow Dispersion Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Sheet Flow Dispe1·sion BMP T5.12 will be used to disperse drivewav runo{[mi each lot at the dme oflot development. Lots are ofa sufficient size that a SO-foot dispersion area for all but one lot is reasonable. Sheet (low disper.vion is not feasible for the new road as the1'e is no available room to implement a (<zcilit_v of this tvpe and exisdng site topography. Or, BMP T5.11: Concentrated Flow Dispersion Feasible\lnfeasible If infeasible, explain the criteria: Conce11trated Flow Dispel'sion per BMP T5.11 will be used to disperse d1·ivewav runoff on each lot at the dme oflot development on drivewavs which are sloped. Lots are of a sufficient size that a 50- (oot dispersion area for is reasonable. Sheet flow dispersion is not feasible for the 1iew road as there is no available room to implement a facility o(this tvpe. I Applicant Signature Date Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 TAB 6 -(MINUMUM REQUIREMENT 6 -RUNOFF TREATMENT) Refer to 1.2.5.6 and provide the required information for this Minimum Requirement. This residential project is responsible for providing BatJ'ic Runoff Treatment. Runof[treatment from tliis residential project will be m·ovided by the incorporation ofa dead st01·age cell located within the bottom of the proposed detention pond. Per WWHJJI the 24-hour 011li11e Water Quality Volume that must be provided for the proposed residential development is 0. 0533 acre-feet or 2.322 cubic feet. Refer to the attached WWHM Views aml Report denoting the re11uired volume attached in Appendix 10. The dead storage cell in the bottom of the pond is estimated to be 0.9-feet deep and will provide 2, 715 cubic feet of dead storage volume below the pond's live storage volume. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Dale: February 20. 2019 TAB 7 -(MINUMUM REQUIREMENT 7 -FLOW CONTROL) Refer to 1.2.5. 7 and provide the required information for this Minimum Requirement. Runoff from areas proposed (or development will be collected and tight-lined to an above ground detention po1td system to be located within the northeast comer of the subject property. The detention volume has been provided to detain runoff and will release it at controlled rates via a control structure. The svstem will release runoffnortheasterlv to the existing ditch svstem located along the south side of Orchard Avenue, north of the site. The proposed stonnwater control .\tructure has been specificallv designed for this project so that when the combined flow durati.on curve, or the inflow to the detention pond from the post-developed conditions, is routed to the proposed detention pond, runoff will be detained and released at a rate not to exceed the established Pre-developed flow durations. The flow curve depicti.ng the l'elease of storm.water from the proposed detenti.on pond and control structure is identified as "801 POCI Mitigated Flow" on the t1ttached WWHM exhibits. This mitigated flow release rate is btzsetl on the exi.'tting (pre-developed) target flow durati.on noted as 501POC1. Based on the proposed detenti.on pond and contl'ol structm·e the svstem provides adequate detenti.on volume and a controlled relea.~e of~tormwater so the waters discharged from the site confonn to the runoff contl'ol requirements of the 2014 DOE manual To substanti.ate that the svstem is sufficient one must obtain a "pass" witliin tlte WWHM software wltich assures tliat the post-developed condition releases stormwater at rates not w exceed the thresholds identified as the pre-developed, pastU1·e condition.. Using the design in(onnation previouslv noted, WWHM has been used to design the necessary detenti.on pond volume and size the control structure to be constructed necessary to miti.gate the increase in runoO'generated tl·om the proposed residential development proposed herein. The detention pond and control structure proposed with this analvsis are as (ollows: Proposed Detention Pond: Detention Pond Bottom Footprint Area: 3,024 square feet Pond Depth: 3. 9-ft deep (0. 9-feet dead storage + 2-.feet live storage + 1..Joot freeboard) Pond Dead Storage Bottom Elevatio11=291.73 Pond Dead Storage Top Elevation=Live Storage Bottom Elevati.on=292.63 Pond Top Live Storage Elevation= 294.63 Pond Top Elevation (incl 1-footfreeboard) = 295.63 Control Structure: Proposed Notch Weir/Orifice Control Structure Riser Height: 2.0-ft (above outlet elevati.on) =Elevation 294.63 Riser Diameter: 12 iii. Rectangular Notch Height= 0. 66-feet (from top of riser) Rectangular Notch Width=O. 023-feet (0.28-inclies) Bottom Orifice Diameter: 0.569 inches. (0 above outlet elevation) Using the developed la11d conditions previously noted, the control structure noted above and an 12-inclt diameter overflow riser1 it is esti.mated that the following mitigated flows will he dischal'ged from the site: Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POCJ (801) Return Period Flow (cfi) 2 year 0.0117 5 year 0.0237 JO year 0.0363 Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 25year 50year 100 year 0.0594 0.0837 0.1159 An above ground detention pond ~·vstem is proposed to provide necessary stormwater detention for runoff control for this project. This detention pond and controlled relea!l·e svstem is to be located within the northeast corne1· of the site, at the subject properties low point as shown 011 the attached infOrmation. The proposed detention pond will have a live storage bottom (ootprjnt area of approximately 3,024 square feet a1td is designed to have 2. 0-feet of live storage depth and an additional foot of (reeboard for storage volume. Refer to the attached Developed Conditions Drainage Exhibit and WWHM de.,·ign in{ormation located in Appendix 10 at the end o{this report The detention pond will release runoff via a control structure which will limit the release of stormwater northeasterly to the existing drainage ditch located along the south side of Orcliard Avenue which currently receives rutiof( from the subject property. Based on the analysis performed by WWHM, a 3- (oot deep detention pond with a minimum footprint area 0(3,024 square feet and use o(the control structure as designed, is sufficient to mitigate the estimated increase in storm water (rom the proposed residential development. flnd the tletention svstem "passes't as noted oti the attached WWHM Report located in Appendix JO. Tlris "passt' signifies that tlte currently shown stormwater system is sized as requfred to provide mitigation as determined bv use ofa continuous model software, WWHM. as required bv the 2014 DOE manual (or the 1.41-acres of new surface areas when dispersing roof runoff and driveway runoff areas as depicted within this report. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20 , 2019 TAB 8 -(MINUMUM REQUIREMENT 8 -WETLAND PROTECTION) Refer to 1.2.5.8 and provide the required information for this Minimum Requirement. The1·e are no wetland areas within the areas of the subject property proposed (or construction. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 TAB 9-(MINUMUM REQUIREMENT 9-0PERATION AND MAINTENANCE) Refer to 1.2.5.9 and provide the required information for this Minimum Requirement. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATELY OWNED DRAINAGE FACILITIES: Attached herein are general maintenance requirements from the 2014 Department of Ecology Drainage Atianual, Volume V. Section 4.6 as applicable to Detention Ponds. Control Structures. Catch Basins, and Wet Ponds. These requirements. together with those listed below, shall apply to onsite drainage faciliti.es. and shall be used as a basis for inseecting and maintaining the drainage faciliti.es within this project. The owner. 01· homeowners association of the plat is responsible for assigning an individual to periodicallv. inse.ect the storm system improvements herein. Detention P011d Maintenance i.11 needed when any trash or debris has accumulated which exceeds 5 cubic feet per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of a trash it would take to fill up on standard size garbage can). This debris shall be clea1·ed from the site. Once every five vears. unless evidence suggests otherwise. an engineer shall inspect the inside of the detention facility and make recommendations for repairs and modi{icati.ons as necessarv. Once everv five years. an inspection and measurement of debris accumulation depth shall be conducted within the detention pond and shall be removed when the debris exceeds 10% o/"the designed pond depth (0.3' or 3. 6"). No dumpi11g ofgrass clippings or debris should be allowed within the pond area. .Refer to the Table 4.5 Maintenance Standards (excerpts attached) from the 2014 DOE Stonnwater Manual (Or specific in(Ormation regarding maintenance. Catch Basins throughout the site shall be inspected once a vear to identify accumulated levels of silt a11d debris within catch basin sumps and general structure integrity. Refer to the attached information from the 2014 DOE Storm water Manual regarding maintenance of control structures and catch basins. C011trol Stl'Ucture shall be inspected once a year to identify accumulated levels ofsilt. trash. or debris within structure along with any structural damage. Any material accumulation 0.5-feet in depth or greater maintenance is needed to remove the material Refer to the attached iltformation from the 1014 DOE Storm water Manual 1·egarding maintenance of" control stmctures and catch basins. Stormwater Conveyance Piping shall be inspected once each year, and at not more than five-vear intervals. all storm water pipes shall be flushed. ~Flushed debl'is shall be contained and disposed offsite, not allowed to enter the detention facility. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Table V-4.~.2(3) Maintenance Standards -Closed Detention Systems ""· (TanksNaults) (continued) Maintenance Component .. , ... .. , Def~~t ~· .. ·,, Conditions When Maintenance is esults Expec tedWhen Needed ,. '"Maintenance / is Performed ·• echanism cannot be opened one Locking Mech-nia!ntenance person with pr er tools. Mechanism anism Not Work-Bolts-{_nto frame have les an 1/2 inch opens with ing of threa'd,,{may not ap~ to self-locking proper tools. " lids). · One mainten be person cannot Cover Difficult to remove~· fter a~~ying normal lifting Remove pressu . Intent is to \eep cover from Cover can be removed and reinstalled by one main- tenance per- Ladder Uns~f,e g off access to rrt~,intenance . \ son. Ladder meets ·."' L dd . , d t . . "· design stand-a er 1s unsa1e ue o m1ssmg·rnngs, d All · r t t I tt h'ed t ar s. ows m1sa 1gnmen . no secure y a ac " "o maintenance structure wall, rust, or cracks. "°' ¥ ·person sa1e ~cce.ss. C t h B . See "Catch Bas-S "C • h B . 11 (N S) a c a s . "(N S) ee ale asms o. . ins o. See "Catch Basins" (No. 5). Table V-4.5.2(4) Maintenance Standards • Control Structure/Flow Restrictor Maintenance Defect Condition When Main· Results Expected When Component tenance is Needed Maintenance is Performed Trash and Material exceeds 25% of Control structure o rifice is not Debris sump depth or 1 foot below blocked. All trash and debris (Includes Sediment) orifice plate. removed . General Structure is not securely Structure securely attached to attached to manhole wall. wall and outlet pipe. Structural Structure is not in upright Structure in correct position. Damage position (allow up to 10% Connections to outlet pipe are from plumb). water ti ght; structure repaired Connections to outlet pipe or replaced and works as 2014 Stonnwafer Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 836 Table V-4.5.2(4) Maintenance Standards -Control Structure/Flow Restrictor (continued) Maintenance Defect Condition When Main-Results Expected When Component tenance is Needed Maintenance is Performed are not watertight and show signs of rust. designed. Any holes -other than Structure has no holes other designed holes -i n the than designed holes. structure. Cleanout gate is not water-Gate is watertight and works tight or is missing. as designed. Gate cannot be moved up Gate moves up and down eas - Cleanout Damaged or and down by one main-ily and is watertight. tenance person. Gate Missing Chain is in place and works as Chain/rod leading to gate is designed. missing or damaged. Gate is rusted over 50 % of Gate is repaired or replaced to its surface area. meet design standards. Control device is not work- Damaged or ing properly due to missing , Plate is in place and works as Orifice Plate Missing outofp~ce ,orbentorifice designed. plate. Any trash , debris, sed iment , Plate is free of all obstructions Obstructions or vegetation blocking the and works as designed. plate. Overflow Any trash or debris blocking Pipe is free of all obstructions Pipe Obstructions (or having the potential of and works as des igned. block i ng) the overflow pipe . See "C losed Manhole Detention See "Closed Detention Sys See "Closed Detention Sys- Systems" terns" (No. 3). terns" (No. 3). (No. 3}. See "Catch Ca tch Bas i n Basins " (No. See "Ca tch Bas i ns 11 (No . 5). See "Catch Bas i ns" (No . 5). 5). 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 837 Table V-4.5.2(5) Maintenance Standards -Ca1:ch Basins Results Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance is Expected Defect When Main-Component Needed tenance is General performed No Trash or debris loc- Trash or debris which is located imme-ated imme- diately in front of the catch basin opening or diately in is blocking inletting capacity of the basin by front of catch more than 10%. basin or on Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds grate open- 60 percent of the sump depth as measured ing. from the bottom of basin to invert of the low-No trash or est pipe into or out of the bas i n, but in no debris in the Trash & case less than a min imum of s ix inches catch basin. Debri s clearance from the debris surface to the invert of the lowest p ipe . Inlet and out- let pipes free Trash or debris i n any in let or ouUe t pipe of trash or blocking more than 113 of its height. debris. Dead animals or vegetati on that could gen-No dead erate odors that could cause complaints or animals or dangerous gases (e .g., methane). vegetation present within the catch basin. Sediment (in the basin) that exceeds 60 per- cent of the sump depth as measured from the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the basin , but in no case No sediment Sediment less than a min imum of6 inches clearance in the catch from the sed i ment surface to the invert of the bas i n lowest pipe . Structure Top slab has holes larger than 2 square Top slab is Damage to inches or cracks w ider than 1 /4 inch. (Intent free of holes Frame and/or is to make sure no material is runn i ng into and cracks. Top Slab basin). Frame is sit- 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 838 Table V-4.5.2(5) Maintenance Standards -Catch Basins (continued) Results Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance is Expected Component Detect Needed When Main- tenance is performed Frame not sitting flush on top slab , i.e ., sep -ting flush on a ra tion of more than 3/4 inch of the frame the riser ri ngs from the top slab. Frame not securely or top slab and firmly attached attached. Basin Maintenance person judges that structure is replaced or unsound. repai red to Fractures or design stand - Cracks in Grout fillet has separated or cracked wider ards. Basin Walls/ than 1 /2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the Bottom joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence Pipe is of soil particles entering catch basin through reg routed crac ks . and secure at basi n wall. Basin Settlement/ If failure of basin has created a safety, func-replaced or Misalignment tion , or design problem. repaired to design stand- ards. No veget- Vegetation growing across and blocking ation block- ing opening more than 10% of the basin opening. to basin. Vegeta tion Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints No veget-that is more than six inches tall and less than six inches apart. ation or root growth present. Contamination See "Detention Ponds" (No . 1 ). No pollution and Pollution present Cover Not in Cover is missing or only partially in place . Catch basin Catch Basin Place Any open catch basin requires main-cover is tenance. closed Cover Locking Mech-Mechanism cannot be opened by one main -Mechanism anism Not tenance person with proper tools . Bolts into opens w ith 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 839 Table V-4.5.2(5) Maintenance Standards -Catch Basins (continued) Results Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance is Expected Component Defect Needed When Main- tenance is performed Working frame have Jess than 112 inch of thread. proper tools. One maintenance person cannot remove lid Cover can be Cover Difficult after applying normal lifting pressure. removed by one main-to Remove (Intent is keep cover from sealing off access tenance per- to maintenance.) son. Ladder meets design stand Ladder Rungs Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs , not ards and Ladder Unsafe securely attached to basin wall, mis-allows main- alignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. tenance per- son safe access. Grate open- Grate opening Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. ing meets Unsafe design stand- ards. Metal Grates Trash and Trash and debris that is blocking more than Grate free of (If Applic-trash and able) Debris 20% of grate surface inletting capacity. debris. Grate is in Damaged or Grate missing or broken member(s) of the place and Missing. grate. meets design standards. Table V-4.5.2(6) Maintenance Standards • Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Racks) Maintenance Condition When Maintenance is Results Expected Com- ponents General Metal Defect Needed When Maintenance is Performed Trash and Trash or debris that is plugging Barrier cleared to design Debris more than 20% of the openings in flow capacity. the barrier. Damaged/ Bars are bent out of shape more Bars in place with no Missing than 3 inches. bends more than 3/4 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 840 Table V-4.5.2(6) Maintenance Standards· Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Racks) (continued) Maintenance Condition When Maintenance is Results Expected Com-Defect Needed When Maintenance is ponents Performed inch. Bars are missing or entire barrier Bars in place according missing. Bars. Bars are loose and rust is causing to design. 50% deterioration to any part of bar Barrier replaced or rier. repaired 1o design stand- ards. In let/Outlet Debris barrier missing or not Barrier firmly attached to Pipe attached to pipe pipe Table V-4.5.2(7) Maintenance Standards · Energy Dissipaters Results Expec- Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is ted When Main· Components Needed tenance is Performed External: Missing or Only one layer of rock exists above nat-Rock pad Moved ive soil in area five square feet or la r-replaced to Rock ger, or any exposure of native soil. design stand- ards. Rock Pad Rock pad Erosion Soil erosion in or adjacent to rock pad. replaced to design stand- ards. Pipe Pipe cleaned/- Plugged Accumulated sediment that exceeds flushed so that with Sed-20% of the design depth. it matches iment design. Not Dis-Visual evidence of water discharging Trench Dispersion Trench charging at concentrated points along trench redesigned or Water Prop· (normal condition is a "sheet flow" of rebuilt to stand-water along trench). Intent is to prevent erly erosion damage. ards. Perforations Over 1/2 of perforations in pipe are Perforated p ipe cleaned or Plugged. plugged with debris and sediment. replaced. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 841 Table V-4.5.2(7) Maintenance Standards· Energy Dissipaters (continued) Results Expec· Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is ed When Main· Components Needed tenance is Performed Water Maintenance person observes or Flows Out Top of "Dis-receives credible report of water flow-Facility rebuilt tributor" ing out during any storm less than the or redesigned Catch design storm or its causing or appears to standards. Basin. likely to cause damage. Receiving Water in receiving area is causing or No danger of Area Over-has potential of causing landslide prob landslides. Saturated lems. Internal: Worn or Structure dissipating flow deteriorates Damaged Structure Post, to 1/2 of original size or any con-replaced to Manhole/Chamber Baffles, centrated worn spot exceeding one design stand- Side of square foot which would make struc-ards. Chamber ture unsound. Other See "Catch Basins" {No. 5}. See "Catch Bas Defects ins" (No. 5). Table V-4.5.2(8) Maintenance Standards -Typical Biofiltration Swale . Condition When . Mamtenance Defect or Prob-M . t . Recommended Maintenance to am enance ts Component lem Needed Correct Problem General Sediment Accu-Sediment depth mulation on exceeds 2 'ffiass.... inches. Standing Water swale between storms and does not drain freely. Remove sediment deposits on grass .,,. treatment area ofthe,,.bio-swale. \Nhen finished , ~~-le should be level from side to ,..$iae and drain freely toward 9.l:ltlet. There should be no ,,, areas'bf standing water once inflow ., h~s ceased. Any of the following may apply: ove sediment or trash blockages , improve e from head to foot of swale, remove dogged_~eck dams , add underdrains or converfto a wet // 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 842 Table V-4.5.2(10) Maintenance Standards· Filter Strips (continued) Condition Mainte,nance Defect or Prob-When Main-Recommended Maintenanc~t6. Cor- Comp6n~nt lem tenance is rect Problem ' ~ ... Needed ation starts to take over . . , Trash and Trash and""@.ebris debris accu- ' Accumulation"' mulated on the or ruts or bare areas less than 12 inches wide, repair the damaged area by filling with crushed gravel. The scou,. a areas grass will creep in over the rock in Erosion/Scouring dye"to flow ti e. If bare areas are large, generally "thannelization, grea r than 12 inches wide, the filter / ./ // or higher flows. strip sh Id be re-graded and re- // seeded. F smaller bare areas, over- / seed when b spots are evident. Flow spreader uneven or cfllogged so tthat Level the spreader and ows are no . ., 1 d. flows are spread evenly o $r entire fil-un11orm y 1s-. , Flow spreader tlibuted through ter width. ~ entire filter width. Table V-4.5.2(11) Maintenance Standards • Wetponds Maintenance Condition When Results Expected When Main-Defect Maintenance is Component Needed tenance is Performed General Line the first cell to maintain at least 4 feet of water. Although the second Water level First cell is empty, cell may drain, the first cell must doesn't hold water. remain full to control turbulence of the incoming flow and reduce sed- iment resuspension. Trash and Accumulation that Trash and debris removed from Debris exceeds 1 CF per pond. 2014 Stonnwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 847 Table V-4.5.2(11) Maintenance Standards -Wetponds (continued) Maintenance Condition When Results Expected When Main-Defect Maintenance is Component Needed tenance is Performed 1000-SF of pond area. Inlet/Outlet pipe Inlet/Outlet clogged with sed-No clogging or blockage in the inlet Pipe iment and/or debris and outlet piping. material. Sediment accu- Sediment mulations in pond bot Accumulation tom that exceeds the Sediment removed from pond bot-depth of sediment in Pond Bot-tom. tom zone plus 6-inches, usually in the first cell. Oil removed from water using oil- absorbent pads or vactor truck. Oil Sheen on Prevalent and visible Source of oil located and corrected. 11 Water oil sheen. chronic low levels of oil persist, plant wetland plants such as Juncus effusus (soft rush) which can uptake small concentrations of oil. Erosion of the pond's side slopes and/or scouring of the pond Slopes stabilized using proper Erosion bottom, that exceeds erosion control measures and repair 6-inches, or where methods. continued erosion is prevalent. Any part of these com• ponents that has Settlement of settled 4-inches or Pond lower than the design Dike/berm is repaired to spe- Dike/Berm elevation, or cifications. inspector determines dike/berm is unsound. Internal Berm Berm dividing cells Berm surface is leveled so that water should be level. flows evenly over entire length of 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 848 Table V-4.5.2(11) Maintenance Standards • Wetponds (continued) Maintenance Condition When Results Expected When Main-Defect Maintenance is Component Needed tenance is Perfonned berm. Rock is missing and Ove rflow soil is exposed at top Rocks rep l aced to specificati ons. Sp i llway of spillway or outs ide slope. Table V-4.5.2(12) Maintenance Standards • Wetvaults Maintenance Defect Condition When Main-Results Expected When Main- Component tenance is Needed tenance is Performed Trash and debris accu- Trash /Debris mulated in vault, pi pe or Remove t rash and debris from Accumulation inlet/outlet (in cl udes float-vault. ables and non -float- ables). Sediment Sediment accumulation Accumulation in vault bottom exceeds Remove sediment from vault. i n Vault the depth of the sediment zone plus 6-inches. Damaged lnlet'outlet piping dam- aged or broken and i n P i pe repa ired and/or rep laced . Pipes need of repa i r. Acce ss Covet Cover cannot be opened Pipe repaired or replaced to General Damaged/Nol or removed, e specially by proper working specifications. Working one person. Blocking mate rial removed or cleared from ventilation area. A Ven tilation Ventilati on area blocked specified % of the vault surface or plugged . area must provide ventilati on to the vault interior (see design spe cifications). Vault Struc~ Maintenance/inspection Vault replaced or repairs made ture Damage personnel determine that so that vault meets design spe- -Includes the vault is not struc-cifications and is structurally Cracks in turally sound. sound. W alls Bottom, Cracks w ider than 1/2-V ault repa i red so tha t no cracks Damage to 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 ~ Page 849 V-4.6 Maintenance Standards for Drainage Facilities The facility-specific maintenance standards contained in this section are intended to be conditions for determining if maintenance actions are required as identified through inspection . They are not intended to be measures of the facility's required condition at all times between i nspections . In other words , exceedence of these condit ions at any time between inspections and /or maintenance does not automatically constitute a violation of these standards. However, based upon inspection observations, the inspection and maintenance schedules shall be adjusted to minimize the length of time that a facility is in a condition that requires a maintenance action. Table V-4.5.2(1) Maintenance Standards -Detention Ponds Maintenance Conditions When Results Expected When Component Defect Maintenance Is Maintenance Is Per- Needed fanned Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cub ic feet per 1,000 square feet. In general, there should be no visual Trash & Debris evidence of dumping. Trashanddebriscieared from site If less than threshold al l trash and debris will be re moved as part of next scheduled main- tenance. Any poisonous or nuis- General ance vegetation which No danger of poisonous may constitute a haz-vegetation where main- ard to maintenance per tenance personnel or the son nel or the public. public might normally be. P oisonous Veget-Any ev idence of nox-(Coordinate with local ation and noxious ious weeds as defined health department) weeds by State or local reg-Complete eradication of ulations. noxious weeds may not (Apply requirements of be possible. Compliance adopted IPM policies with State or local erad- for the use of herb-ication policies required icides ). Contam i nants Any evidence of o il , No c ontaminants o r pol- 2014 Storrnwater Management Manual for Western Wa shington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 829 Table V-4.S.2(1} Maintenance Standards -Detention Ponds (continued) Maintenance Conditions When Results Expected When Component Defect Maintenance Is Maintenance Is Per- Needed formed gasoline, contaminants or other pollutants and Pollution (Coordinate lutants present. removal/cleanup with local water quality response agency). Any evidence of rodent Rodents destroyed and holes if facility is acting dam or berm repaired. (Coordinate with local Rodent Holes as a dam or berm, or health department; any evidence of water piping through dam or coordinate with Ecology berm via rodent holes. Dam Safety Office if pond exceeds 10 acre-feet.) Facility is returned to Dam results in change design function. Beaver Dams or function of the facil-(Coordinate trapping of ity. beavers and removal of dams with appropriate per mitting agencies) When insects such as Insects destroyed or removed from site. Insects wasps and hornets Apply insecticides in com-interfere with main- tenance activities. pliance with adopted IPM policies Tree growth does not allow maintenance access or interferes Trees do not hinder main- with maintenance activ tenance activities. Har- ity (i.e., slope mowing, vested trees should be Tree Growth and silt removal, vactoring, recycled into mulch or Hazard Trees or equipment move-other beneficial uses (e.g., ments). If trees are not alders for firewood). interfering with access Remove hazard Trees or maintenance, do not remove 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 830 Table V-4.5.2(1) Maintenance Standards -Detention Ponds (continued) Maintenance Conditions When Results Expected When Component Detect Maintenance Is Maintenance Is Per- Needed formed If dead , diseased, or dying trees are iden- tified (Use a certified Arbor- ist to determine health of tree or removal requirements) Slopes should be sta- Eroded damage over 2 bilized using appropriate inches deep where erosion control measure cause of damage is (s); e.g .,rock rein- Side Slopes of still present or where forcement, planting of Erosion there is potenti a l for grass , compacti on. Pond continued erosion . If eros ion is occurri ng on Any erosion observed compacted berms a on a compacted berm licensed civil engineer embankment. should be consulted to resolve source of erosion. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10% of Sediment cleaned out to the designed pond designed pond shape and Sediment depth unless otherwise depth; pond reseeded if Storage Area specified or affects necessary to control inletting or outletting erosion. condition of the facility. Liner (if Applic-Liner is visible and has Liner repaired or replaced. more than three 1/4-able) inch holes in it. Liner is fully covered. Any part of berm which has settled 4 in c hes lower than the desi gn Ponds Berms elevation Dike is bu ilt back to the (Dikes) Settlements design elevation. If settlement is appar- ent, measure berm to determ i ne amount of settlement 2014 Stormwater Management Manual tor We stem Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 831 Table V-4.5.2(1) Maintenance Standards -Detention Ponds (continued) Maintenance Conditions When Results Expected When Component Defect Maintenance Is Maintenance Is Per- Needed fonned Settling can be an indication of more severe problems with the berm or outlet works. A licensed civil engineer should be consulted to detennine the source of the set- tlement. Discernable water flow through pond berm. Ongoing erosion with potential for erosion to continue. Piping (Recommend a Gaeth- Piping eliminated. Erosion potential resolved. echnical engineer be called in to inspect and evaluate condition and recommend repair of condition. Tree growth on emer- gency spillways ere-Trees should be removed. ates blockage If root system is small problems and may (base less than 4 inches) cause failure of the the root system may be left berm due to uncon-in place. Otherwise the Emergency Over-Tree Growth trolled overtopping. roots should be removed flow/ Spillway Tree growth on berms and the berm restored. A and Benns over 4 over 4 feet in height licensed civil engineer feet in height may lead to piping should be consulted for through the benn proper benn/spillway res- !which could lead to fail· toration. ure of the berm. Discernable water flow Piping eliminated. Erosion Piping through pond berm. Ongoing erosion with potential resolved. 2014 Stotmwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 832 Table V-4.5.2(1) Maintenance Standards -Detention Ponds (continued) Maintenance Conditions When Results Expected When Component Defect Maintenance Is Maintenance Is Per- Needed formed potential for erosion to continue. {Recommend a Goeth- echnical engineer be calledintoinspectand evaluate condition and recommend repair of condition. Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in area five square feet or larger, or any expos- Rocks and pad depth are Emergency Over-Emergency Over-ure of native soil at the restored to design stand-flow/Spillway flow/Spillway top of out flow path of spillway. ards. (Rip-rap on inside slopes need not be replaced.) Erosion See "Side Slopes of Pond" Table V-4.5.2(2) Maintenance Standards -Infiltration Results Expec· Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is ted When Component Needed Maintenance Is Performed Trash & Debris See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1 ). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1 ). Poisonous/Noxious See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1 ). See "Detention Vegetation Ponds" (No. 1). General Contaminants and See "Detention See "Detention Ponds0 (No. 1 ). Pollution Ponds" (No. 1 ). Rodent Holes See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1} Water ponding in infiltration pond Sediment is Storage Area Sediment after rainfall ceases and appropriate removed 2014 Stonnwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 4 -Page 833 APPENDIX 1 -Survey performed by a Professional Land Surveyor Refer to attached "Existing Conditions, Site Prep and Erosion Control Sheet" attached fo,. survev information provided bv Lisser and As.vociates also attached within this Appendix. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 SUR~ C>eSGRIPTION SKAelT GOVNTY A56ES50R'5 PARCEL NLJM6ER P-320TI THE EAST 11.2 OF THE !:OUTHEA5T 1/4 Of THE 50\JTHHE9T 1/4 OF 5EC:,TION 25, TOl-INSHI P ~ NOR TH. RAN6E I EA5T, 1--J.M.; EXCEPT THE 50UTH 16 5 FEET THEREOF: Al.SO EXCEPT THE NORTH ,5"1 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPT THE EAST 3:% FEET THEREOF; TOISETHER 1-!ITH THAT PORTION O F THE EAST 1/2 Of THE SOLJTHEAST 1/4 OF THE 50IJTHWEST 1/4 OF SEc.TION 25, TOHNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANeE I EA5T, H.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, BEetNNINe A T A POINT ON THE EAST L INE OF SAID SCOTHEAST 1/4 OF THE 50UTHHE5T 1/4 l-IHICH IS 2"10 FEOET NORTH OF THE 50IJTHEAST C:,ORNER OF 5AID 501JTHEA5T 1/4 OF THE 50LJTHNE5T 1/41 THENCE NORTH ALONl9 SAID EAST L INE OF lb FEET; THENCE NE5T 331':> FE.ET: THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL lt-llTH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THf SOIJTHHEST 1/4 16 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO A POIN T DUE WEST OF THE POINT OF SEcSl lNNIN6: THENCE EAST TO THE POINT OF BE61NNIN6: EXCEPT RISHT-Of-lo!AY FOR Pl!6LIC ROAD ALON6 THE EAST BOUNDARY THEREOF , KNO~ A S AVENUE H OR HEART LAKE ROAD. 5ll6JEC.T TO AND TO<SETHER H ITH EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, C.OVENANTS, L IEN$, LEASES, COi.RT CAU5E5 AND OTHER IN5TR1.ll-iENT5 OF REC.ORO. S ITVATE IN THE C.I TY OF ANAGORTES. GOVNTY Of Sl<AcS IT, STATE OF HA5HINGTON. LITJL.ITll!$ l!A~NTS AN EASEMENT 15 HEREBY RESERVED FOR AND eRANTED TO THE CITY Of ANACORTES. F'IJGET SOUND ENE~Y: CASCADE NA1VRAL $AS CORPORATION; FRONTIER C.OMMUNI C.ATIONS. INC.; AND C.OMC.AS T C.ABLEVISION, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE 60c.CES50R5 AND ASSISNS UNDER AND UPON THE AREAS 5HO""N AS UTILITIES EASEMENT AREAS AS SHOWN ON THE FACE OF THIS PLAT, OR AS NOTED, IN NHIC H TO INSTALL, LAY, CONSTRUCT, RENE"", OPERATE, MAINTAIN AND REMOVE UTILITY SYSTEMS, LINES, Fli<n!RES AND APPURTENANGE!:> A TTACHED THERETO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDIN6 VT IL ITY SERVICE TO THE 51.eDIVIS ION AND OTHfR PROPERTY, TOGETHER H ITH THE R l 5HT TO ENTER UPON THE LOT5 ANO TRAC T5 AT ALL TIHES F OR THE PURP05ES STATED, WITH THE UNDER5TANDIN6 THAT ANT' 6RANTEE SHALL 13E RE5PONSU3LE FOR ALL UNNECESSARY DAMAOE IT CAUSED TO ANY REAL PROPERTY OHNER IN THE SUBDIV ISION ElY THE EXERCISE OF Rl6HTS AND PRIVIL.EoeS HEREIN <SRANTED. PllllVAr= ~T~MJlllATl!R c:>AAINA\91! !:A~~NT EASEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF C.ONVEYIN6 ON-SITE S TORHHATER RUNOFF WERE .sAANTED IN FAVOR OF ALL A6UTTINe LOT OJl>INERS IN THE AREAS DESl5NATED AS PRiVATE DRAI NA<SE EAS EMEN TS ON THE FACE OF THll S SHORT PLAT. THE R:Ee\JLAR MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE DRAINAeE FACILI TIES ESTA8Ll=-tiED AND 5RANTED THEREON HAS TO 6E THE RESPON51BIUTY OF AND THE COSTS THEREOF BE BORNE EGUALL Y BY, THE PRESENT AND FUnJRE OHNERS OF THE AOOTTINe PROPERTY AND THE IR HEIRS, PERSONAL REPRE5ENTATIVES, A ND ASGIS N5. THE C ITY OF ANACORTES IS ALSO eRANTED ll-IE P!:RPE1l.JAL RJ6HT OF ENTRY Ac.ROSS ORAIHAeE EASEMENTS AND AD.JACENT LANDS OF THE 6RANTOR, AND OR ASSl &NS, FOR FVRPOSES OF RCUTJNE INSPECTlON OF STORMWATER DRAINA5E FACILITIES AND EMERSENC.Y MAINTENANCE PURPOSES AT ITS O~ D ISCRETION. THE <SRANTOR. OWNERS . A ND ANY PERSON tlAVINS ANY PRESENT OR Sl,65EGIJENT OWNERSHI P INTEREST IN THE PROPERTIES, AND THEIR ~C.E550R5 AND ASGIS NS OF OWNERS, A6REED TO HOLD THE C ITY, ITS OFFICERS, Ei"IPLO'fEEs ANO A6ENT5 HARMLESS IN ALL RESPECTS FROM ANY AND ALL C.LAIHS FOR DAMAeES HHIC.H MAY BE OcC.A510NED NOW OR IN THE PLmJRE TO AD...IAC.ENT PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS BY REASON OF cONSTRIJc.TION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANVE OF THE SAID DRAINAeE SYSTEM . I. • INDIC.A TES REBAR SET ANO CAPPED HITH YEl...LOH CAP INSGRIBED LISSER 22"160. 0 INDIC.ATES EXISTIN6 IRON P IPE OR REBAR FOUND @ INDICATES EXISITIN6 MONUMENT OR SET MONJ>1ENT 2 . SURVEY DESCRIPTION IS FROM LAND TITLE SUBDIVISION eUARANTEE, ORDER NO. Ol-ITT2<!2-F DATED MARC.H 13 , 2020 ;,. FOR ADDITIONAL MERIDIAN ANO SURVEY INFORMATION SEE PLAT OF TtlE ORC.HARDS FUD RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 2 00b011<!012b AND REC.ORD OF SURVEY MAPS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NIJHflERS e l 052800.25 AND '1501110020, REC.OROS OF 51::.ABIT COUNTY , HASHIN6TON. .... BASIS OF 13EARIN£" EAST L INE OF THE SOIJTtlYEST V4 OF SEGTION :25. TOWNSH IP 35 NORTH, RAN6E I EAST, 1-1.H. 6EARJN6 ~ NORTH 1°30'24' EAST 5 . MERIDIAN• AS5UMEO b. INSTRJJMENTATION, LEIC.A 1103 TC.RA PWS THEODOLITE DISTANC.E Mf:TE'R 1 . SURVEY PROCEDURE, STANDARD F IELD TRAVERSE e>. THIS PROPERTT" IS 51.J6JEC.T TO ANO T06-ETHER HITH EASEMENTS, Rf5ERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, c~NANTS, LIENS, LEASE$, C.OURT C.AUSES AND OTHER INSTRlA-1ENT5 OF RECORD INC.LUD ING ElUT NOT LIMITED TO THOSE INSTRUMENTS SHOWN ON THE ABOVE REFERENC.ED Tin.£ Rf PORT AND RECORDED UNDER SK.AelT c.OUNn' AUDITOR'S FILE HIJMBERS e104100021, 8'105280025 AND <!501110020. "I. TH I S~ HA5 SHOWN OC.C.UPATlONAL l tlDIC-ATORS (5TRIJC11JRE5, FENCE LINE5) N:J PER~ C.HAF'TI:R 332-1:30. L INES OF oc.c.uPATION MAY INDICATE AREAS FOR POTENTIAl. C.LAll-15 OF IJNHRITTEN OHNERSHIP. THIS BOUNDARY SURVEY HAS ONLY SHOHN THE RELATIONSHIP OF LINES OF OC.GUPATION TO THE DEEDED LINES OF REc.oRD. NO RESOLUTION OF OINNERStilP ElASED ON UNJ.oo!RI TTEN RleHT5 HAS BEEN MADE OR IMPLIED BY TI-l l S 5URVEY. 10. A LL DISTANCES SHOHN HEREON ARE IN FEET. I I. O~ER/APPLICANT , RON ALD V . BA YEK RON ALD V. BAl'EK, ..JR 21':>33 <! PRESIDENT AVENUE HARBOR C ITY, CA '10110 12. SKAOIT c.ot.IITTY ASSESSOR'S PARC-EL IVMBERS P-32011 13. PROPERTY ZON IN6• RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY D ISTRIC.T (R-1) MINll"IUM LOT Af<fA = 15POO SG. FT. MJNll-11J1'1 SETBACKS, STREET= 20 FEET (HOUSE) 25 FEET (GARAGE) REAR YARD = 20 FEET IN TERIOR SIDE YARD • 10 FEET S IDE YARD ALON6 STREBT ~ 20 FEET 14. WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF ANAGORTE5 15. 5EtiA8E DISPOSAL, C.iTY OF ANAGORTE5 lb. STORM DRAINAef, C.ITY OF ANACORTES 11 . C.ONTOUR INTERVAL• 2-FOOT lb . DATU-f PER PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS AJD l'I. TRACT "Y" 15 FOR 5TORM DRAINAISE P\JR.POSE AND 15 TO BE OlrlNED ANO MAINTAINED BY THE C ITY OF ANAc.ORTE5 .AJ::>JO I NI~ ~l'"e!llt'N" Ol"INl:"6 P-520f!>O AND P-3.20bl RONALD 5AYEK S R AND RONALD BAYEK ..JR 2b33'l PRESIDENT AVE HARBOR C ITY, G A '10101 P -3208'2 6ARY AND CARRIE NOL.LAM 4318' H AVE ANACORTES, WA '18'221 P-32116 .JAMES AND BETTY TARTA5 4402 HAVE ANACORTES, HA q,e,221 P-124002 ...ENNINGS ReVOC.ABLE TRUST l.!Wl ORCHARD PLAC.E ANACORT!:S, HA 'lb221 P-12400 1 .JOHN AND MARLA HOVEY 1"105 ORC.HARD PLAGE ANACORTES, HA <!1:}221 P-124000 Leo ANACORTES LLC. 504 E. F A IRHAVEN AVE euRL IN.sTON, """' <18233 P -124003 eERALDAND 60NNIE BOHER5 4415 ORGHARDS AVE ANACORTES, WA '18-221 P-124004 MICHAEL AND K IMBERLY LATSHA 4415 ORCHARDS AVE ANAC.ORTE!>, HA "18221 P-124005 CARTIJS F INANCIAL C.ORP C/O OLD REPUBLIC. RELOC.A TIOIN SERVIC.ES 1000 SURNETI AVE. SIJITE 330 C.ONCORD, C.A <14520 P -124006 TERRILL VELIN 441'1 ORCHARDS AVE ANACORTES, HA "lb22t P-12404 4 THE 0Rc.HARD5 PUD HOA P .0. BOX 16S3 ANAC.ORTES, HA "lb221 I.OT AiiteA A.Ne:> ~S INl"O"-MATIO N LOT I lb ,<!63 SG. FT. O.~ ACRES C.t£RRY C:,OURT LOT 2 11.411 SG. FT. 0.40 AC-RE5 C.HERRY COURT LOT 3 16Pb2 SG. FT. 038 AC.RES C.HERRY COURT LOT 4 20,9<!2 SQ. FT. 0.41 AC.RES C HERRY COURT LOT 5 23,412 SQ. FT. 0.55 ACRES CHERRY C.OVRT LOT 6 15,o41 SG. FT. 035 AC.RES C.HeRRY COURT TRAC.T "'(" 12,624 SQ. FT. 0.2'l AC.RES CHERRY COURT RIGHT OF HAY 12,l2b SG. FT. 0.2"1 Ac.RES SH~ ~ Cf(-4 PATE • ,.;~no C:.IT"r Clf' ~TE.S ~T ~T NO. ~j....:20:20- ~~ IN A POtltTION 01'" T~ !Se 1/4 OI" Tte $).'( 1/4 OP' !Se'-Tlc:>N ~. T. !3S N., R . I I!., 1-"l.M. &l<.ASIT '-CUN'TY, ~INISTON l'"Ollt1 MNAl.O V. SA"l"ei< ANP JltONAL.c:> V. BAY!!!<: Jiit. Fe. Pe. IL 155ER 4 ASSOC.IA TES, PLLC. l5CAU:• MERIDIAN. ASSlM:D I~~~ ~~+4211-0WB,--.-l-'1--130--SP--t / I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I :i:1 i.~ llil"' !... ~ 11\1 I~ 1< I~ i I I I I I ' I ' I I I I ) ,/ TRAIL ~ "' §~ <-~~ ~ . ~~ ,_ < < ~ l"ARK/CffN P-124044 LOT 23 P-124006 LOT Z2 P-124005 LOT 16 P-124000 P-124001 LOT 17 LOT 18 .44' S.. ~IN!: OF 1HE N. ;?;q' OF THE 5E 1/4 OF THE 5H 1/-4 ASPl!Al.T P-32135 L07 !!) P-124001 .25 R.05 A.F. NO. bl052b002!; ~211b so 100 ISO TOE EX IST INe CONDITIONS MAP I SCALE: 1• = 50' P-32135 41 !$T ST MON'T INC.AS!: -----~~ 0.14'$,A.NP 0.14W Of C."'1£ I \ OF C.ALC. I/lb ~t- N ~ IN A POl'ilTION Of" THI!! se 1/4 ora T+e ew 1/4 ora 5l!C:.TION .:2$, T. l3 N., lit. I I:., Jli.M. $KA61T '-CUNT"t', ~SHIN6Tc::>N DATE1 4/01!>/'20 f"Ot'il: Rc:;>NAl...1:) Y. BA"l'l!K ANO ~NAU:> Y. eA"l'l!K .JR. re. P61 LISSER 4 ASSOC.IA TES, PLLC. SG.AU:• 1°2 W' MERIDIAN•~ ~~ c.oH!M..~~---2 0He1 l'l-1;,o SP I I I I I I I I . I I I I I ;cl~ a;, . ~I ~ I I~ ii I I I I I I I I I I I ) ,! /' lRAIL NM Cl Q ~ ""' G5 lOT 2J P-124006 ~ i~ ~~ ~~ LOT 22 l5 ~ P-124005 ~ LOT 21 P-124004 LOl 20 P-124003 LOT 15 Dfl.T ... l'w:. &1~'24' 3!;:15' "ll>'31~' 42.95' l'IO"l-4'-0' 122~1 20·4~· l&.o<l' "'"-4'1'0b" 26.l>'l' ,1 I· LOT s.t ~AVI!. _ _,,,/ --------------~ I ~ I v _I !." ~I % ;a: I I I I I 14:;,01· l.OT2 n.4<1 S<J,.lt. 0.4 N.re<,. l!l'l.o.2' lb ' IMeR:ES&, EORE55 NlD llT1UTH:5 e$H'T TO ClfNEFIT LOT 3 LOT 3 1~.p2..,,,~!t. I 10· PRIVATE J'-r:>IQAIHA6E CA5et'll:ll'J: I 2 $. LUE OF TH: N. 15<1' OF 1liE 5e' 1/4 Of' Tl-if SH 114 I I I . I I I I I I I I ~·-<j:i ~ c.,* ~ ~r .!t• ~1 Ii ~ TRACT'Y' § ~ 12,1>24 ~.It. ll' D.3 Aue . b{ P-320e>O II' N; v ...,. ~ !'I ~ ~ ;i % [!~~·l~~H'."~'e~~. (f'OF:l'ION N ITHIN ~T PLAT TO BE RELIHGl!l~D) "'""°"''°'"' -------------------------------------I ~ \ f~oei2~€ T22'.2"7i·--1 8 '-J='----i I L =· S TORH ANO I 0 ! IJTILIT IES E!>M'T I 2 I 18 :t I 1.,. ;,. f) I (I !'I LOT5 : f 2'1;142 5q.ft. I o/I 0:5 AU¢!. I P-32QJ}2 .1-~~~~~~~~200~.oo~·~~~~_J~.j_~m__J !"I ~ z I I 10' PRIVATE :().1~~_.._,._._:r,;;,;~----... 2l~~~"'""!-l:~~~~~-.L--..1_;~-..J:~ ~~~eE EAS&elT-(lQ n~.-+4' I LOT4 20,3<!2 Sq.fl. 05 ~res . I I ~ : _ l9 :~,., rB ~ I f' I z R05 A.F. NO. t>I052t>0025 P-$2116 Q !S ~ ffi ~----------1-----1,,..=· 'I \) ----------l«Ax---------~ 10'1'52'05"H P -124000 P-124001 P -32135 LOT 19 LOT 17 LOT 18 HCPE P -124001 0 25 50 100 150 RllDtLIS 2§.00' :l()l'ltl' 50.00' SCALE• I"" 50' !I0.00' !I0,00' DEVELOPED CONDIT IONS 1V1AP P-32135 ~11~1~~~ 36 '""&. 20lq SH!l!T o4 ~ 4 DA'fe. 410&/20 GIT"r' Of' ~1eS ~T ~T NO. ~-.:Z~O- SURve'T" IN A PORTION Cf' ~ $e 1/4 Cf' THI! 5Jlll 1/4 or' $eC:.TION ;25, T. 35 N., lit. I ~ .. l"l.M. SKASIT GCUNT"!', ~eHINeTON l"OR, RONAl.D V. 6A~ ANP f'ONAl.c:> V. eA"l"e)( .Jiil. Fe. P6. LISSER 4 ASSOCIATES, f'LLC, SCALE· 1·#~· t-t:RIOIAN.. ~ ~~~ WIEU.~~ DHS· 1<1-190 SP APPENDIX 2 -Soils Anaylsis (Volume 1, Chapter 3 .1.1) Geotechnical Report for Cherry Court by Geotest Engineers dated February 26th, 2020 Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 Cherry Court SFR Development Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Prepared For: Landed Gentry Homes and Communities 504 E. Fairhaven Ave. Burlington, WA Attn: Anna Nelson l.888 251 !>n6 T ~--- February 26, 2020 Project No. 19-0882 Landed Gentry Homes and Communities 504 E. Fairhaven Avenue Burlington, WA 98233 Attention: Anna Nelson Land Development Project Manager Regarding: Final Geotechnical Engineering Report Cherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, Washington Dear Ms. Nelson: 1.888.251 SVE> Bellingham Ar!ington I Oak Ha rbor v;,vN.geotest-inc.com As requested, Geo Test Services, Inc. (Geo Test) is pleased to submit the following report summarizing the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Cherry Court Single-Family Residence (SFR) Development, located along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). This report has been prepared in general accordance with the terms and conditions established in our services agreement dated December 10, 2019 and authorized °by Mr. Brian Gentry. We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward to assisting you during the construction phase. Should you have any further questions regarding the information contained within the report, or if we may be of service in other regards, please contact the undersigned. Respectfu I ly, Geolest Services, Inc. Zachary G. Click Zach Click, LG. Staff Geologist Enclosure: Final Geotechnical Report Small Business Enterprise (SBE) King County Small Contractor or Supplier (SCS) Joe Schmidt, P.E. Project Geotechnical Engineer ---· ------------· T TABLE OF CONTENTS l.888.251.b276 Bellingham! Arlington j Oak Harbor wwvv.geotest :nccom PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ..................................................................................................... l PROJECT DESCRIPTION .•...•.....•...•...•...•...•..•...•...•..•...••...•................•..•...•...•..•........•..•...•....•..•..•........•. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ...••...••..••...•••...•..••...•...•.••..••..••.••...••...••...•.....•....•...•...•..........••...•..••..••.........••...•...•• 1 Surface Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 1 Subsurface Soil Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 2 General Geologic Conditions .................................................................................................................... 3 Web Soil Survey ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................ 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS •••••••..••••...•••••...••..••••..••..••.••...•...••••••....••....••.•••..••..•••••..•••..•.•••...••..••.•••..•..•••.••... 5 Seismic Hazard ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Liquefaction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Slope and Erosion ..................................................................................................................................... 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................... 7 Site Preparation and Earthwork ............................................................................................................... 7 Fill and Compaction .................................................................................................................................. 8 Reuse of On-Site Soil ............................................................................................................................ 8 Import Structural Fill ............................................................................................................................ 9 Backfill and Compaction ...................................................................................................................... 9 Wet Weather Earthwork .......................................................................................................................... 9 Seismic Design Considerations ............................................................................................................... 10 Foundation Support ............................................................................................................................... 10 Allowable Bearing Capacity ............................................................................................................... 11 Foundation Settlement ...................................................................................................................... 11 Floor Support ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Foundation and Site Drainage ................................................................................................................ 12 Resistance to Lateral Loads .................................................................................................................... 13 Temporary and Permanent Slopes ........................................................................................................ 14 Utilities ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ........................................................................................................... 15 Flexible Pavement Sections -Light Duty ........................................................................................... 15 Flexible Pavement Sections -Heavy Duty ......................................................................................... 16 Concrete Sidewalks and Hardscapes ................................................................................................. 16 Sm<lll Business Enterprise (SBE} King County Small Contractor or Supplier (SCS) T 1.888.2515276 l3el 111~~·l 'arn f Arlington I Oak harbor .... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~~- Storm water Infiltration Po t ential. .......................................................................................................... 16 Stormwater Treatm ent ...................................................................................................................... 16 Geotec hnical Consultat ion and Construction Monitoring ..................................................................... 17 USE OF THIS REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 18 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 19 ---·--·-··-·--- --·--------·--·---·-·-·-··--------- Small Business Enterprise (SBE) King County Small Contractor or Supplier (SCS) Geo Test Services, Inc. February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes "--~-- PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of this evaluation is to establish general subsurface conditions beneath the site from which conclusions and recommendations pertaining to project design can be formulated. Our scope of services includes the following tasks: • Exploration of soil and groundwater conditions underlying the site by advancing 6 test pits with a client provided excavator to evaluate subsurface conditions. • Laboratory testing on representative samples to classify and evaluate the engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. • To provide a written report containing a description of subsurface conditions, exploration logs, findings and recommendations pertaining to site preparation and earthwork, fill and compaction, seismic design, foundation recommendations, concrete slab-on-grade construction, foundation and site drainage, utilities, temporary and permanent slopes, an assessment of on-site infiltration feasibility and stormwater pollutant treatment, geotechnical consultation, and construction monitoring. PROJECT DESCRIPTION GeoTest understands that there are plans to develop 7 lots along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington with single-family residences. New construction will likely consist of wood-framed residences, on-grade parking and associated drive lanes. Building·loads are anticipated to be light and supported by conventional foundations. SITE CONDITIONS This section includes a description of the general surface and subsurface conditions observed at the project site during the time of our field investigation. Interpretations of site conditions are based on the results and review of available information, site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, and previous experience in the project vicinity. Surface Conditions The subject property is approximately 3.4 acres and L-shaped . The property is generally bordered to the north by Cherry Lane, to the south by Orchard Place, to the west by Orchard Avenue and to the east by residential and livestock-purposed properties. The site is relatively level but slopes gently to the northeast. Site vegetation consists of short grass covering with sporadic trees located at the perimeter of the property. The site is currently occupied by a series of electric 1 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development , Anacortes ---- February 26, 2020 Geo Test Project No. 19-0882 fences and gates utilized for livestock which reside on the property. No surface water was observed during our site visit on December 18, 2019. Image 1. View of the excavation process at test pit II (TP-11) showing the typical overall site conditions. Subsurface Soil Conditions Subsurface conditions were explored by advancing 6 test pits (TP-1 through TP-6) with a client provided excavator and operator on December 18, 2019. The explorations were advanced to depths of between 9 and 10 feet below ground surface (BGS). Approximate locations of these explorations have been plotted on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2). The on-site near surface soils generally consisted of approximately 1 foot or less of topsoil, underlain by approximately 2 to 3 feet of a dense, brown, slightly gravelly, silty sand, interpreted as weathered glacial till. At approximately 3 to 4 feet BGS the soils grade to a very dense, gray gravelly, silty sand. GeoTest interprets these soils to be unweathered glacial till. Within test pit 1 (TP-1), fill was observed overlying undisturbed glacial till. This test pit was performed on a soil mound at the southwestern corner of the project site. GeoTest interprets 2 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 the fill at this location to be indicative of native borrow fill, likely from past construction activities in the immediate vicinity, consisting of previously excavated, disturbed glacial till. More detailed logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the exploration locations are presented in the attached Test Pit Logs (Figures 5 through 7) at the end of this report. Image 2. View of test pit 3 (TP-3) showing the typical subgrade soil profile for the project site. General Geologic Conditions General geologic conditions at the site are mapped as Pleistocene aged Vashon Stade glacial till within the northwest portion of the site and advance outwash deposits within the southeast portion of the site (Pessl, et. al, 1989). Glacial till consists of nonstratified, dense to very dense diamicton consisting of clay, silt, sand, and gravel in various proportions, with scattered cobbles 3 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ~--- February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 and boulders; and rare lenses of sand or gravel indicating subglacial meltwater processes during deposition. Advance outwash deposits typically consist of sand, gravel, silt and clay deposited by meltwater flowing from the advancing ice margin of the Puget lobe of Vashon age. Advance outwash deposits are typically moderate to well·sorted and distinctly stratified. The subsurface soils encountered in our explorations underlying the site topsoil and uncontrolled fill soils appear to consistent with the mapped glacial till deposits. No soils indicative of advance outwash deposits were encountered within our explorations. Web Soil Survey According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey website, two relevant soil units are present on the subject property and vicinity. Please reference Table 1 below for general characteristics. The mapped soils on the property consist of Unit 18 and Unit 19-Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes and Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 percent slopes. Both units can be prone to poor drainage and wetness based on their land capability classification ranking of 4w by the USDA. Although the susceptibility to erosion rating of 0.24 is considered moderate by the USDA scale, it is Geo Test's opinion that due to the relatively flat topography, the project site presents a low vulnerability to sheet and rill erosion. . . Table 1 USDA NRCS Soil Classifications Map Unit 18 19 Symj)o.I Map Unit Name Bow gravelly loam, dry, Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes 3 to 8 percent slopes General Western % of the site Eastern % of the site Location Gravelly ashy loam over Gravelly ashy loam over Soil Description very gravelly ashy loam very gravelly ashy loam over clay loam over silty over clay loam over silty clay clay Landform Hillslopes, terraces Hillslopes, terraces Volcanic ash, Volcanic ash, Parent Material glaciolacustrine glaciolacustrine deposits, and glacial drift deposits, and glacial drift Land Capability 4w 4w Classification Erosion K Factor, 0.24 0.24 Whole Soil Values of the erosion factor "K" range from 0.02 to 0.69; the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. Soils found within the project vicinity 4 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ---~ February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 could be susceptible to erosion based on their rating, but their vulnerability to sheet and rill erosion are considered low based on slope inclination. Additional commentary on potential geologic hazards follows herein. Groundwater Slight Groundwater seepage was observed at depths of approximately 1.5 to 4 feet below the existing ground surface within test pits TP-3, TP-4 and TP-6 at the time of our explorations. No groundwater seepage was observed within the remaining explorations. The groundwater was noted as a slight seep that entered the excavation from the sidewall. The groundwater seepage observed during our explorations is not indicative of a regional groundwater table or aquifer and no indications of a regional groundwater table or aquifer were observed within our subsurface explorations. The slight seepage observed within the explorations is indicative of perched, laterally flowing groundwater conditions. laterally flowing groundwater typically develops when relatively permeable soil is underlain by more dense and/or less permeable soil. The depositional pattern of these soils is such that the looser or more granular soils allow water to pass through it, only to be restricted once it encounters the denser or siltier soils at depth. It should be noted that interf!ow (the lateral movement of perched groundwater) likely exists locally on top of the hard glacial till soils where groundwater migrates horizontally down grade perched upon a very dense restrictive soil layer. The groundwater conditions reported on the exploration logs are for the specific locations and dates indicated, and therefore may not be indicative of other locations and/or times. Groundwater levels are variable and groundwater conditions will fluctuate depending on local subsurface conditions, precipitation, and changes in on-site and off-site use. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Seismic Hazard The Pacific Northwest region is seismically active. large Cascadia subduction zone earthquakes with possible magnitudes of 8 or 9 could produce ground shaking events with the potential to significantly impact the region. Cascadia subduction zone earthquakes have occurred 6 times in the last 3,500 years with the most recent taking place in 1700, approximately 300 years ago. They have been determined to have an average reoccurrence interval of approximately 300 to 700 years. The project site is classified as a potential seismic hazard per Anacortes Municipal Code (AMC) Section 17. 70.190( C} because the area proposed for development is at risk of earthquake induced ground shaking. 5 Geo Test Services, Inc. February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ---- The project location is mapped by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources on line Geologic Information Portal as Seismic Site Class D. The International Building Code addresses design standards for new construction in this seismic design category. Incorporation of these mitigations into project design is the responsibility of the structural engineer. Refer to the Seismic Design Considerations section of this report for additional information. Liquefaction Liquefaction is defined as a significant rise in pore water pressure within a soil mass caused by earthquake-induced cyclic shaking. The shear strength of liquefiable soils is reduced during large and/or long duration earthquakes as the soil consistency approaches that of semi-solid slurry. Liquefaction can result in significant and widespread structural damage if not properly mitigated. Deposits of loose, granular soil below the groundwater table are most susceptible to liquefaction. Damage caused by foundation rotation, lateral spreading, and other ground movements can results from soil liquefaction. The subject site is mapped (Palmer et al. 2004) as having a liquefaction susceptibility of "very low". However, this map only provides an estimate of the likelihood that soil will liquefy as a result of earthquake shaking and is meant as a general guide to delineate areas prone to liquefaction. Based on our field explorations in which dense to very dense, gravelly and silty sands (glacial till) were encountered and only localized, slight groundwater seepage was observed , it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions are at a very low risk of liquefaction. Therefore, no specific liquefaction mitigations are recommended for this project. Slope and Erosion Due to the relatively flat nature of the project site, GeoTest does not anticipate any slope or erosion hazards as defined by the AMC. Thus, no specific erosion mitigations are recommended for this project. However, the project site is classified as an erosion hazard p er AMC 17.70.190(A} due to being classified as a "moderate" erosion hazard by the USDA NRCS. The following recommendations are best practices intended to prevent excessive erosion from occurring: • All clearing and grading activities for future residence construction will need to incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion control in compliance with current City of Anacortes codes and standards. • We recommend that appropriate silt fencing be incorporated into the construction plan for erosion control. • We recommend that onsite BMP's be implemented during construct ion . Areas of native vegetation should be left in p lace and could also be enhanced by adding additional native 6 GeoTest Services, Inc. February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19--0882 ==-------~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes "----~ plant species and/or other vegetation enhancements. • Removal of vegetation and trees without proper mitigation may increase the risk of failure for the surficial soils during periods of wet weather. Planting additional brush and vegetation wi thin the subject site and in areas disturbed by excavation activities will help maintain near surface slope stability by providing a stable root base within the near surface soils. • Proper drainage controls have a significant effect on erosion. • All areas disturbed by construction practices should be vegetated or otherwise protected to limit the potential for erosion as soon as practical during and after construction. Areas requiring immed iate protection from the effects of erosion should be covered with either plastic, mulch or erosion control netting/blankets. Areas requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved grass seed mixture, hydroseeded with an approved seed-mulch-fertilizer mixture or landscaped with a suitable planting design. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the evaluation of the data collected during this investigation, it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions at the site are suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations contained herein are incorporated into the project design. Based on our explorations we anticipate that on average about 12 inches of topsoil will need to be removed from across the site to reach suitable native soils. Localized stripping depths will increase in the area surrounding test pit TP-1 due to existing uncontrolled fill soils. In this area we anticipate that up to approximately 5.5 feet of topsoil and uncontrolled fill soils will need to be removed to reach undisturbed native soils. On-site stormwater infiltration through traditional means will not be feasible due to the highly compact condition of the native unweathered glacial till soils. However, a limited amount of infiltration may be achieved th rough dispersion or other similar methods. It is our understanding, based on conversations with Ravnik and Associates, that a curtain drain will be installed on the along the western border of the site to intercept offsite groundwater and a stormwater retention pond is planned for the northeast corner of the property. Additionally, the project will utilize roof drain dispersion. Site Preparation and Earthwork The portions of the site proposed for foundation(s), floor slabs, pavement and/or sidewalks development should be prepared by removing existing fill, topsoil, deleterious material and significant accumulations of organics. Prior to p lace ment of any foundation elements or structural fill, the exposed subgrade under all areas to be occupied by soil-supported floor slabs, spread, or continuous foundations should be recompacted to a firm and unyielding condition. Verification of compaction can be accomplish ed through proof rolling with a loaded dump truck, 7 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ----~ February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 large self-propelled vibrating roller, or similar piece of equipment applicable to the size of the excavation. The purpose of this effort is to identify loose or soft soil deposits so that, if feasible, the soil distributed during site work can be recompacted. Proof rolling should be carefully observed by qualified geotechnical personnel. Areas exhibiting significant deflection, pumping, or over-saturation that cannot be readily compacted should be overexcavated to firm soil. Overexcavated areas should be backfilled with compacted granular material placed in accordance with subsequent recommendations for structural fill. During periods of wet weather, proof rolling could damage the exposed subgrade. Under these conditions, qualified geotechnical personnel should observe subgrade conditions to determine if proof rolling is feasible. Proof rolling may not be feasible for certain locations within excavated footings, trench areas, or other difficult access zones when using a full-size dump truck or other large machinery. In this situation, we recommend alternate means of verification such as Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP} testing or soil probe methods be employed to verify suitability of field conditions. Fill and Compaction Structural fill used to obtain final elevations for footings and soil-supported floor slabs must be properly placed and compacted. In most cases, any non-organic, predominantly granular soil may be used for fill material provided the material is properly moisture conditioned prior to placement and compaction, and the specified degree of compaction is obtained. Material containing topsoil, wood, trash, organic content, or construction debris is not suitable for reuse as structural fill and should be properly disposed offsite or placed in nonstructural areas. Soils containing more than approximately S percent fines are considered moisture sensitive and are difficult to compact to a firm and unyielding condition when over the optimum moisture content by more than approximately 2 percent. The optimum moisture content is that which allows the greatest dry density to be achieved at a given level of compactive effort. Reuse of On-Site Soil Due to excessive silt content of the on-site soils, these soils are not recommended for use as structural fill during wet weather/site conditions due to the difficulties associated with moisture conditioning. GeoTest recommends any reuse of the native soils during periods of wet weather/site conditions be limited to landscape and other non-structural areas. Reuse of the on-site native soils may be feasible during the dry summer months, typically July through September, provided that they are properly moisture conditioned and placed within approximately 2 percent of the optimum moisture content determined by ASTM 01557 (Modified Proctor). 8 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 ------ Import Structural Fill GeoTest recommends that imported structural fill consist of clean, well-graded sandy gravel, gravelly sand, or other approved naturally occurring granular material (pit run) with at least 30 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve, or a well-graded crushed rock. Structural fill for dry weather construction may contain up to 10 percent fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve} based on the portion passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. The use of an imported fill having more than 10 percent fines may be feasible, but the use of these soils should generally be reviewed by the design team prior to the start of construction. Imported structural fill with less than S percent fines should be used during wet weather conditions. Due to wet site conditions, soil moisture contents could be high enough that it may be difficult to compact even clean imported select granular fill to a firm and unyielding condition. Soils with an over-optimum moisture content should be scarified and dried back to a suitable moisture content during periods of dry weather or removed and replaced with drier structural fill. Backfill and Compaction Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts. The structural fill must measure 8 to 10 inches in loose thickness and be thoroughly compacted. All structural fill placed under load bearing areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent .of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM 01557. The top of the compacted structural fill should extend outside all foundations and other structural improvements a minimum distance equal to the thickness of the fill. We recommend that compaction be tested after placement of each lift in the fill pad. Wet Weather Earthwork Native glacial till soils are particularly susceptible to degradation during wet weather. As a result, it may be difficult to control the moisture content of site soils during the wet season. If construction takes place during wet weather, GeoTest recommends that structural fill consist of imported, clean, well-graded sandy gravel or gravelly sand with low fines content as described above. If fill is to be placed or earthwork is to be performed in wet conditions, the contractor may reduce soil disturbance by: • Limiting the size of areas that are stripped of topsoil and left exposed • Accomplishing earthwork in small sections • Limiting construction traffic over unprotected soil • Sloping excavated surfaces to promote runoff • Limiting the size and type of construction equipment used • Providing gravel 'working mats' over areas of prepared subgrade • Removing wet surficial soil prior to commencing fill placement each day 9 GeoTest Services, Inc . February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ~--- • Sealing the exposed ground surface by rolling with a smooth drum compactor or rubber- tired roller at the end of each working day • Providing up-gradient perimeter ditches or low earthen berms and using temporary sumps to collect runoff and prevent water from ponding and damaging exposed subgrades Seismic Design Considerations The Pacific Northwest is seismically active, and the site could be subject to movement from a moderate or major earthquake. Consequently, moderate levels of seismic shaking should be accounted for during the design life of the project, and the proposed structure should be designed to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology. For structures designed using the seismic provisions of the 2018 International Building Code, the very dense/hard silty sand/sandy silt soils underlying the site within the upper 100 feet is classified as Site Class D, according to ASCE 7-16. The structural engineer should select the appropriate design response spectrum based on Site Class D soil and the geographical location of the proposed construction. Foundation Support Continuous or isolated spread footings founded on proof-rolled, undisturbed, stiff/dense native soils or on properly compacted structural fill placed directly over undisturbed native soil can provide foundation support for the proposed improvements. We recommend that qualified geotechnical personnel confirm that suitable bearing conditions have been reached prior to placement of structural fill or foundation formwork. To provide proper support, Geo Test recommends that existing topsoil, uncontrolled fill, and/or loose/soft, upper portions of the native soil be removed from beneath the building foundation area(s) or be replaced with properly compacted structural fill as described in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Localized overexcavation, if necessary, can be backfilled to the design footing elevation with structural fill or controlled density fill (CDF), or foundations may be extended to bear on undisturbed native soil. In areas requiring overexcavation to competent native soil, the limits of the overexcavation should extend laterally beyond the edge of each side of the footing a distance equal to the depth of the excavation below the base of the footing, if structural fill is used. If CDF is used to backfill the overexcavation, the limits of the overexcavation need only extend a nominal distance beyond the width of the footing. In addition, GeoTest recommends that foundation elements for the proposed structure(s) bear entirely on similar soil conditions to help prevent differential settlement from occurring. 10 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 ~-:-..... 1--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Continuous and isolated spread footings should be founded 18 inches, minimum, below the lowest adjacent final grade for freeze/thaw protection. The footings should be sized in accordance with the structural engineer's prescribed design criteria and seismic considerations. Allowable Bearing Capacity Assuming the above foundation support criteria are satisfied, continuous or isolated spread footings founded directly on stiff /dense native soils or on compacted structural fill placed directly over undisturbed native soils may be proportioned using a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf}. The "net allowable bearing pressure" refers to the pressure that can be imposed on the soil at foundation level. This pressure includes all dead loads, live loads, the weight of the footing, and any backfill placed above the footing. The net allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for transient wind or seismic loads. Foundation Settlement Settlement of shallow foundations depends on foundation size and bearing pressure, as well as the strength and compressibility characteristics of the underlying soil. If construction is accomplished as recommended and at the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure, GeoTest estimates the total settlement of building foundations to be less than one inch. Differential settlement between two adjacent load-bearing components supported on competent soil is estimated to be less than one half the total settlement. Floor Support Conventional slab-on-grade floor construction is feasible for the planned site improvements. Floor slabs may be supported on properly prepared native subgrade or on properly placed and compacted structural fill placed over properly prepared native soil. Prior to placement of the structural fill, the native soil should be proof-rolled or otherwise verified as recommended in the Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this report. A Subgrade Modulus (k} of 300 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for the native glacial till or structural fill overlying native soils is recommended for use in design of concrete slab elements. These values are assuming site preparations including removal of existing topsoil and any uncontrolled fill (if encountered) to native soil and potential replacement with imported structural fill prior to slab installation. For proper slab support, GeoTest recommends that interior concrete slab-on-grade floors be underlain with at least 6 inches of clean, compacted, free-draining gravel. The gravel should contain less than 3 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis 11 Geo Test Service s, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes .__ __ _ February 26 , 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 of that portion passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve). The purpose of this gravel layer is to provide uniform support for the slab, provide a capillary break, and act as a drainage layer. To help reduce the potential for water vapor migration through floor slabs, a continuous 10 to 15- mil minimum thick polyethylene sheet with tape -sea led joints should be installed below the slab to serve as an impermeable vapor barrier. Th e vapor barrier should be installed and sealed in accordance with the manufacturers instructions . Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade, such as sidewalks, may be supported directly on undisturbed native soil or on properly placed and compacted structural fill; however, long-term performance will be enhanced if exterior slabs are placed on a layer of clean, durable, well-draining granular material. Foundation and Site Drainage Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to the proposed build ing to direct surface water away from the building and toward suitable drainage facilities. Roof drainage should not be introduced into the perimeter footing drains but should be separately discharged directly to the stormwater collection system or similar municipality-approved outlet. Pavement and sidewalk areas, if present, should be sloped and drainage gradients should be maintained to carry surface water away from the building towards an approved stormwater collection system. Surface water should not be allowed to pond and soak into the ground surface near buildings or paved areas during or after construction. Construction excavations should be sloped to drain to sumps where water from seepage, rainfall, and runoff can be collected and pumped to a suitable discharge facility. To reduce the potential for groundwater and surface water to seep into interior spaces, GeoTest recommends that an exterior footing drain system be constructed around the perimeter of new building foundations as shown in the Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section (Figure 3) of this report. The drain should consist of a perforated pipe measuring 4 inches in diameter at minimum, surrounded by at least 12 inches of filtering media. The pipe should be sloped to carry water to an approved collection system. The filtering media may consist of open-graded drain rock wrapped i n a nonwoven geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 140N or industry equivalent. For foundations supporting retaining walls, drainage backfill should be carried up the back of the wall and be at least 12 inches wide. The drainage backfill should extend from the foundation drain to within approximately 1 foot of the finished grade and consist of open-graded drain rock containing less than 3 percent fines by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve). The invert of the footing drain pipe should be placed at approximately the same elevation as the bottom of the footing or 12 inches below the adjacent floor slab grade, whichever is deeper, so that water will be contained. This process prevents 12 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ---~ February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 water from seeping through walls or floor slabs. The drain system should include cleanouts to allow for periodic maintenance and inspection. Resistance to Lateral Loads The lateral earth pressures that develop against retaining walls will depend on the method of backfill placement, degree of compaction, slope of backfill, type of backfill material, provisions for drainage, magnitude and location of any adjacent surcharge loads, and the degree to which the wall can yield laterally during or after placement of backfill. If the wall is allowed to rotate or yield so the top of the wall moves an amount equal to or greater than about 0.001 to 0.002 times its height {a yielding wall}, the soil pressure exerted comprises the active soil pressure. When a wall is restrained against lateral movement or tilting (a nonyielding wall), the soil pressure exerted comprises the at rest soil pressure. Wall restraint may develop if a rigid structural network is constructed prior to backfilling or if the wall is inherently stiff. Geo Test recommends that yielding walls under drained conditions be designed for an equivalent fluid density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf}, for structural fill and undisturbed native glacial till in active soil conditions. Nonyielding walls under drained conditions should be designed for an equivalent fluid density of SS pcf, for structural fill and undisturbed glacial till in at-rest conditions. Design of walls should include appropriate lateral pressures caused by surcharge loads located within a horizontal distance equal to or less than the height of the wall. For uniform surcharge pressures, a uniformly distributed lateral pressure equal to 35 percent and SO percent of the vertical surcharge pressure should be added to the lateral soil pressures for yielding and nonyielding walls, respectively. For structures designed using the seismic design provisions of the 2018 International Building Code, GeoTest recommends that retaining walls include a seismic surcharge in addition to the equivalent fluid densities presented above. We recommend that a seismic surcharge of approximately 8*H (where H is the height of the wall in feet) be used for design purposes. The seismic surcharge should be modeled as a rectangular distribution with the resultant applied at the midpoint of the wall. Passive earth pressures developed against the sides of building foundations, in conjunction with friction developed between the base of the footings and the supporting subgrade, will resist lateral loads transmitted from the structure to its foundation. For design purposes, the passive resistance of well-compacted fill placed against the sides of foundations is equivalent to a fluid with a density of 300 pounds per cubic foot. The recommended value includes a safety factor of about 1.5 and is based on the assumption that the ground surface adjacent to the structure is level in the direction of movement for a distance equal to or greater than twice the embedment depth. The recommended value also assumes drained conditions that will prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure in the compacted fill. Retaining walls should include a drain system constructed in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the Foundation and 13 Geo Test Serv i ces, Inc. Che r ry Court SFR Development, Anacortes "---~=;..- February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Site Drainage section of this report. In design computations, the upper 12 inches of passive resistance should be neglected if the soil is not covered by floor slabs or pavement. If future plans call for the removal of the soil providing resistance, the passive resistance should not be considered. An allowable coefficient of base friction of 0.35, applied to vertical dead loads only, may be used between the underlying imported granular structural fill and the base of the footing. If passive and frictional resistance are considered together, one half the recommended passive soil resistance value should be used since larger strains are required to mobilize the passive soil resistance as compared to frictional resistance . A safety factor of about 1.5 is included in the base friction design value. Geo Test does not recommend increasing the coefficient of friction to resist seismic or wind loads. Temporary and Permanent Slopes The contractor is responsible for construction slope configurations and maintaining safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability. All applicable local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open cuts should be monitored during and after excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability is detected, the contractor should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring. Temporary excavations in excess of 4 feet should be shored or sloped in accordance with Safety Standards for Construction Work Part N, WAC 296-155-66403. The dense to very dense glacial till encountered at the project site is classified as a Type A soil according to WAC 296-155-66401. Therefore, temporary unsupported excavations and may be sloped as steep as Y.:1 (Horizontal: Vertical). All soils encountered are classified as Type C soil in the presence of groundwater seepage. Flatter slopes or temporary shoring may be required in areas where groundwater flow is present and unstable conditions develop. Temporary slopes and excavations should be protected as soon as possible using appropriate methods to prevent erosion from occurring during periods of wet weather. Geo Test recommends that permanent cut or fill slopes be designed for inclinations of 2H:l V or flatter. Due to the dense to very dense, low permeability soils, permanent cuts or fills used in detention ponds, retention ponds, or earth slopes intended to hold water may be sloped at an inclination of 2H :1 V or flatter. All permanent slopes should be vegetated or otherwise protected to limit the potential for erosion as soon as practical after construction. 14 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ,__, __ _ Utilities .February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Utility trenches must be properly backfilled and compacted to reduce cracking or localized loss of foundation, slab, or pavement support. Excavations for new shallow underground utilities are expected to be placed within very dense glacial till soils. Trench backfill in improved areas (beneath structures, pavements, sidewalks, etc.) should consist of structural fill as defined in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Outside of improved areas, trench backfill may consist of reused native material provided the backfill can be compacted to the project specifications. Trench backfill should be placed and compacted in general accordance with the recommendations presented in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. Surcharge loads on trench support systems due to construction equipment, stockpiled material, and vehicle traffic should be included in the design of any anticipated shoring system. The contractor should implement measures to prevent surface water runoff from entering trenches and excavations. In addition, vibration as a result of construction activity and traffic may cause caving of the trench walls. The contractor is responsible for trench configurations. All applicable local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open cuts should be monitored by the contractor during excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability is detected, the contractor should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring. If groundwater or groundwater seepage is present, and the trench is not properly dewatered, the soil within the trench zone may be prone to caving, channeling, and running. Trench widths may be substantially wider than under dewatered conditions. Pavement Subgrade Preparation Site grading plans should include provisions for sloping of the subgrade soils in proposed pavement areas, so that passive drainage of the pavement section(s) can proceed uninterrupted during the life of the project. Flexible Pavement Sections -Light Duty GeoTest recommends that a minimum pavement section consist of 2.5 inches of Class Yi-inch HMA asphalt above 2 inches of WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3] Crushed Surfacing Top Course {CSTC), overlying 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) meeting criteria of the WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9(3]. Asphalt, CSTC and CSBC sections should be founded on existing firm and unyielding native glacial till or on properly placed and compacted structural fill overlying firm and unyielding native deposits. 15 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ---- Flexible Pavement Sections -Heavy Duty February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 Areas that will be accessed by more heavily loaded vehicles such as semi and garbage trucks, etc., if any, will require a thicker asphalt section and should be designed using a pavement section consisting of 4 inches of Yi-inch HMA above 2 inches of CSTC meeting the WSDOT Standard Specification of 9-03.9[3], overlying 8 inches of WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3] CSBC. Concrete Sidewalks and Hardscapes We anticipate that Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) will be used for walkways and hardscapes. We recommend a concrete sidewalk and hardscape section consisting of 4 inches of PCC surfacing above a minimum of 4 inches of CSTC. It is assumed that sidewalks and hardscape section will be placed over a firm and unyielding subgrade and will be designed by the Structural Engineer. Stormwater Infiltration Potential Due to the elevated fines content and the very dense nature of the glacial till soils, it can be expected that the native soils constitute a restrictive layer as defined by the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, amended 2014. As such, full infiltration through conventional infiltration systems will not be feasible for the project site. It is our understanding that a stormwater detention pond is planned for the northeast corner of the project site. The less dense weathered glacial till have a very limited amount of infiltration capability and are suitable to support low impact development facilities such as dispersion. We understand that a limited amount of stormwater will be managed through roof drain dispersion. Stormwater Treatment Potential stormwater facilities on-site may require some form of pollutant pretreatment with an amended soil prior to on-site infiltration or off site discharge. The reuse of on-site soil is often the most sustainable and cost-effective method for pollutant treatment purposes. Cation exchange capacities, organic contents, and pH of site subsurface soils were also tested to determine possible pollutant treatment suitability. Cation exchange capacity, organic content, and pH tests were performed by Northwest Agricultural Consultants on two soil samples collected from the explorations shown in Table 2. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented in Table 2 below. 16 GeoTest Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes ~~-...... c;i.--. .... 1--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- TABLE 2 Cation Exchange Capacity, Organic Content, and pH Laboratory Test Results Test Pit Sample Geologic cation Exchange Organic ID Depth (ft) Unit Capacity Content(%) pH (meq/100 grams) TP-2 2.0 Weathered 7.4 1.85 6.1 Glacial Till TP-5 0.5 Topsoil 17.7 8.62 5.7 Suitability for onsite pollutant treatment is determined in accordance with SSC-6 of the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Soils with an organic content of greater than or equal to 1 percent and a cation exchange capacity of greater than or equal to 5 meq/100 grams are characterized as suitable for stormwater treatment. Based on the results shown in Table 2, soils within the upper 2 feet are suitable for stormwater treatment. However, low rates of infiltration should be anticipated in the native glacial till soils due to these soils' high silt contents and density. On-site soils can be amended by mixing higher silt content soils or adding mulch (or other admixtures) to elevate the cation exchange capacity and organic contents. On-site amended soil requires additional testing to confirm compliance with ecological regulations. GeoTest is available to perform additional laboratory testing as part of an expanded scope of services if the soil is to be amended. Alternatively, the owner may elect to import amended soils with the desired properties for planned treatment facilities. Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring Geo Test recommends that we be involved in the project design review process. The purpose of the review is to verify that the recommendations presented in this report are understood and incorporated in the design and specifications. We also recommend that geotechnical construction monitoring services be provided. These services should include observation by GeoTest personnel during structural fill placement, compaction activities and subgrade preparation operations to confirm that design subgrade conditions are obtained beneath the areas of improvement. Periodic field density testing should be performed to verify that the appropriate degree of compaction is obtained. The purpose of these services is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations of this report. In the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated before the start of construction, Geo Test Services would be pleased to provide revised recommendations appropriate to the conditions revealed during construction. 17 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19·0882 GeoTest is available to provide a full range of materials testing and special inspection during construction as required by the local building department and the International Building Code. This may include specific construction inspections on materials such as reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, wood framing and structural steel. These services are supported by our fully accredited materials testing laboratory. USE OF THIS REPORT GeoTest Services has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Laned Gentry Homes and Communities and their design consultants for specific application to the design of the proposed Cherry Court SFR Development located along Cherry Lane in Anacortes, Washington. Use of this report by others is at the user's sole risk. This report is not applicable to other site locations. Our services are conducted in accordance with accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. Our site explorations indicate subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated. It is not warranted that these conditions are representative of conditions at other locations and times. The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions to the limited depth and time of our explorations, a geological reconnaissance of the area, and a review of previously published geological information for the site. If variations in subsurface conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those contained within this report, GeoTest should be allowed to review the recommendations and, if necessary, make revisions. If there is a substantial lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions change due to construction operations at or adjacent to the project site, we recommend that we review this report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. The earthwork contractor is responsible to perform all work in conformance with all applicable WISHA/OSHA regulations. GeoTest Services, Inc. is not responsible for job site safety on this project, and this responsibility is specifically disclaimed. Attachments: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figures 5-7 Figures 8-9 Attached Attached Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section Soil Classification System and Key Test Pit Exploration Logs Sieve Analysis CEC, pH and Organic Content Test Results (1 Page) Report Limitations and Guidelines for its Use (4 Pages} 18 Geo Test Services, Inc. Cherry Court SFR Development, Anacortes February 26, 2020 GeoTest Project No. 19-0882 REFERENCES Ba kema n, S., Dan, G ., Howie, D., Killelea, J., La bib, F ., & Ed, 0. (n.d.). 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, as Amend ed in December 2014 (The 2014 SWMMWW) (pp. 1-1042) (United States, Washington State Department of Ecology). City of Anacortes Municipal Code -Geologically Hazardous Areas, Sections 17.70.190-17.70.260 Palmer, et al., 2004. Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Skagit County, Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Open File Report 2004-20. Seismic Design Maps Tool. Structural Engineers Association of California/Office of Statewide Health, Planning and Development (SEAOC/OSHPD), Retrieved December 2019 from https://seismicmaps.org. Pessl , Jr., Fred, Dethier, D.P., Booth, D.B., and Minar, J.P., 1989. Surficial Geologic Mop of the Port Townsend 30-by 60- Minute Quadrangle, Puget Sound Region, Washington. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey. Folio of the Port Townsend Quadrangle, Washington Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Map 1-1198-F. USDA Web Soil Survey. (2017, August 21). Retrieved December 2019, from https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Geologic Information Portal. (n.d.). Retrieved December 2019 from https://geologyportal. dnr. wa .gov/. 19 £!.1111'(,'A'. · hnd 11.fancn> • I ,!.: Atari 1·tm1 1 Mlle GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 7 41 Marine Drive Bell ingha m, WA 98225 phone: (360) 733-7318 fax: (360) 733-7418 Date: 1-13-20 PROJECT LOCATION •t, ~;; ::~. ~ I By: ZC lll'l1 i '!.~ -r""' ~Im 1119 .end i.hrM<t mq Co~ Scale : As Shown VICINITY MAP CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES, WASHINGTON Project 19-0882 Figure 1 ~? : ;1· :r: j: LOT 24 ' LOT 54 ~i ~it r--~;T· ~5 J. ~ .'Y1 1· , LOT 27 , . 1 j' ~L Jl ~ t--f If ~ .. ~ ,t, J_ ), \J • "'' [A I i~~,\~ .• r: i --.;! ... r ~"-'~"":-.. _jj/ A"\. J '<J 1· i ; !1 1-~'"'£l'E;:;-+-~~ ~...)? ..._____ f-\---.. . I . ! ORCtlARD • ,.,VE.. !V I GITY RleHT\oF HA.,.. 8 ' ·LOI 28. :t ~ARK/OPEN' ............. -:..~'">& ..... r·:n~ "":':.i -·:--;,~, ... · ~ ""°"'' r' Po. jill ... ' ! ,_,!!l .,, ___jl . . _,,,. ' Jltl i I L_J D n I I I~ . . ~ LOT 1 LOT 7 ' LOTIJ.llr TP..Q~ PAACl:l (; ! 4: I t _B C.l ~.. J "· ft." A"lo P·.32000 . . t D l I~ 1! LOT 23 '""'°'° J<>"-h ~,~,ma.~ ..... l~ \ \ :.-:.::::=:::. L9 I tt lf f~ I -· ~ ~~ fii rr-1 9 LOT A ~ I ~ ll '~ I ~~mo • ··: -"r-' r-°""" -,·w I .... OT 29 \) i l ,) l ),._ \/ I 08 ..... I ' 'JI. I ()[ . . ! ~ . ~h \ ~ JOZ.JO.e "'""· : -<( 0 ;tlo j ti 8 LOT 2 --~ ..,.,.,..,-·"' -·~•=+ . ;_J I --.. ~1 ~J~ j1 l OT ?.7. ~ ~s TP-2;:-f!. IXJ'' '\ -le ! < l . ii( I Ii LOT B i IF.. I u..11 illl -I ~, ,f.:.f"l:· =~ ' ~ I 0 I· t ~~:n-~ P,o.~ 0 -~·-·-• .... LOT 30 ~ i I 1: -..... l:M'F" P.320&• AJ' llO. '1S06J~ ~I ~ ! ,/ ) I i? J ii 11 ·! LOT 21 • r; I-if I I llC!'!"»"""' . ....t~···.J ---' ......... ,\, 1 ' I ~ -· ~ r l 'OT :.S1 I 9 o.LOT 3 LOT 4 .. LOT 0 ll -, ,,, I I' '-J+ ~ LOT 20 teo;.,,~11. ,f/,n"":!n. ~;i ~~1 •• ~, ~ is ~ ~~ ;. ,~ I ~I ! ~ 2 2 ' ~ . I --·~-~'C/. . . s TP-4 I I ' • '"~ .. ~~· ~~'H 59~· l .... ~ ~-:-:*'..:-~:;;;:fli::;,'~ F~ATE SHARED ClS:UVEl""'"f l -ii i /, PL T OF "THE ORCHARDS PUD' , · ,,_~ 3 . I i LOT 15 ~ LOT 16 1· LOT 17 i LOT 18 I LOT 19 ::1 ~ I~ ~ I : / I I ~ '111 l/1 Z2(;;~~i:ELL:ZJ/07&;,yz~ 777_d,~~ .ii. 10'1"32'0!!~• 3b ' + !,I(> RELIMINARY SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY LANDED GENTRY HOMES AND COMMUNITIES ~4~1 l'A.11!. I' c.'041.EHT MN" lW ,..-~OP 1l'IE" ,., II• c;f' itte. ~yrt. II• Of' J !!e<O"""Zl.J. S l>l, It. I 0:.,"1H. O::ITY.,..~TCS ~""'<!IT C<l<Mn', -·~ON 1'Qfll,~ .. ~ m -.0: ..... i'1)Mii#."4 ~UA'ili~"i.'Cc.-;-.,.,;.::;;·;:.;;;;, ~~~=~~""""'j~..-~~ 5 TP-# =Approximate Test Pit location I I Date: 1•6_20 I By: zc I Scale: As Shown I Project I GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 7 41 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 phone: (360) 733-7318 fax: (360) 733-7418 SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES1 WASHINGTON 19~0882 Figure 2 SHALLOW FOOTINGS WITH INTERIOR SLAB .. QN .. GRADE Drainage Material (Drain Rock or Clea Crushed Rock wl no fines) Notes: r I I I Four Inch DiJmeter, Perforated, Rigid PVC Pip& (Perforations oriented down, wrapped in non-woven g eotextile filter fabric, directed to suitable discharge) Suitable Soil Appropriate Wa terproofing Applied to Exterior of Wall Footings Should be properly buried for frost protection in accordance with International Building Code or local building codes {Typically 18 inches below exterior finished grades) The footing drain will need to be modified from this typical drawing to fit the dimensions of the planned footing and slab configuration Dale: 1-6-20 By: ZC Scale: None Project GEOTEST SERVICES, INC. 741 Mari ne Drive Be llingham , WA 98225 phone: (360) 7 33-7318 fax: (360) 733-7 418 TYPICAL FOOTING & WALL DRAIN SECTION 19-0882 CHERRY COURT SFR DEVELOPMENT CHERRY LANE ANACORTES, WASHINGTON 1-------'I Figure 3 MAJOR DIVISIONS Soil Classification System uses GRAPHIC LETTER SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS11X2> GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOIL (More than 50% cf coarse fraction retained on No . 4 sieve) GRAVEL WITH FINES ~)}~·: ·: { GM (Appreciable amount of ,.,r."'. ~Hoo-. 1.i~l':".~7fi:.t. --G-C-----l fines) ~~ ,.~ . .,, SAND AND SANDY SOIL (More 1han 50% of coarse traction passed through No. 4 sieve) CLEAN SAND (Little or no fines} SAND WITH FINES (Appreciable amount cf fines) SILT AND CLAY (Liquid limit less than 50) S I LT AND CLAY (Liquid Um~ greater than 50) HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL SW SP SM SC I ML CL OL MH CH OH PT GRAPHIC LETTER WeD-graded gravel; graveVsand mixture(s); little or no fines Poorly graded gravel: gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines Silty gravel; gravel/sa nd/silt mixture(s) Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/day mixture(s) Well-graded sand; gravelly send ; ittle or no fines Poorly graded sand; gravelly send; little or no fines Silty sand; sand/silt mixture(s) Clayey sand ; sand/clay mixture(s) Inorganic silt and very fine sand; rock flour; silty or dayey fine sar.d Of clayey slll 'Mth slight plasticity Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly day; sandy clay; silly day; lean day Organi c sill; organic, silty clay of km plasticity I norganic silt; micaoeous or diatomaceoos flne sand Inorganic day of h igh plasticity; fat clay Organic clay of medium to high plasticity: organ ic silt Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content OTHER MATERIALS SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS ...----------------------, PAVEMENT AC or PC Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement ROCK RK Rock (See Rock Classification) WOOD WO Wood. umber, wood chips ~-------------! DEBRIS DB Construction debns, garbage Notes: 1. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Descrtption and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). as outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for £ngineering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487. 2. Soil descrtption terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined as tol ows: Primary Constituent > 50% ·"GRAVEL," "SAND," "SILT," "CLAY," etc. Seoondary Constituents: > 30% and ~ 50% -''very gravely," ''very sandy," "vely silty," etc. > 12% and ~ 30% -"gravelly," "sandy," "silly," etc. Additionat Constituents: > 5% end::: 12% ·"slightly gravelly ," "slightly sandy," "slightly silty," etc. ::: 5% -''trace graveL •"trace sand ," "trace sill ," etc., or not noted . Drilling and Sampling Key Field and Lab Test Data SAMPLE NUMBER & INTERVAL SAMPLER TYPE Code Description Code Description a 3.25-inch O.D., 2..42-lnch 1.0. Spit Spoon pp= 1.0 Pocket Penetrometer. Isl b 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50-inch 1.0. Spit Spoon lV= 0.5 Torvane, tsf c Sample Identification Number .--Reoovery Depth Interval c ShebyTube PIO = 100 Photolooization DetectorVOC screening, ppm 1:1 ] J-Sample Depth Interval d Grab Sample W=10 Moisture Content, % e Other -See text if applicable D= 120 Dry Density, pcf ~ Portion of Sample Retained 1 300·lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop -200 = 60 Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, % for Archive or Analys is 2 140-lb Hammer, SO-inch Drop GS Grain Size -See separate figure ror data 3 Pushed AL Atlerberg Limits • See separate figure for data 4 Other -See text if ap plicebte GT Other Geotechni cal Testing Groundwater CA Chemical Analysis ~ Approximate water elevation at time of drilling (ATO) or on date noled. Groundwater ATO levels can fluctuate due to precipitation , seasonal conditions, and other factOl's. Figure "9' Cherry Court SFR Development Cherry Lane Anacortes, WA Soil Classification System and Key 4 TP-1 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Qj 0 ..c w ..0 0 Excavation Method· Tracked Excavator E Q. E :I_ ~ > ..0 ~ ::z "' ro Vl E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determined QI~ ... ..... u > QI m :E V) .c -1.11 Q. 0 Q. a..., Q. V) R & J Dfrtworks/Z. Click EE E t; "' v Excavated By: cu .'l~ "' QI l'.5 V) 0 V) r-::::> '-0 :.:::: d ,_. LJ ""' SM/ ~Loose, dark brown, damp, si lty SAND with \.Q!:J organics {Topsoil) r Groundwater not encounter ed. ML Med!um stiff, light brown and tan with '-2 =-= d some red/orange staining, damp, very sandy - W= 18 SI LT w ith occasional gravel (Native Borrow :....::: d GS Fill) '-4 -Soil at this location was variegated in color -and grainsize distribution as well as less =-= d dense than was typical within test pits 2 ML _through 6. __,,,- '--6 Hard, gray, damp, gravelly, sligh tly sandy -=-= d W=26 GS SILT (Gla cial Till} =-= d '-8 - =-= d '-10 -... Test P'rt Completed 12/18/19 ... Total Depth ofTest Pit= 9.S ft . ... ,__ 12 - TP-2 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER .... I 0 QI ..c GI .c 0 Excavation Method· Tracked Excavator E a. E :::i_ ~ > .c ~ ::z ... "' VI E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determined Q) ~ ... .... u > QI ,,, :E V) .c -111 Q. 0 Q. a. ..... Q. V'I R & J D lrtworks/Z. Click EE E t: "' u Excavated By: QI ~~ "' QI i!i <ll 0 V) r-::::> ..... 0 .. ) SM/ Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND with ... ~:~ =-= d ~~ t----.... organics {Topsoil) -Groundwater not encountered. SM Dense, brown tran~itloning to tan with >-2 =-= d some red/orange staining, damp, silty SAND - (Weathered Glacial Tiii) =-= d -Rootlets pre.sent to -3• SGS >-4 d W=9 -=-= GS SM Very dense, gray, damp, slightly gravelly to =-= d gravelly, very silty SAND (Glacial Till) >-6 -... =-= d ... =-: d ... '-8 =-: d W= 10 -... GS ... ... ,__ 10 - Test Pit Completed 12/18/19 - Total Depth of Test Pit= 10.0 ft. ,__ 12 - Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpreta tions and are approximate. 2. Refe rence to the text of t his report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. ~T Cherry Court SFR Figure Development Log of Test Pits 5 Cherry Lane .---Anacortes, WA TP-3 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Gi 0 ..0. Ql ..Q ] Excavation Method· Tracked Excavator E a. E :I_ ~ > ~ Zcn "' VI E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determined QI 2: .... -u >-QI "' :.c. VI ..t::. -QI i5.. 0 a o...., a. VI R & J Dirtworks/Z. Click EE E ..... u Excavated By: "' "' Q) ~oi!S "' Q) l5 VI 0 II') I-:J -o ·~ SM/ Loose; dark brown, damp, silty SAND wit h =-= d --. ~. ~ r--.._ organics (Topsoil) .,.,.-- SM Dense, brown transitioning to tan with - -2 =-= d W=lS some red/orange staining, damp, slightlt 5l-Slight sroundwater seepage encountered at-:: GS gravelly, silty SAND (Weathered Glacial ill) 2.S ft. ~ d -Rootlets present to -3· BGS .... . . -4 d -SU~ht seepage and weepholes observed at r -=-= SM .... -2.s and 4 BGS ~ . . .... ::.m.: d W= 11 Very dense, gray, damp, gravelly, slightly -6 GS gravelly, very silty SAND {Glaclal Till) -.... ~ - -s - -10 Test Pit Completed 12/18/19 Total Depth ofTest Pit= 9.5 ft. - -12 - TP-4 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER .. 0 Q) .J:J QJ ..Q 0 Excavation Method· Tracked Excavator E a. E :::i_ ~ >-..0. g Z ro "' VI E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determined Q) 2: Q; .... u > "' 1: VI ..c -QJ ii Q a c..., a. VI R & J D l rtworks/Z. Click EE E ... v Excavated By: .,, "' CIJ ~oi!S "' QI l!i VI 0 VI I-;:) >--0 SM/ Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND w ith =-= d > > OL organics (Topsoil) =-= d W=31 SM Dense, brown transitioning to tan with ~z GS some red/orange staining, damp, slightly '¥-Slight groundwater seepage encountered at -gravelly, silty SAND (Weathered Glacial Till) 2.5 ft. • Rootlets present to -3• SGS -4 =-= d SM -Slisht see~age and weepholes observed at r -~i.s· and 3 BGS t-6 Very dense, gray. damp, gravelly, very silty SAND (Glacial Till) - =-= d t-8 - -10 Test Pit Completed 12/18/19 Total Depth of Test Pit= 9.0 ft. - -12 - Notes : 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference .to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "SOi l Classification Syst em and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. "9' Cherry Court SFR Figure Development Log of Test Pits 6 Cherry Lane . -Anacortes, WA TP-5 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER ..... 0 QI Excavation Method· T rack ed EKcavator .0 Cll .0 0 E 0. E ::I_ ~ > .0 :!:.. z Ill Ill V) E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determ ined QJ ~ ..... ..... -~ > Cll Ill ..c -QI c.. Cl ..c V) .., c....., c. V) R & J Di rtworks/Z .. Click 0. EE E ..., RI u Excavated By: "' QJ ~<>ZS Ill QI <$ V) 0 V) I-::::> -0 SM/ Loose, dark brown, damp, silty SAND w ith =-= d OL orga nics (TopsoH) Groundwater not encountered . -=-= d SM Dense, brown transitioning to tan with - -2 - ~ d W=20 some r ed/oran~e staininr,, damp, slightly - .... :..m: GS gravelly, very si ty SAND Weathered Glaci al - SM nm r -4 =-= d -Rootlets present to ~3' BGS - Very dense, gray, damp, slightly gravelly, W=ll very silty SAND (Glacial Till) -6 ::-.: d -GS -8 -.. f-10 Test Pi t Complet ed 12/18/19 - Total Dept h of Test Pit= 9.0 ft. f-12 - TP-6 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER ... 0 Cll ..0 QJ ..0 0 Excavation Method· Tracked Excav ator E c. E :::i _ ~ > .0 g z Ill 2 V) E Ground Elevation (ft)· Not Determined Q) c: Q; Ill u > ..c -QI c.. 0 1: V) ""' c..., ..., c.. V) R & J Dlrtworks/Z. Click 0. EE E VI RI u Excavat ed By: Cll ~ aZS "' QJ ~ V) 0 VI I-::::> -0 SM/ Loose, dark brow n, damp, silty SAND with =-= d ... ,:i... ,,,,---·.~ ~organics (Topsoil) 'Sl-Slight groundwater seepage encountered at SM Dense, brow n transitioning to tan w ith l .S ft. -2 =-= d some red/orange staining , damp, si lty SAND - .. (Weathered Glacial Till) =-= d W=l7 SM • Root lets present to -3• BGS r ... GS '-4 .. · Slight see~age and weepholes observed at -"1..S' and 2 BGS =-= d Very dense, gray, damp, gravelly, very si lty -6 .. SAN D (Glacial Till) - - -8 =-= d - - -10 Test Pit Completed 12/18/19 -Tota l Depth ofTest Pit= 9.0 ft. - - - -12 - Notes: l . Stratigraphic contacts are based on field i nterpretations and are approximate . 2. Reference to the text of t his report is necessary for a proper under standing of subsu rface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Class.ification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. ~T Cher ry Cou rt SFR F igu re Development Log of Test Pits 7 Cherry Lane -Anacortes, W A U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 IA 112313 3 IL 6 s 10 1416 30 40 50 60 100140200 100 I I I ~ .... II ~ I I I I I~ ~ :~ ,... --.. I?" -.. ~ " ~-~~ "'-. ~ Ii 90 ~r-~ ~ : ~1 \ --........ \.. 80 "\ \ : 70 ~:~ I\ ~\ ~ \ :E .~\ ·2160 ~ ~' \. >-.0 \ \\ .~50 : u. \ \' c ~ ~'I': ~ ~40 \ ~ ' 30 ~ 20 10 : 0 : 100 10 1 0.1 0 .01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters Cobbles Gravel I Sand I Silt or Clay I coarse I fine I coarse medium fine I Point Depth Classification LL PL Pl Cc Cu • TP·1 3.0 VERY SANDY SILT (ML) Ill TP·1 6.5 SLIGHTLY SANDY SILT (Ml) • TP·2 4 .0 SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, VERY SIL TY SAND (SM) * TP·2 8.0 GRAVELLY, VERY SILTY SANO (SM) 0 TP-3 2.0 SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, SILTY SAND (SM) Point Depth 090 06() Dso D30 D10 % .... oarse % i-ine % \Altlrse %MeOIUm %1 ·1ne %Fines Gravel Gravel Sand Sand S.:and • TP-1 3.0 0.416 0.105 0.0 2.1 0.7 6.8 39.1 51.4 Ill TP-1 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 .7 6.8 92.5 ... TP-2 4.0 4.151 0.227 0.148 0 .0 9.6 2 .4 12.0 37.9 38.1 * TP-2 8.0 5.837 0.184 0.113 0.0 11.2 3.0 9.5 34.4 41.8 @ TP-3 2.0 1.476 0.284 0.207 0.083 0.0 5.7 2.4 17.3 46.3 28.2 Cc = 030 2/(Dso * D1 0) To be well graded: 1 <Cc< 3 and Cu = Osof D10 Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW ~T Cherry Court SFR Figure Development Grain Size Test Data 8 Cherry Lane ---Anacortes, WA U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 .1, IA 112 ~ 8 3 § 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 100 I I 1\ M I :--I l"'J ~ II I I I : ~ i::~ t--.~ I, -~ ' 90 .:... -~ -.. rr--. .......... .. ~ ....... ~' \ : r-..... ........ ·~~ '\ .J\ ['.,," 80 ~II ~ ~ ' ~I\ \ '"! ~ ~ 70 : ..:. 1v ' ~ ::E 13[\ \ f 60 h '~\ >-J;I '~ iii .!:50 : \\ u.. "E 4.1 \ ~ ~40 ~· • 30 : : 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters Cobbles I Gravel Sand I Silt or Clay I coarse I fine I coarse medium fine I Point Depth Classification LL PL Pl cc Cu • TP-3 5.5 SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY , VERY SIL TY SAND (S M) Ill TP-4 1.5 GRAV ELLY , VERY SIL TY SAND (SM) ... TP-5 2 .7 VERY SIL TY SAND (SM) * TP-5 6.0 SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY , VERY SIL TY SAND (S M) 0 TP-6 3.3 GRAVELLY, VERY SIL TY SAND (SM) Point Depth Doo Doo Dso Dao D10 %\;Qiilf&e "lo Hne %<.;oarse %Me<11um "lo f ne % Fines r.mvel Gravel ~nti Sand ~nn • TP-3 5.5 5.304 0.237 0.152 0.0 10.5 2 .9 12.1 37.6 36.9 Ill TP-4 1.5 19.1 0.25 0.132 10.2 5.0 4 .2 10.7 27.5 42.3 ... TP-5 2.7 0 .611 0.15 0.101 0.0 0.1 1.5 12.8 43.1 42.5 * TP-5 6.0 1.684 0.186 0.111 0.0 6.9 2 .4 11.1 36.3 43.3 0 TP-6 3.3 5.073 0 .207 0.126 0 .0 10.4 3.4 10.4 34.6 41.2 Cc = 0 30 2/(D60 * D10) To be well graded: 1 < Cc< 3 and Cu = Da/D10 Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW ~T Cherry Court SFR Figure Development Grain Size Test Data 9 Cherry Lane -~ ---Anacortes, WA Northwest Agricultural Consultants 2545 W Falls Avenue Kennewick, WA 99336 509.783.7450 www.nwag.com lab@nwag.com Sample ID TP-2 @2.0' TP-5 @0.5' PAP-Accredited pH Organic Matter 6.1 1.85% 5.7 8.62% Method SM 4500-W B ASTM D2974 GeoTest Services Inc. 741 Marine Drive Bellingham, WA 98225 Report: 50199-1-1 Date: January 6, 2020 Project No: 19-0882 Project Name: Cherry Court SFR Development Cation E><change Capacity 7.4 meq/lOOg 17.7 meq/100g EPA9081 ~--- REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR ITS USE 1 Subsurface Issues may cause construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help: Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects At GeoTest our geotechnical engineers and geologists structure their services to meet specific needs of our clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the need s of an owner, a construction contractor or even another civil eng ineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one -not even you -should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred becau se those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive sum mary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors GeoTest's geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the clients goals, objectives, and risk management preference s; the general nature of the structure involved its size, and configuration; the location of the st ructure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless GeoTest, who conducted the study specifically states otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnica l engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the speci fic site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. 1 llnformation in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geoscie nces(asfe.org) Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an exi sting geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed, for example, from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed construction, • alterations in drainage designs; or • composition of the design team; the passage of time; man-made alterations and construction whether on or adjacent to the site; or by natural alterations and events, such as floods, earthquakes or groundwater fluctuations; or project ownership. Always inform GeoTest's geotechnical engineer of project changes -even minor ones -and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on the findings and conclusions of this report, whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact Geo Test before applying the report to determine if it is still relevant. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis will help determine if the report remains applicable. Most Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions Our site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoTest's engineers and geologists review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly-from those indicated in your report. Retaining Geo Test who developed this report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with anticipated or unanticipated conditions. 2 llnformation in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosclences(asfe.org) A Report's Recommendations are Not Final Do not over-rely on the construction recommendations included In this report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers or geologists develop them principally from judgment and opinion . GeoTest's geotechnical engineers or geologists can finalize their recommendations only by ob se rv ing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. Geo Te st cannot assume responsibi lity or liability for the report's recommendations if our firm does not perform the construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report may be Subject to Misinterpretation Misinterpretation of this report by other de sign team members can result in costly problems. lower that risk by having GeoTest confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report . Also, we suggest reta i n ing Geo Test to review pertinent elements of the design teams plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having GeoTest participate in pre-bid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation . Do not Redraw the Exploration Logs Our geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors of omissions, the logs included in this report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable; but recognizes that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, consider advising the contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with Geo Test and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A pre-bid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a po siti on to give contractors the best information available, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsib il ities stemming from unanticipated conditions. 3 llnformation in this document Is b ase d upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) In addition, it is recommended that a contingency for unanticipated conditions be included in your project budget and schedule. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering or geology is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding can create unrealistic expectations that can lead to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce risk, GeoTest includes an explanatory limitations section in our reports. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions and we encourage our clients or their representative to contact our office if you are unclear as to how these provisions apply to your project. Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered in this Geotechnical or Geologic Report The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated containments, etc. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on environmental report prepared for some one else. Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Biological Pollutants Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts biological pollutants from growing on indoor surfaces. Biological pollutants include s but is not limited to molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional biological pollutant prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lea d to the d eve lopment of severe biological infestations, a number of prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of this study, the geotechnical engineer or geologist in charge of th is project is not a biologica I pollutant prevention consultant; none of the services preformed in connection with this geotechnical engineering or geological study were desig ned or conducted for the purpose of preventing biological infestations. 4 llnforrnation in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) APPENDIX 3 -Model Soil Management Plan for BMP T5.13 An alternate document acceptable to the City of Anacortes is a Test Report provided by the Soils Supplier that identifies the soils to be used meet the specifications outlined under Minimum Requirement 5. The specifications are in both WSDOT and CSI Formats. For specifications, refer to the above referenced PDF. This submittal can be a deferred submittal since most projects are not sure who the supplier will be at the time of building permit application. For projects that trigger Minimum Requirements 1 through 5, the Test Report will be provided to the Building Department. Projects triggering Minimum Requirements 1 through 9, the Test Report will be provided to the Engineering Department. This submittal will deferred since tliis project is unsure of who the supplier will be. Since this project triggers Minimum Requirements 1 through 9, the Test Report will be provided to the Engineering Department as required. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 DEFERRED SUBMITTAL: PROVIDE A TEST REPORT FROM SOILS SUPPLIER TO THE ENGINEERING DEPT. PROJECT INFORMATION "Model Soil Manage ment Plan for BMP TS.13" age # __ of __ pages c l f, omp ete all in ormation on pae;e 1 ~ d ; only site a ress and permit number on a ditiona paees. Site Address I Lot No.: Permit Type: Permit N umber: Permit Holder: Phone: Mailing Address: Contact P erson: Phone: Plan Prepared By : ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED (Check off required items that are altached to this plan) _ Site Plan showing, to scale: _Areas of u ndisturbed native vegetation (no amendment required) _ New planting beds and turf areas (amendment required) Type of soil improvement proposed for each area Soil test results (required if proposing custom amendment rates) Product test results for proposed amendments AREA# ___ (sh ould match Area # on Site Plan) PLANTING TYPE Turf _Undi sturbed native vegetation -_ Planting Beds -O ther: SQUARE F OOTAGE OF TIIlS AREA: ___ square feet SCARIFICATION _inches (depth) of scarification needed to achi eve fi nished to tal 12" loosen ed depth. Subsoil will be scarified -- PRE-APPROVED __ inches of compost or imported topsoil applied AM ENDl\fENT METHOD: X ll (conversion factor, inches to cubic yards) PRODUCT: _Topsoi l import __ = cu. yards p er 1,000 sq. ft. _ Amend with compost X _ ,OOOs sq.ft. in this area _Stockpi le and amend __ = cubic yards of amendmen t -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ QUANTITY: CU . YDS . ( cu. yds. stockoiled) (n ee.ded 1.0 C()ver this area to d esignated depth) CUSTOM AMENDMENT Attach test results and calculations. _Topsoil import __ inches organic matter or topsoil import PRODUCT: _Topsoil & compost lift x 11 -Amend __ = cu. yards I 1,000 sq. ft. _ Stockpile and amend X _ ,OOOs sq.ft. in this area (__ cu. yds. stockpiled) __ = cubic yards of amendment -+ -+ -+ ...... -+ QUANTITY : __ ._ cu. YDS. MULCH _ ,000 sq. ft. PRODUCT : - X Q.1.. (conversion, to give 2 inch mulch depth) --= cubic yards of mul ch -+ -+ ....... -+ -+ -+ QUANTITY: ___ cu. YDS. -- .. TOTAL 1ENDMEN /TOPSOIL/ ULCH FOR Al\ T M ALL AREAS( comp ete on pag e l on y, tota ing a ll I Pl ) area ·pages in t iis an D Product#l: 0 Quantity: cu. yds. D Test Results: % organic matter C:N ratio <25:1 (except mulch, or <35:1 for native planls) "sta hie" (yes/no) Q Product #2: 0 Quantity: cu. yds. 0 Test Results: 11/11 organic matter C:N ratio <25:1 (exce pt mulch, or <35:1 for native plants) "stable" (yes/no) Q Product #3: D Quantity: cu. yds. 0 Test Results: % organic matter C:N ratio <25:1 (exce pt mulch, or <35: l for native plants) "stable" (ye~/no) Date: Inspector: Approved: Revisions Required: Date: Inspector: Approved: Revisions Required: Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previou s Version Date : February 20 , 2019 APPENDIX 4 -Determining Construction Site Sediment Damage Potential (Appendix 7 -NPDES Phase II Permit) See attached Constr1'ction Site Sediment Transport Potendal Worksheet as required for this project. Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 1. APPENDIX 7 -Determining Construction Site Sediment Damage Potential The following rating system allows objective evaluation of a particular development site's potential to discharge sediment. Permittees may use the rating system below or develop alternative process designed to identify site-specific features which indicate that the site must be inspected prior to clearing and construction. Any alternative evaluation process must be documented and provide for equivalent environmental review. Step one is to determine if there is a sediment/erosion sensitive feature downstream of the development site. If there is such a site downstream complete step two , assessment of hydraulic nearness. If there is a sedimenUerosion sensitive feature and it is hydraulically near the site then go to step three to determine the construction site sediment transport potential. STEP 1 -Sedjment{Erosion Sensjtjye Feature ldentjfication Sediment/erosion sensitive features are areas subject to significant degradation due to the effect of sediment deposition or erosion. Special protection must be provided to protect them. Sediment/erosion sensitive features include but are not limited to: 1. Salmonid bearing fresh water streams and their tributaries or freshwater streams that would be Salmonid bearing If not for anthropogenic barriers; u. Lakes; 111. Category I, II , and Ill wetlands; iv. Marine near-shore habitat; v. Sites containing contaminated soils where erosion could cause dispersal of contaminants; and vt. Steep slopes (25% or greater) associated with one of the above features. Identify any sediment/erosion sensitive features, and proceed to step two. If there are none the assessment is complete. Ace of Hearts Creek located approximately 125 feet easterly of'the area of the site proposed tor development and is noted as a "Fish Bearing" per the Department of Natural Resources FPARS Mapping. Futthermore, the slopes al01ig the edge o[Ace of Hearts Creek are slightly ,'lteeper than 25% in .<mme locations. 1. STEP 2 -Hydraylic Nearness Assessment Sites are hydraulically near a feature if the pollutant load and peak quantity of runoff from the site will not be naturally attenuated before entering the feature. The conditions that render a site hydraulically near to a feature include, but are not limited to, the following: i. The feature or a buffer to protect the feature is within 200 feet downstream of the site. u. Runoff from the site is tight-lined to the feature or flows to the feature through a channel or ditch. August 1, 2013, Modified January 16. 2015 Appendix 7-Determining Sediment Damage Potential Page 1 of 3 Version Date: October 7, 2019 Previous Version Date: February 20, 2019 A site is not hydraulically near a feature if one of the following takes place to provide attenuation before runoff from the site enters the feature: iv. Sheet flow through a vegetated area with dense ground cover v. Flow through a wetland not included as a sensitive feature v1. Flow through a significant shallow or adverse slope, not in a conveyance channel, between the site and the sensitive feature. Identify any of the sediment/erosion sensitive features from step one that are hydraulically near the site, and proceed to step three. If none of the sediment/erosion sensitive features are hydraulically near the site, the assessment is complete. Discharge from the sites proposed detention pond will he he released to an existing shallow ditch located along the south side of Orchard Avenue, which conveys runoff easterly to Ace of Hearts Creek a~· occurs today. vu. STEP 3 -Coo§tructjon Site Sedjment Transport Potentjal Using the worksheet below, detennine the total points for each development site. Assign points based on the most critical condition t hat affects 10% or more of the site. If soil testing has been performed on site, the results should be used to determine the predominant soil type on the site. Otherwise, soil information should be obtained from the county soil survey to determine Hydrologic Soil Group (Table of Engineering Index Properties for step 1.0) and Erosion Potential (Table of Water Features for step 1.E) When using the county soil survey, the dominant soil type may be in question. particularly when the site falls on a boundary between two soil types or when one of two soil types may be present on a site. In this case , the soil type resulting in the most points on the rating system will be assumed unless site soil tests indicate that another soil type dominates the site. Use the point score from Step 3 to detennine whether the development site has a high potential for sediment transport off of the site. Total Score <100 l''J100 Transport Rating Low High A high transport rating indicates a higher risk that the site w ill generate sediment contaminated runoff. Refer to the attached worksheet prepared for this project noting a score of JOO (or this site. however this includes the development ofall 6-future home sites. which will all not occur concun·ently with plat infrastructure con.wruction. Not accounting (or home development reduces the total score below tlte threshold transport rating to "Low". Construction Site Sediment Transport Potential Worksheet A. Existing s lo pe of s ite (average, w eig ht ed by aerial e xtent): Poi nts 2 % o r less ... 0 >2-5% .............................................................................................. 5 >5-1 0% .......................................................................................... 15 >10-15o/o ........................................................................................ 30 >15% ............................................................................................. 50 B. Site Area to be cleared and/or graded: <5 ,000 sq. ft ................................................................................... 0 5,0 00 sq. ft. -1 acre ..................................................................... 30 >1 acres* ..................................................................................... 50 *This includes future home site construction which will not occur at the same time as the road cons truction. thus genera/Iv /.ess than I-acre of area wi ll be cleared and/o r gl'aded at one time. Wit h this in m ind this could be represen te d as 30 points rath er than 50 points as n oted h ere. C. Quantity of cut a nd/or fill o n s ite: <500 cubic yards ............................................................................ 0 500 -5,000 cubic yards .................................................................. 5 >5,000-10,000 cubic yards ....................................................... 10 >10,000 -2 0,000 cu b ic yard s ...................................................... 25 >20,000 cubic ya rd s ..................................................................... 40 D. Runoff pote ntial of predominant soil s {Natural Resources Co n servation Service): Hydrologic soil group A .................................................................................... O Hydro lo gic soi l gro u p B ................................................................. 10 Hydrologic soil group C ............................................................. 20 Hydrologic soil group D ................................................................ 40 E. Erosion Potential of predominant soils (Unified C la ssification System): GW , GP, SW, SP soils .......................................................................................... 0 D ual cla ss ifica ti ons (GW -GM , GP-GM, GW-GC, G P-GC, SW-SM, SW-SC , SP-SM, S P-SC) .......................... 10 GM, GC, SM, SC so ils .................................................................. 20 ML. CL, MH, CH soils ................................................................... 40 F. Surface or Groundwater entering si t e identifie d a nd interce pt ed 1: Yes ................................................................................................. o No ................................................................................................ 25 G. Depth of c ut or height o f fill >10 feet: Yes ............................................................................................... 25 No .......................................................................................................... o H. Clearing and gradi ng will occur in the wet season (Octo be r 1 -May 1 ): Ye s 50 No .......................................................................................................... O TOTAL POINTS ............................................................................................. 100 *This includes future home site constructi.nn which will not occur at the same time a11· the road construction. thus generally les!l· than I-acre of area will be cleared and/or graded at one ti.me. With this in mind this could be represented as 30 points rath er than 50 poi11ts as note d here. APPENDIX 5-Site Plan with all applicable information (Minimum Size 11x17 at a legible scale) See attached Civil Plans ~o-21 i LOI 29 @7J> '..OT .50 Q4f;p LOT 31 <4_11~ LOT 15 "4411'· REV. .. · ,,, .... ~-:. ..... :. ,... :.; PA~EN @_i3JJ ~ ir" ;./~~ ;:~.~: /·: ~~: .. ~ ·- , .. « : ::.:. :•·:\::: ; . ~ . . ~" '·~:;.; '...OT 2.3 Cf!TW •JIQ..tt . ~ LOT 22 <ii!P 'u.n ·.r- ·1 SUB JEC T PROPERTY f.-:320 77 -·----- 3.11 Ac res. ,~,., L.OT 2.i '4 415> ~---,!.-' I 1 104~~10.06 LOT ?G ([4J]) I, ti\''."''"" l Ravnik & Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1633 LINDAMOOD LANEIP.0. BOX %1 BURLINGTON, WA 98211 PH: (360) 707·2041 PAX: (360) 707-2216 £ =IMiac 1EST PIT l..OClollON ,. ".x,tt SHEET DESCRIPTION: LO I 5 5 <£@]> ~I Fl.TER!llG 1 1 "i•._•J UC11JRt. R£n:R I I r IXTAIL Oii SHEE1 !I. r h I ,_,,,., l!SI r 1 31 1 I I '-r ri I r;'.1 1 I -I BMP #2:!..,... ..J,;.. ,"11 ~~~: I l ia OllStl' (!£.., f I ' r COlfS1ll'JC'llO r ' ,I· I I I.,,,., 1'!1•61 r I I L--~--J I L __ !:-6'~~--J BMP •C233 Sl.T F!NCE PE1t COM.OH'lHEETO. Cet-ITRACTOR TO REFER TO THE SwPPP PLAN APPR0\/£0 BY Tl-IE 0£PARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR ll-US PROJECT roR SP£Clf1CS w lHE FOLLOYMIC BMPS. 00.0W IS A U ST or BMPS YtHCl4 CAtl Bl'. US£D BY lHE COll~CTM TO M.t.NAGE lHE CONSTRUC'llON or lHIS SIT!'. AS TAKEN rRO!\I THE APPROVED S"'PP, HOWEVER lHE COl'HRACTOR MUST DETER .. INE WHICH BMP'S ARE TO BE USED Wt1£N ANO v.ttERE TO STABILIZE SITE APPROPRIA1\.EY. I .. ARI< CLEARING UMJTS BMP fCI OJ \!.~ ESTABUSli CONSTRUCllON Acet:SS J'MP fC105 & C107 CONTROL f'\.OW RA l!S BMP fC233 INSTAU. SEDIMENT CON TROLS Bl.IP 20, C233, C235, & C241 PROTECT DRAIN INLETS-BldP IC \ \ ·\ PLAN STATUS: SCAI.£: 1 '=JO' SHEET TI 1l£: DRAWN BY: 01.R CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR a m:x ro BY: mN CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC 30' ---- AP"Pl'OX. t.l>:':"l\llOt.I ex. 5• CCt.CRETE CUl..\.'Ei<T DATE DATE ORA'MNG NO. 19013SITE.dwg JOO NO. 19013 EXISTING CONDITIONS, SITE PREPARATION & EROSION CONTROLS DATE: 05.00.20 SW 114 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. I E., W.M. SHEET NO. 2 or 11 LOT :;19 <JJ_j§;> LOT JO q_~[j) _QT .3' <i_i_jj) .OT 15 •N ,. "41~™• ~•tt '"' Ravnik & Associates, Inc. """ """"'"' CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1633 LINDAMOOD LANE!/P.O. &OX 361 · BURLINGTON, WA 9&23l ~ PH: (360) 707-20 48 FAX: (360) 707-2216 OVERALL SITE PLAN PLAN STATUS: SCAL£: 1'=:10' SH EET 11Tt£: DRA\m BY: Hl..N CHECKEO BY: HLN CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC ---- DRAWING NO. 1!Kl13Sllt:.dwg Jee NO . 19013 :i or 11 SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N ., R. I E., W.M. SHEET NO. DATE: 05.06.20 MON"l IN CASE SIR: BEHC•l<NIK TOP Of YON•214..S1 . REFDI TO Slfl'IEYCllS NOit Oil SllrrT ' 305 295 290 E:V. NO. ,{ 0 17.S UPSmWI ex C8 15 INSTALL 8"••" ltt 'fl/: 4• CO SOUTK. ll!OM 00 INSlAU. 10 LJ' 4• SD SOU1H o swul-o.<>200 To •• ~. a: -PO$I I[ 6" TEE•'\94-211 ' IE 4 • ltt/,:0•21>4-38 IE 0 4• !f OIP•2-.. I !/ N !-: I • Ravnik & Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1633 LINDAMOOD LANEIP.0. BOX 361 BURLINGTON, WA 98213 PH: (360) 707·:2048 FAX: (360) 707·2116 SHEU OESCRI PTi otl: PLAN & PROFILE _:SCALE: 1• 20' I J I ! ----0 10 l!D ·40 SEE SHEET i9 FOi! UTILITIBS NORrR OF '!'HIS Y/EIT ~ LOT3 LOT,6 / LOTI, 1 COL-DE-SIC SD.ll6N- J PO-lf; 11--49.M, '10' tl. I PO-RT: 1•87.~, 10" RT. PAC-LT: 1+7.'.191 J1' Lf. PRC-RI: 1<47.$4, 12" In. ICI: PC-l!T TO PRC-llr R•2$' .ll.-2:r'8'27.1" L•10.J7' S-0~ LOT2 Gl!mR-301.09 CJU!lUl-Jo2.79 ~·.JOt.M ~· "' 0 "' CUL DE SAC DETAIL VIEW '! SCALE: 1' ~ -- . -~ I PC <sri.. C>+•S~. 10" Lf I ~~ -o::::::. I& .. LT I = ~.~:. J9.7' LT I ~ ~~;~ 41,7' LT I CUTml -.a~.01 • .f ~O;_C. JO' ." I ~: ~'r~53.5' LOT 6 ; I INTERSECTION DETAIL VIEW ----. . ---SCALE: 1• = 20' SCALE; HORJZ. 1'=20' VERT. 1 '~2' ORA'M'I BY: DLR OiECKEO BY: HlN OA lE: 05.06.20 SHEET TI11.£: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. I E., W.M. ORA'll\HG NO. 19013SITE.dw9 JOB NO. 19013 SHEET NO. 4 or 11 APPENDIX 6 -Documented Site Photos (Show all directions of the site, including frontage) Locati.on: View from Orchard Avenue looking southwest Description of the photo: Subject pl'ope1·ty looking southwest Photo taken bv: HLN Location: View from private roadwav along south side of site Description of the photo: Subject prope1·ty looking northwest Photo taken by: HLN Location: View from Orchard Avenue Description of the photo: Subject propertv looking southeast along west property line Photo taken bv: HLN Location: View along north ~·ide of Orchard Avenue Description. of the photo: Existing ditclt outlet at subject property's northeast corner looking east Photo taken bv: HLN Location: View along north side of Orchard Avenue Description oftlie photo: From subject property's northeast corner looking west Photo taken bv: HLN APPENDIX 7 -Drainage BMP Facility Maintenance Covenant Note : To be recorded prior to: 1) Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; 2) Final Certificate of Occupancy, and or; 3) Final Acceptance of the project. This is Covenant is required for any Permanent Stormwater Facility constructed on a project site. The applicant should work with the City of Anacortes Engineering Department on formalizing the document for recording. The owller will coordinoJe with the Citv ('or the exact wording to be added to the short plat as needed for required maintenance for the associated drainage facilities. APPENDIX 8 -Vicinty Map, Aerial Exhibit, Downstream Exhibit, Exceprts from City of Anacortes Comprehensive Plan P32 l 25 P32126 LAMBERT SHORT PU. T ~2016-1001 M 1 1801110001 P134109 I Jdl 1 P123983 I LP 1~~;85 I -:-~Pl 23986 : _____ 1 I I I lP1' • I : h P123987 : S/P AN 1 uns P.3 2076 l l P1 23988 ---r-i1 -·· I UJr' I l I P123989 wrla- P32131 i I : r -- • UJT 8 J_ ~·P1 2399 1 I JQ1'. P123992 F ~:~--- I.OT 7 P32130 L P123993 P1~ 1m 17 ~10 P124~19 l IM'n ----=-t-( Pl 24011 ,,,,. }rs P12 41s i- t---~'-· Im"$ M+• I P124012 P124017 I I f J.Dr .ffJ --~~38~ P124013 P12~016 r unls.2 I -41 P12io15 P1 24014 ... ________ _ NELSON SHQR Pl.A T AN A SP04--00 Al'200B020801 r $ P.32073 • P127400 P127399 41ST ST!IEET -~.,..---- P124043 l I l P12739 P32139 I Ol'Jtll $/>J&ll 1'RAGT .. Ir P124047 ' P127398 T- OR CH{A RDS PU D I THE 4882 UJT '11 P124042 I P124041 I wr.., P 124040 --:-:-1 P124039 I W1'~ I P124038 . ROW P32 077 SITE I I J NCH i . I P12404B l·'__J_ I \ I P.32079 P32oso \ P3213°5 :: U11',. I I.bf' IS P123997 . P123998 ---'-- 1'1Ur:'l'""tr' P1 23999 P124000 I P12 4001 -· 11 P1 2 40~ L __ _ Ravnik & Associates, Inc. CML ENGINBBRING & LAN[).USB PLANNING 1633 UMD.\JIOOD LAMl!IP.0. )OX J61 JUltLINGTON, WA !11233 PH: (360) 707-2048 PAX: (MO) 'IV7·2216 TRAW "Ir _____ P12 4046 VICINITY MAP / .t08 NO. 100\:S DA'IE: 04.21.20 P32298 --- ·--- --- P32307 1 A p p S/P A P3231 B Ravnik & Associates, Inc. cssaaY cou1tT CML BNGINBBIUNG & J.ANJ>.USB PLANNING SHORT PLAT ~_,....,. POB. ,...,,., '"'' ~ 111: ciiimi4i"'m,.-"'4m LANDED GBNTitY HOMU ~r ~ : · · ~ ' · · ·, '. · · .1 sw 11-t sBCI'loN 25, T. " N ..... 1 B., wx IOAlt: o+.2UO SCAl£: N. T .S. DRAW. 8Y: DC.ft AERIAL PHOTO RCV. 1'10 '" 1, REVISIO•I DATE: Ravnik & Associates, Inc. ._--1-----------t-------il------i-~ CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1':U LINDAMOOD LANE.JP.O. BOX 361 BUJtUN'OTON, WA 912JJ J>H : (360) 707·2048 FAX: (360) 707·2216 SHtET DESCR1P11 0N : DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE EXHIBIT ORA\\ll BY: H. NCLSOH CHLO<EO BY; J. RAVlllK DATE: OQ.06 .20 ' SHEET nll.£: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR CORNER 9 PROPER TIES, LLC SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T . 35 N., R. I E, W.M . F ID SCA~.8o;A DRAYllHG NO. OwnStrm.d>or9 JOB MO. 19013 Sll[[T HO. 1 OF' 1 City of Anacortes Gray & Osborne, Inc., Consulting Engineers Basin F2 -This basin is located to the east of Basin Fl, between 17& and 2200 S1reets. This basin is zoned as Commercial and Commercial Marine. No detention facili1ies are located within this basin. Although the stormwater system da~ shows a piped outfall, there is no numbered outfall from this basin. Basin F3 -This basin is extends south moroximately from 22nd to 32nd' Streets and west from FidaJgo Bay to the Cranberry Lake basin. Zoning areas in this has.in include Public, High and Low Density Residential, Industrial, Commercial and Commercial Marine. Fourteen detention facilities are located within this basin. This basin discharges to Outfall No. 41 Basin 4 -This basin comprises a large area south of 32nc1 Street to approximately the City Limits and east of SR 20 to approximately A Avenue. This basin is zoned as High and Low Density Residential, Commercial, Industrial and Public. Seventeen detention facilities are located within this ba~\n. This basin discharges to Outfall No. 42. ________ 2-25 (/ --------------··· Burrows Bey Gu em es Channel Fldalgo Bay . ·· ... . . ' .A~.~ : .\ ; ,·:<. March Point 3000· ~ 0 t I ~·: .1. ··-_\ ___ \ ( .. : ;~'.--:__, 7 ; ; ~-·· . ,, 3000 Feet ·--' Pil,dilla Bay ____ .. --·-· I : .. · ·.,.-./~---. ...,.--.....--i7 .·· .... \: ·······/ .·, ·~ ~·1· ~ .j'...... f;--~ ... \, I ~ .. ")~·;;] FIGUitl! s-1 BAs.INS HYDllAUUCAl.LYMODBlLED ~/ ~ LU ~OFANAro~ V STORMWATElt COMPMml.NSIVE PLAN Not~: All Basins within the City of Anacortes were hydrologically modell G ~-. r~ Basins shown here were analyzed both hydmullcally and hydrologically. ~~~1~w- Gray & Osborne, Inc., Consulting Engineers TABLE 2-2-(continued) Anacortes Subbasin Areas and Land Cover Sub basin 1994 Plan Drainage Subbasin Area Basin Outfall Percent Percent Percent Basin Name (acres) No.<1> No. Forested Impervious Pervious 818 84.9 38 NIA NIA NIA Burrows Bl9 137.6 43 NIA NIA NIA Bay Total 2,201 Fl 197.7 40 40 0 65 35 F2 16.3 40 0 65 35 F3 -1--... 376.0 28 41 16 .d'J 4'- 1....--F4 I/ 65.0 29 42 0 ( 68 32 ..... ( ) _--F") 718.3 26, 27, 30, 43 10 --..;.4 ,,,____ 'V 32 F6 12.4 3 1 45 0 65 35 F7 18.7 31 46 0 60 40 F8 8.4 31 0 60 40 Fidalgo f 9 28.0 48 48,49, 0 60 40 Bay 50, ~.! FI O 158.4 48 52 0 65 35 Fl I 424.0 32 F5 70 15 15 F12 140.7 33 FS 70 15 15 F l 3 489.0 39 F5,Fl2 75 20 5 F14 200.0 40 53,54 0 65 35 F15 858.8 41 55-61 0 65 35 Fl6 387.4 62,63 0 70 30 F l7 42.7 0 70 30 Total 4,142 Padilla Pl 174.6 0 65 35 P2 159.5 0 65 35 Bay Total 334 Similk Sl 160.6 0 70 30 Bay Total 161 N I A -Not Available, Outside City of Anacortes Aerial Photography City of Anacortes 2-5 Anacortes Stonn water M anagement Plan September 2007 APPENDIX 9 -NRCS/SCS Soils Information United States Department of Agriculture NRCS Nat ural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agen ci es, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Skagit County Area, Washington January 8, 2020 48° 29'9"1'1 d8° 29'4~ N 3: ~ !:; £l i-· ~-· ~-· lil I-~-· 3: ~ J;; ~ C1 I 52748) N A Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map ~ 527520 527540 ~ SZ75llJ 1 wsz1 a 1: ' s ; wi• ,. 527500 SZ7S20 5Z7SdO S21!l50 5Z7S!IO Map Saile: 1:1,070 ~printedonAlandsalpe (11• x8.5") sheet. --------===========--------------====================Meters o 1s 3l oo ro --------===========---------------===================R!e.t o ro 100 an 3Xl Map projection: \Neb Mercator Comer ooordinates: WGS84 Edge trs: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 6 smm 1. 5Z1!IOO = S270lO 5276llO 5Va20 SZJ640 52i'!B) s.voao 52'/&!IO smoo 3: ~ J;; ~ 3: ~ !;; 8 ~ 48" 29'9"N m I I i i ~ ~ I 480 29•4•u Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND Arva of tntvrest (AOll D Area or Interest (A01) Soils D Soil Map Unit Polygons .,..,,,, Soil Map Unit Lines El Soil Map Unit Points Speclal Point Features ~ Blowout 181 Borrow Pit * Clay Spot <> Closed Depress ion ~ Gravel Pit . Gravelly Spot .. 0 Landfill A. Lava Flow .ti!. Marsh or swamp 'Jto Mine or Quarry 0 Mi.scellaneous \Miter 0 Perennial Waler v Rock Outcrop + Saline Spot .. Sandy Spot ..g. Severely Eroded Spot .;. Sinkhole S: Slide or Slip jJI SodicSpot 91 Spoa Area (I Stony Spot Ql Very Stony Spot g WetSpot ~ Other -· Special Line Features Water Faetu~s ,,,.....,, Streams and Canals Transportation ....... """""' -Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roaels Background • Aerial Photography 7 MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI ...vere mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been sho1NT1 at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soll Suivey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Skagit County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 16, 2019 Soll map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50.000 orlarger. Oate(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 31, 2009-Sep 29,2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shiflinq of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend I I Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres inAOI Percent of AOI · 1s Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 3.8 percent slopes . --.. - - 19 Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 1.7 i percent slopes I Totals for Area of Interest 5.5 Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps. can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar. components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, 8 69.6% 30.4% 100.0%' Custom Soil Resource Report onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil seties. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness. and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes. is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas. or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Skagit County Area, Washington 18-Bow gravelly loam, dry, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2hty Elevation: 0 to 200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 40 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 170 to 220 days Fann/and classification: Prime farmland if drained Map Unit Composition Bow, dry, and similar soils: 95 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Bow, Dry Setting Landfonn: Hillslopes, terraces Parent material: Volcanic ash, glaciolacustrine deposits, and glacial drift Typical profile H1 -0 to 7 inches: gravelly ashy loam H2 -7 to 17 inches: very gravelly ashy loam H3 -17 to 31 inches: clay loam H4 -31 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: CID Forage suitability group: Seasonally Wet Soils (G002XN202WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Bellingham, undrained Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Hydric soil rating: Yes 10 Custom Soil Resource Report 19-Bow gravelly loam, dry, 3 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2htz Elevation: O to 200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 40 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 170 to 220 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained Map Unit Composition Bow, dry, and similar soils: 100 percent Estimates are based on obsetvations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Bow, Dry Setting Landform: Hillslopes, terraces Parent material: Volcanic ash, glaciolacustrine deposits, and glacial drift Typical profile H 1 -0 to 7 inches: gravelly ashy loam H2 -7 to 17 inches: very gravelly ashy loam H3 -17 to 31 inches: clay loam H4 -31 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.4 inches} Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: CID Forage suitability group: Seasonally Wet Soils (G002XN202WA) Hydric soil rating: Yes 11 Skagit County Area, Washington basis of a 50-year site curve, the mean stte ind.ex for Douglas fir is estimated to be 107. The highest average growth rate for Douglas fir ls 132 cubic feet per acre per year at age 70. Among the trees of limited extent are red alder. western redcedar. and western hemlock. Common forest understory plants are salal. trailing blackberry, evergreen hucklebe rry , western swor<lfem , creambush o ceanspray. and northern twinflower. The main !imitation tor the harvesting of timber i s muddiness caused by seasonal soil wetness. Use of wheeled and tracked equ ipment when the soil is moist produces ruts, compacts the soil, and damages the roots of trees .. When wet, unstirfaced roads and skid trails are sticky and slippery af1d they can be impassable. Logging roads require suitable surfacing for ~ year-round use. Rock for road construction is not rea<lily avail able on this unit .. Seedling establishment and the hazard of windthrow are the main con~erns in the production of timber. Reforesta!ion can be accomplished by planting Douglas fjr seedlings. If seed trees ar·e present. natural reforestation of cutover areas by red alder occurs readily. The perched water table reduces root respiration, which results in a low surviv:al rate of seectlings. When openings are made in the canopy, ·invading brustly plants .can prevent the es1ablishment of seedlings. Because 1he rooting de.pth ls restricted by the perched water table and tha .clay tayer, trees frequently are subject to windthrow. This unit l s poorly suited to homeslte development. The main limitations are wetness and shrink-swell potential. Wetness can be reduced by Installing drain tile around footings. The effects of .shrinking and swelling can be minimized by using proper engineering de-signs and 'by backfilling with material that has low shrin'k-swell potential. The main 11mitati.ons fOJ septic tank absorption fields are ·slow per:meabllity a!ld the perched water table. Use of interceplOt drains, additional topsoil placed over the absorption field, and longer absorption lines placed on the contour helps to compensat.e 'for these limHations. This map unit is i n capability subclass lllw. 18-Bow gravelly loam, low precip'llatlon, Oto 3 percent slopes. This very deep, somewhat poorly drained so il is on g1acia11y modified remnant terraces and hilts. It formed in gravelly glacial drift over g1acio·tacustrine material mantled with volcanic ash. The vegetation in areas not cultivated is mainly conifers and deciduous trees. El evation Is near sea ·1evel to 200 feet. The average annual prec.ipltatio.n l s about 23 inctles, the average annual air temperature ls about 50 degrees F, and the average fro$t-free season js 170 to 220 days. 23 Typically, the 3Urface is .covered w i th a mat of leav~ and twigs 1 inc.h thick. The $Urface layer i$ dark .brown :gravelly loam 5 incMs thick. The upper .3 .in<;hes of the subsoiJ is br~n gravelly loam, the next 14 inches is .dark grayish brown clay lo am. and the lower part to~ depth of 60 i nch~s or more i$ gray silty ciay. Jn some areas the sur1ace layer is _gravelly silt loam or is blac~ to dark brown grav.elJy loam about 9 inches thick., and .in some areas 1he .subsoil .is gravelly and loamy. mcl-uded Jn 'thjs unit are .small areas of Catla Md Clallam soils on bi.Us. Bellingham s,olls in depresslonaJ areas, and Laconner soils on terraces. Pe.rmeabiUty of this Bow soil JS slow .. Available water capacity ·i s high, Effective rooti ng depth i s limited by a perched water table that is at a depth of 6 to 18 iochei- from Novembe;r to May. Runoff js s1ow, and the hazard of water ero.isipn :is slf.ght. Ttiis unit is -us ed as woodland, pasturetand, hayland , aAd home.sites. Jf adequ~e.ly drained, it is suited to climatically adapted cultivated .c.r-o.ps. Doug.las fi:r is the main woodlan(j species ·on this unit. On the basis of a mo-year sl1e curYe, the mean site ind.ex for Douglas fir t$ es.timate<:I to be 126. On the basis of a 50-year sit~ -curve. ttie mean site index for Douglas 1ir .i$ estim.at'$d l:O be S4. The rugh~st average gr.owt.h r.at~ for Oo.1Jgl$l-s fir is 124 .cubic feet per acr~ per year at age 70, Amq the tree;5 of timite d extern ar,e western redcedar, red alder, grand fir, and western hemlock. Common for.est uoderstory plants are salal, trailing blackberry> evergreetJ hu.ekleberry, western swordftirn, creambush oceanspray, and no rthern twinflower. The main lim.itaiicin fo.r the harv~ting of Umb~r is muddmes:s eaused by se.asonal s.ol.I wetness. Use of wheeled ·and tracked equlpment when the soil is moist prQduees ruts, compacts the soi1, ctnd damaQfiS th.e roots o11rees. When wet, unsurfaced roads and skid tra11.s are sticky and s1ippery a11d they can .bs impassabl.e. Losiging roads requlr~ st.iitable surfacing tor year -round use. :Rock 1or road construct.Jon is not readily avai1ab1e .on th.is unit. SeedUng establishment and the hazard of w.indthrow are the main concerns in the production .of timber. Reforestation can be accom_plished by p l anting Douglas fir seedlings. If .seed tr,ees are present, nat.ura1 reforestation of cuto:ver areas by re.d alder occurs .reacrny. The perched water table reduces root respi.ratip.n , wh.1eh results in a ~'OW ·S111Viva1 rate of seedling~. When openings a-re made ln the c~nopy, invading brushy plants can prevent the .e~ablJshment of 24 seedlings. Because the rooting depth is restricted by the perched water table and the clay layer, trees frequer:itly are subject to windthrow. If this unit is used for hay and pasture, the main limitation is the perched water table. The water table l imits use of the unit to grasses and shallow-rooted legu mes. Tile drains a nd field d itches are needed to lower the water table if deep-rooted plants are grow n . Drainage tiles should be closely spaced because of the slow permeability. Use of proper stocking rates, pasture rotation. and restricted grazing during wet periods helps to keep the pasture in good condition. Shallow ditches help to remove surface water and prevent ponding in winter. In summer supplemental irrigation is required for maximum production. Sprinkler irrigation is the most sui table method of applying water. This un it is poorly suited to homesite development. T h e main limitations are wetness and shrink-swell potential. Soil wetness can be reduced by i nstalling d rai n ti le around footi ngs . T he effects of shrinking and swelling can be minimized by using proper eng i neering designs and by backfilling with material that has low shrlnk·swell potential. The main limitations for septic tank absorption fields are slow permeability and the perched water table. Use o1 interceptor drains, additional topsoil placed over the absorption field, and longer absorption lines helps to compensate for these lim itations. T his map unit is in capability subclass lll w. 19-Bow gravelly loam, low precipitation, 3 to 8 percent slopes. This very deep, somewhat poorly drai ned soil is on glacially modified remnant terraces and hills. It formed in gravelly glacial drift over glaciolacustrine material mantled with volcanic ash. The vegetation in areas not cultivated is mainly coniferous and deciduous trees. Elevation is near sea level to 200 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 23 inches, the average annual ai r temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average trost-free season is 170 to 220 days. Typically, the surface is covered with a mat of leaves and twigs 1 inch thick. The surface layer is dark brown gravelly loam 5 inche.s thick. The upper 3 inches of the subsoil is brown gravelly loam, the next 14 inches is dark grayish brown clay loam, and the lower part to a depth of 60 inches or more is gray silty clay. In some areas the surface layer is gravelly sill loam or is black to dark brown gravelly loam about 9 inches thick, and in some areas the s ubsoil is gravelly and loamy. Included i n this unit are small areas of Catla and Soil Survey Clallam soils on hills and Laconner soils on terraces . Permeability of this Bow soil is slow. Available water capacity is high. Effective rooting depth is limited by a perched water table that is at a depth of 6 to 18 inches from November to May. Runoff ls medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This unit Is used as woodland, past ureland, hayland, and homesites. If adequately drained, it is su it ed to climatically adapted cultivated crops. Douglas fir i s the main woodland species on this unit. On the basis of a 100-year site curve, the mean site index for Douglas fir is estimated to be 126. On the basis of a 50-year site curve, the mean site index for Douglas fir is estimated to be 94. The highest average growth rate for Douglas fir is 122 cubic feet per acre per year at age 70. Among the trees of limited extent are western redcedar, red alder, grand fir, and western hemlock. Common forest understory plants are salal , tra il i ng blackberry, evergreen huckleberry , western swo rdfern , creambush oceanspray, and northern twinflower. The main limitation for the harvesting of timber is muddiness caused by seasonal soil wetness. Use of wheeled and tracked equipment when the soil is moist produces ruts, compacts the soil, and damages the roots of trees. When wet, unsurfaced roads and skid trails are sticky and slippery and they can be impassable. Logging roads requi re suitab le surfacing for year-round use. Rock for road construction is not readily available on thi s unit. Seed li ng establi shment and the hazard of windthrow are the main concerns i n the production of timber. Reforestation can be accompllshed by planting Douglas fir seedlings. If seed trees are present, natural reforestation of cutover areas by red alder occurs readily. The perched water table reduces root respiration, which results In a low survival rate of seedliqgs. When openings are made i n the canopy, invading brushy p lants can prevent the establishment of seedlings. Because the rooting depth is restricted by the perched water table and the clay layer , trees frequently are subject to windthrow. If this unit is used for hay and pasture, the main limitation is the perched water table. The water table limits use of the unit to grasses and shallow-rooted legumes. Tile drains and field ditches are needed to lower the perched water table if deep-rooted plants are grown. Drainage liles should be closely spaced because of the slow permeability. Use of proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and r estricted grazing duri ng wet peri ods helps to keep the pasture in good condition . In Skagit County Area, Washington sum mer su pplemental irrigation is required for maxi mum production. Sprinkler irrigation is the most suitable method of applying water. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitations are wetness and shrink-swell potenti al. Wetness can be reduced by i nstalling drai n tile around footings. The effects of shrinking and swelling can be minimiz ed by using proper enginee ring designs an d by backfilling with material that has low shrink -swell potential. The main limilations for septic tank absorption f i elds are the slow permeability and perched wate r t ab le. Use of interceptor drains, addition al topsoil placed over the absorption field, and longer absorption lines placed on the contour helps to compensate for these limitations. This map uni t is i n capability subcl ass lllw. 20-Bow-Urban land complex, o to 8 percent slopes. This map unit Is on glaciated terraces and hills. Slopes are broad and smooth with concave areas . The native vegetation is malnly conifers and deciduous shru bs . E!evation is 5 to 150 feet. The average an nu al preci pitation is about 23 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average frost -free season is 170 to 220 days. This unit is about 60 percent Bow gravelly loam, low precip itation, 0 to 8 percent slopes, and about 35 percent Urban l and . The components of t his unit are so intricately intermingled that it was not practical to map them separately at the scale used. Included in this unit are small areas of Bellingh am soi l s in depress ional areas and along dr ain ageways and Catla and C l all am soil s on glaciated hi lls. The Bow soil is very deep and somewhat poorly drained. It formed in glaciotacustrine material derived dominantly from glacial till and lake sedi ment mantled with volcanic ash. Typically, the surface lay er i s dark brown gravelly loam 7 inches thicl<_ T he upper 10 inches of the subsoil is dark brown very gravelly roa m; the next 14 inches is grayish brown clay loam, olive gray silty clay. and light olive gray si lt loam; and the lower part to a depth of 60 in ches or more is olive gray silty clay. In some areas the surface l ayer is gravelly silt roam or is black, a nd i n some areas the subsoil Is loamy. Perm eabilily oi the Bow soil is slow. Available water capacity ls high. Effe ctive rooting depth is limited by a pe rched water table that i s at a depth of 6 to 18 inches from Novem ber to May. Runott i s mediu m, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Urban land consists of areas covered by streets, buildings, parking lots, and other structures that obscure the soils s o that identif ication is not feasible. The Bow soil in this unit is used as open spaces, parks, building sites. lawns, and gardens. 25 It the Bow soil ls used for homesite development, the main limitations are watness and shrink-swell potential. Wetness can be red uced by installing dr ai n t il e around footi ngs. The effects of s hrinking and swelling can be minimized by using·proper engineering designs and by backtilling with material that has low shrink-swell potential. The main limitations for septic tank abso rption fiel ds ar e slow permeability and the perched wat er table. Use of interceptor drains, additional topsoil placed over the absorption field, and longer absorption lines placed on the contour helps to compensate for these limitations. T his map un it i s i n capabil ity subclass lllw. 21-Briscot fine sandy loam. This very deep, poorly drained soil is on flood plains. Drainage has been altered by tiling. The soil formed in alluvium. Slope is o to 2 pe rcent. The vege lation in areas not cu l tivated is mai nly conifers and sh rubs. Elevation is 5 to 45 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 32 inches. the average annual air temperature is about 51 degrees F , and the averag e frost-free season is 160 to 21 O days. Typically , the surface layer is dark grayish brown fi ne sandy loam 16 inches thick. The upper 14 inches of the underlying material is grayish brown, stratifie d loamy fine sand and sill loam, and the lower part to a depth of 60 inches or more is olive gray silt loam. In some areas the surface l ayer is loamy fine sand, and in some areas the underlying material is dominantly silt loam. Included in this unit are small areas of Sumas soils on flood plains. Perm eability of this Briscot s9il is moderate. Available water capacity is hi gh . Ettective rooti ng depth is limited by a seasonal hi gh water table that is at a depth of 18 to 36 feet from November to April. Runott is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is s light Flooding is rare in areas protected by dikes; however, this soil may be subject to frequent , lon g periods of flooding in areas not protected by d i kes. This unit is used as cropland, hayl and , and pastureland. This unit is w e ll suited to use as cropland, hayland, and pastureland if dikes and drainage systems are mainta ined. In summer suppl emental i r ri gation is req uired for maximum production. Return ing a ll c rop residue to the soil and using cover crops help to maintain organic matter content , fertility, and tilth. Use of proper stockin g rates, pasture rotation, and restricted 318 Soil Survey TABLE 13.--ENGINEERING INDEX PROPERTIES••Continued I I :_--'-C-'l-'-a-'-ss;:.i;::..;;.fl;,;.ca~t""1'"'o""n'--_ ll"ra9-I Percentage passing : Soil. name and lDepth! USDA texture : , lments : sieve nwnber--:Liquid map symbol I I I Unified : AASHTO I > 3 l , t t : limit I I I : linchesl 4 r io l 40 I 200 : r r, 1, I r --I ' I I I In I t : ; Pct I l I : 1 ; PCt I I 1 I I I 16, 17-----------1 0-7 !Gravelly loam----ISM lA-2, A-4 I 0-10 :1s-ao 55-75 130-50 l30·50 I 20-30 Bow f 7-17[Very qravclly ISM lA-1, A-2,I 5-15 l65-75 135-60 f25-50 (20-40 l 20•30 l I loam, very I I A-4 I I \ I I I I I qravelly silt : I : I , I I : I I loam. I : I ; I I I I ll7-3ljClay loam, silt IML, CL IA-6, A-7 I 0-5 l90-100f 75-lOOl60-100l50-85 I 35-50 l I loam, silty I I : I I I I : I I clay. I I I l I : l I l31-50IS1lty clay loam, IML, MH IA-7 l 0-5 l90-100 1l90-lOOl80-lOOl75-lOOI 40-55 I I silty clay, I I 1 I 1 I I I I : clay. l I I : I I I : I I I J I I I I ' I l I I I I ' I I ' I 18, 19-----------, 0-8 ,Gravelly loam----ISM lA-2, A-4 I 0-10 175-80 155-75 130-50 130-50 l 20-30 Bow l 8-22IC1ay loam, silt ]ML, CL lA-6, A-7 : 0-5 l90-lOOl75-lOOl60-l00[50-85 I 35-50 I t loam, silty I I I l I l I : I clay. : l I : : : I , 122-601s11ty clay loam, IHL, MH [A-7 I o-s ;90-100:90-1001so-100:1s-100: 40-55 l I silty clay, : : I : I : I ' I I clay. I l : I I I I I I I I I I I t I l J 1 I l f I I _I w.-: I I : I l I I I I Bow-------------1 0-7 !Gravelly loam----ISM IA-2, A-4 l 0-10 [75-80 155-75 130-50 !30-50 I 7-17lVery qravelly :sM ,A-1, A-2,I 5-15 \65-75 135-60 l25-50 120-40 : loam, very I : A-4 I l 1 I I : I gravelly sandy I l l l I l I 20-30 20-30 j ' loam. I I l I I I I 117-31,Clay loam, silt lML, CL :A-6, A-7 l 0-5 l90-lOOl75-lOOl60-IOOl50-85 35-50 I I loam, silty I l I I : I I l I clay, l l I l l : I , l31-60fSilty clay loal!l, [ML, MH lA-7 I o-s •90-100:90-1oo[ao-100[1s-1001 40-55 I '1 silty clay, l ' I ' 1 1 • I ' I l l I I I clay. l 1 1 r 1 1 r I I I I 1 I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! l I I I ' I I I I I I I ' I I I 21---------------1 0-16IF1ne sandy loam :sM IA-4 I O 100 l 100 175-90 1 35-50 Briscot ll6-30jStrat1f1ed silt IML IA-4 I O 100 195-lOOl85-95 155-75 I I loaan to fine I l I I I l I Urban land. 20-25 25-30 I l sano. I : : 1 I I I l30-60[Silt loam, very ICL IA-6, A-7 I 0 i 100 I 100 l95-lOOl50-85 35-45 I I fine sandy loam, l \ ! ! ! ! ! I I silty clay loam. ! I l • I I I I I I I I I I I I I 22, 23-----------: 0-lOjLoam---------~---IML IA-4, A-5 '! O 190•95 185•95 170•80 160•70 35•45 Cathcart :10-4o:Loam, sandy loam, :•IL, SM IA-4, A-5 o IB0-95 lS0-90 170-85 140-65 35-45 : : silt loam. : I I I I : I i40-60IGravelly loan, ISM, GM lA-2, A-4 I 0 :60-as IS0-75 136-50 125-40 l I gravelly sandy I l I I I : I I I loam. I I I 1 l I I I I I I ! ! I I I t I I l I l I I l 24---------------1 0-7 !Loam-------------:ML IA-4, A-5 1 1 o l90-95 :as-95 l?o-so 160-70 35-45 Cathcart l 7-39[Loam, sandy loam, lMt, SM !A-4, A-5 o JB0-95 1so-90 po-85 /40-65 35-45 l I silt loam. : , 1 1 1 , f 39-6a:Gravelly loam, :sM, ~ IA-2, A-4 I o 160•85 Js0-75 l36·50 125-40 l I gravelly sandy t l I I l I I I I 1 I t I I I 1 I I I oam. I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I 25-35 25-35 See footnote at end of table. Plas- ticity index NP-5 NP-S 10-20 10-20 NP-5 10-20 NP-5 NP-5 10-20 NP-S NP·S NP-10 NP-10 NP..5 NP-10 NP-10 NP·S Skag it County Area. Washington TABLE 14.--PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OY THE SOILs--Conticued I I t I Soil name ano [Depth! map symbol : l I I I I : In : I I I I 14---------------: 0-6 : Blethen : 6-371 137-491 : 49 : I I I I 15---------------: 0-8 : Borohemists l 8-301 130-601 I I I I 16, 17-----------: 0-1 I Bow I 7-171 117-311 l31-60l I I I I ia, 19-----------l o-a I Bow I s-22: 122-601 I I .,0 *. I I -• I t Bow-------------1 0-1 I I 1-111 fl7-3ll [31-601 I I 1 I I I I I I I Urban land. 21---------------: 0-161 Briscot i16-30f :30-601 I I ' r 22, 23-----------: 0-101 Cathcart I 10-401 [40-601 I I I I 24---------------1 0-1 I Cathcart I 7-39 1 [39-601 I I I I 25, 26-----------1 0-6 l Catla I 6-lll 111-111 : 17 : I I I I 27, 28-----------: 0-9 : Cbuckanut l 9-351 l 35-49' I 49 I 29, 30-----------: 0-11 Clallam fll-27 l 27 I I 31*: : Clallam---------: 0-11 I 11-27, r 21 : I I I I I I I J I I I I Urban lana. 32---------------: 0-1 I Clendenen I 7-161 : 16 : Clay 25-45 35-50 25-45 35-50 25-45 35-50 5-12 5-12 20-35 5-lO 5-15 5-15 7-12 3-12 7-12 3-12 S~ footnote at end of table. P~eability In/hr 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0,2-0.6 0.06-0.2 0.6-2.0 0.2-0.6 0.06-0.2 0.6•2.0 0,6-2.0 0.2-0.6 0.06-0,2 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0,6-2.0 0,6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.06 2.0-6.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.06 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.06 0.6•2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.06 I I I I ~ I I ' I ' ' 1 I I I I I I I I I I I Available water capacity In/in o.1s-o.20 0.10-0.15 0.08-0.12 0.30-0.40 0.30-0.40 0.15-0.20 0.10-0.11 0.19-0.21 0, 1.5-0.19 o.1s-o.20 0.19-0.21 0.15•0,19 0.15-0.20 0.10-0.17 0.19-0.21 0.15-0.19 0.13-0.15 0.13-0.20 0.19-0.21 o.1s-2.o 0.10-2.0 0.08-0.11 0.15-2.0 0.10-2.0 0.08-0.11 0.08-0.10 o.os-0.10 0.06-0.08 o.1s-o.20 0.10-0.15 o.10-o.1s 0.10-0.14 0.06-0.10 0.10-0.14 0.06-0.10 0.15-0.25 0.12-0.20 : r trQsiOll 1 Soil I Sh.rink-swell I factors :reactionl potential l f f 1 K T ; R!! I I I I I I I I I I :s.1-6.5 Low·-----------10.1s1 3 1s.1-6.s 1 1 1.ow------------ro.151 15.1-6.5 Low------------10,101 I :••-------••••--1-••-I l 1 I I t I 1 I 14.5-5.5 lLow---------·-·I0.021 S 14.s-s.s ILow------------10.021 ! 1---------------:----1 I l r I l6.1-1.3 ltov------------10.201 s 16.1-7.3 ILow------------10.1s, 16.1-7.3 fModerate-------l0.24l 16.1·7.3 lModerate-------l0.241 I I l I 16,1-7.3 ILow------------10.20: s 16.1-7.3 IModerate-------10.241 J6.l-7.3 IModerate-------10.241 I I I I I I I I I I I I 16.1-7.3 ltow------------10.201 5 )6.l-7.3 lLow------------10.1s: 16.1-7.3 lModerate-------I0.24l 1 '6.l-7.3 lModeratQ-·-----I0.24l I I J I I I I I I I l t I l I l I l6.l-7.3 ILov------------10.321 s 16.1-7.3 ILow------------,0.37, 16.1-7.3 ILow------------:o.431 I I I I !4.S-6.0 ILow---------~-:o.2sl s :s.1-6.5 1Low------------I0.28j IS.6-6.5 ILow------------l0.20, I I : I 14.5-6.0 lt~------------:0.20: s ls.1-6.s jLow------------:o.2s1 15,6-6.5 ,Low------------10.201 I I I I I I I I :s.1-6.0 ILow------------10.201 l 1s.1-6.0 lLow------------10.201 f5.1·6.0 lLow------------:0.10; I 1---------------:----r ; : 1 1 :s.1-6.o !Low------------:0.20: 3 ;s.1-6.0 ILow------------10.201 15.1-6.0 JLow-~----------10.20: II :-----~---------:----: I I I ' . ' . :s.1-6.5 lLow------------10.201 2 15.1·6.5 JLow------------10.1sl : :----------~~---;----: I I : I I I t I I • I I 1s.1-6.s II.ow------------10 .20: 2 1s.1-6.5 ILow-----------~ro.1s: I I :---------------1----1 I I I I I I I I t I I I I t 1 I I t 14.s-s.o ILow------------10.20: l 14.5-5.5 ILow------------10.10: : :---------------1----: 345 I I !Organic I J11atter I I Pct r I I l ' I I I I I I I i I I I ' I I r I I 3-9 40•80 .5-2 .5-2 .s-2 3-9 2-8 2-B 2-5 2-8 3-5 3-5 I 10-15 I I 364 Soi l Survey TABLE 16.--WATER FF.ATURES {"Floodinq" and "water table" and terms such as "rare," "brief," "apparent," and "perched" are explained in the text. The symbol < means less than; > meons more than. Absen~ of an entry indicates that the feature is not a concern or that data we re not estimated) So 11 name and map symbol ; l~~~~~~~__,rF~l~oo:..::..:di==n~g'--~~.-~~~~~~~--'H~i~g·h~w~a~t~e~r:.....::t~ab=.;l~e;__~~-l Hydro logic! : I 1 qroup 1 Frequency Duration Months Depth I Kind : Months I I I I I ! l *: I Andie Cryochrepts------1 I Rock outcrop. I I 2-----------------------1 Andie Xerochrepts I I 3*, 4*: I Acd1c Xerocbrepts------1 Rock outcrop. I I l s, 6, 7, 8--------------1 Barneston I 9*. Beaches I ! I I I 10----------------------1 Be 11 :lngham l I 11----------------------1 Bellingballl I I 12, 13------------------1 Bir~view I ~ 14----------------------: Blethen : I 15----------------------: Borobemists I I 16, 17, 18, 19----------1 Bow I I I 20•: I Bow--------------------1 Urban land, l I I ll----------------------1 Briscot I I 22, 23. 24--------------1 Cathca.rt I I 25, 26------------------1 Catla I I 27, 28------------------; Cbucka nut ; , I 29, 30------------------: Clallam I I c B B B D D A D D D c B D B c See footnote-at end of table. I l I 1 I I !None------------; I I I I I I I I I I I ' INoce------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I INone-·----------1 I I ( I I I I I I I fNone------------l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' . I I . ' JNone------------1 I I I I I I I I INone------------l I I I I I I 1 I INone------------l I I I I I l ' 1 INone------------l I I I I I I I I !None------------: I ·1 I I I 1 I I lNone------------1 I I I l I I I I I I I I None------------ ! I I lRare------------ 1 I ' I None------------ ' I I I I I I I INone------------l I I I I I I ' 1 lNone------------l I I 1 I [ I INone------------1 I I I I I I I I ' I ! ! Ft >6.0 >6.0 >6.0 >6.0 0-1.0 l +l.-0 ! I I I I I I I I I ' I ! I I I I I I l I I ' I I I • I l >6.0 >6 .0 +1-0 0 .5-1.5 1.5-3.0 >6.0 0.5-1.5 >6.0 1.5-3.0 ! I I I I 1 I I I ' I I I l I I I I I Perched I I Perched I I I I I I l IAppare11t l l I Perched I I I !Perched I 1 I I I IAppti..rent I I I I I jPerched l I I I I !Perched I I Nov-Apr Nov-May Nov-May Nov-Apr Nov-May Jan-Apr APPENDIX 10 -WWHM Views and WWHM Report :"'l i r u • a-~.;.,~;t~U .. ,~.4.~ ir~.1.·.·,)t •. ;f:.~.;~;-... --·--fit. fdot 11-Holp o~ge. .. e r~-----·------··---~····---·--~-. . -------!~ 1~~.!-j ~ f ,~!LI I~~ p ....-~-~ -...... ~~ • ..---c;_.=IV~.--~--~--==--....-~ ~--~1r--r ·--.. ·~, j 'Ft1cilify~M1& -~~-"!~~.r~.-:=i Sctle:mJb< !')-f•-:p:~·::lO:I Fu.-:i ! !'.k..c •. ~,J rl'r~ I . , .. . ~~~.!..-··---~l~·--J~~.~~---.. -... , I j Da<#nstr&am. Cownecti'ons JO ' in "' i · ;;; .... ..i I · · .. r .. " .. racitity Typa ir~~,...J.J;_._ __ r_ !:'----·-.. --• I • ·-· -------·· ··---~. -I l ~r ~~IC>Fdl, __ .4M!R,ty..ll!!-.J-2J!iP'~.Q._j 1; R1.<tS~ I Ii( :~--.-:--· -• > ... t,-~<olilln•'·llf~'HoFW.!)I ! fl fhr'&N'.J'S • ~ " llF'acilityEl'a!fa'"'Elevntiah (ft) if; ...... _ ... ··• · • _ ... _ ••••.• ] Iii~~ l ~::!~~;incio.t ITT. C-------··--·---.. -_.. ---· ~rfi~ •· c:. ~~~Wl<f.h1a1 j~ :.-.~i;;;;rn I ~E'ff~O~f~J 13 1-l!!!El!!!l!!/llQIM tl41tSi.r..S~tMIJ fl Pj\~ I · .. t 6ollcnl Sido Slope f!Nl ': ·~ . IRi#i•~s~"*"Nl h ~ ·lr~Pon0 t jlTqiS~Sfq>olHNI ;~ i 1! I M-E~ .~ .... , . t= ·-~.<;!lily Oime~i~i~!-9·~J I"' --_,J ~ !nu•ffaliClft :ttO • , !! ;i I 1; I . ~ j ~ t I 1 j j I .... :J, , Sove•.jl ~•.Y .· -~ ,_x ;::·~o...; I :cr._ .... -:.~~.l;.)u · Oulfe! Sttudllle I'(,,.. ~1-1.ao 12--·-:-1 Ais<r o..m.t<(o-.J lir ~ AiwTJll)e f~--:-1 llotcllT.-(ii;;;;i.r--71 K«cti H'9't tnl Jo ~ .-;i "'°'th""dh(nl IOoF ~ Omi<» Diama~rl'feigJ\f Wumbar (Ir>) (Ft) ClMu (ds} Ja~ -7'! io---· -!-J lr.M 473 ra ...... -=~ ra---!~ o ro---:-1 ra-~:-1 O' PondV<tmfatA~HeadlOM!.ftl .ll!O Pondl..c1-..t l[io -:'~ Strow' Pond Table l(ij;,;;:r;i;ie--:-! u~ 1.s.Ge.o1 r:-:;c--.d ll'llJ •• :J~..,,,":'.'L..·:;:rJ:L· ill _..J ~I ... ----~------..--.---·--41312fJ20' 2:17 PM . ·:---1 r.b ·' I~ •.r.: .L!!:'_i.. '~v '-7 .. q 1-f-~LIL' _ni-~JI:· ----·--·--~--· ..... ._. .... -------~---· .. -· --~~~-~~~~~~~--~~-~ ·-_____ .._..,.._.. _________ _ u--;.--;;:;~jj ;{-~~-~~~:,;;;:~;;,-··-·-------·-·· -··-· -----·~ ---------·-··· -··--·--· fole &rt\ ,,,_ H.14' D ~Id A f." r·-···~ __ , ____ ....... ________ ,,··-------------···-· -··-----. -------.. :----------·-!I ~j~~ LliU!~~ -"-=c·~~ -·• _,_._..~ -==-t°" -·~ . •· _,_,.. ...... ~-.. _:;:::;:;;_~~-----..--~~----~----------------.-~.1l0>1f;:'" r-· -·· ···--··· ·--. . j. ·~·1· -·····. ----··-... ·--·-·1:::~· ~-~~~~~j J E lGEi I.~ 0 ~ !J IDIH1 1 IL .. •"' t..64a-lt.O.&AO.t.6A &~ & ~ 6.6.4AA60.66AMAlJ~ 0 oooo00~~)t 4)000.000 )()4)( ~o~~~x>X)~~~ 10E" .21 , '5 ohb0090iOOO, , _ • ;,Y:-)(' r ,,,,,~;~,zo.~""~'"'-¥if"!lrirn. 1G 11n · Cumulative Probability 9Q 3! .£.,...,.,..,. --FbwP1-q @.~~ l:~.----J~~l~J-AMl~u d.c ... otr 1,··1NT.i.il"ui'lW'tY'EW>w1,ifNSEmiA1sr----·· _ ~ SUJ'll.11!1; l DN !'RW~ 1000 T1~'a,iPc.rd lP!LOllTLETS ~ l(JQ1l1~PciM1!.TW,)£~ _t!O•a:J!t.!..sTI::•l!!~J fwpTPl:ie1 !----' e-~ ';i'~r:e~;;;;.::':'-r--~,;,.o•~-,..,.~-':~ .... =--,. ..... .._,_~~--'J'.""'(aS-) 0501 1110~ !1611!1 ·1 ~ Yea.r • 0.0~~1 o.n~~~ a.OLt7 f -' TEJ&t' • lf.!13U U.?1,-!S IJ.0237 I, 1111 Tt<tY -~-~l 1r.11n o.oan 2s Y..-...-• o .. CUJ€6 a. 2~64' o-.n~u 1so 'te<te • o .• 0801 o .::na1 ,1ao YMr. • a. 091e o ,.3203· ·~4rl.y l>•IJ(• 1''4.! • .l.!J!ll I uu 19~2 l'.9!!-3 19!4<. 19.il·s 19'5~ 1!157 u.sa tg.n 1g.611 J:gll'.1 l.96:t 8.a.!61 r..nu e-. 0-2.ln 0.0!!17 o.ou:r Q,Ql.Jl o.01n 0.0~60 l!.021'3' 0-.01.:116 a,cr~t!I (),!IU& O.Cl1UI O.GtlU Ct.U5'7 D.Q.931 Q.13?-6 D,11970 (}. 1.l91 o..IJ"l1 l),Q•62lf 0.06(9 O.ll26:1 o.aaa~ 0.0682' 0.10·•7 c.osn Cl.U.933 ~!16l 5.0116 a.16~~ fg.6', 0.013'& Q.D~i& l96S o:. 02'1"1. D. 26-Ct5 igs6 0.0105 o.063~ 1911'7 Q.O;l7!1 O.U.91 196~ 0.0366 0.1:297 1'&' o.oog~ 0.0~17 Q;, 0!&3'7 o.1M9 0.()286-=· o.o:r.6 o. 017' G.012'~ o-.ooeer o-.oou o.oo;10 O.OIJ'73 o.1n2.r> 0.00611 ().~?07 0.!)·?76 11'.00!H 0.(166.S o.o&a G'.Ca.'1I c .. c•al! o:.o:a6' 01.0077 0'.02:1.f G.001!1 19711 ~.ll056 o.1$~9 o.oiua 1!J11 o.oa19 o.t:U:t n.o:n1J rlocdF•-Meftiocl I t91'2 o.o.ua o.ons a.craeo I ~· logP-f)lp&l~1'18 1!173 O,Q1'!J 0.011;3 Ill.GU!! • I ( WcJibA 14'l'.c n n'>'-r"> 11 lfOllC'"f 11 ftl\D!:V ., ..1 ("' c~.... ~ ~--.. :.__ .. ----------·----·-·-·: ·---~--.. -, ... ~,:·; -----------i.------------~--------..--.·-·~=--..i..-----------------------------------, -~~n -~-ff IIJJ_~ } .. t1 .. r1rr1~ 1 fi'.U'~:j~-~---------·----------~---·----·--·-.--------·--·---··-· ··--·-·-· fil• ~dit \litoo Htlp . Ir.. -------··-~-----------· [(~ ~ 1:1~:0~~ ... _; :·~ ... .-.·~~"""~ ............ ·~-..... -. .._~.:.~--~··-~.,...:. """'c ~------=-uo --------. --=~------~"'··~~--~~~-. ~,~~~~ 11~':-~: :.i .. l!;;~.;-.·::_-_-~_ .. --. -) ~ 9 ~ 11 ; llctefMll -·--· "!; !' ~ Sl<lhdoolf\>wAdle 'ei~i ~~~~ ~:. _;: :Sl!o!~!lfdfb,,f:ll'e [<f.l!i~l . ] ~ I !•5111rU<!AowP.* i~ll4"ttl·.=:1l!1s~wefb.•1.i., :n'ci."1,:{] : ~ ........ ·--. ..... ·-··-·· ....... ··-.... ~ i.~. I I ! ~--J·Fb.Fc~L.__:!f.._J!b!.t.Qr~---§!~-~---l_!'~f.l!<.!~J -low 1cm Tr~F~ 1AU00tl£TS ~ 1001 t1~Fan.i I STAG£~ Al04\&t& fF!c.H I_~! i'T .. :;i Ev~I POC~-· l'l<1c1t!rr-f.f~ a· l1tgP-Tl'Pt'IH71J (" Wt:bl. (" Uw•l¥IO r-(.' .......... ...,,,.._ -·-.... ,,.==-==--·--·· ....... --.. .-.... ._ ... _._.-.__ .. _.,..,. .... :.·-..,....._._.., ... ::.:-.·.,.,..,.--=:-.• ~-------·---·-------...... --~~-~ ·--------·-~-~~------------------------------i-. t~ ..__~;-~ f: I GJ-iJL~J=-~--~ fl ra-~·:~ _ ~ _ _ __ _ ~ . Western Washington Hydrology Model PROJECT REPORT ___________________________________________________________________ Project Name: 04.03.20 Smaller Pond Site Address: City : Report Date : 4/3/2020 Gage : Burlington Data Start : 1948/10/01 Data End : 1999/09/30 Precip Scale: 0.83 WWHM3 Version: ___________________________________________________________________ PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Forest, Mod .5 C, Pasture, Flat .91 Impervious Land Use Acres ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C IMP DISP FLAT .43 C, Lawn, Flat .14 C, Pasture, Flat .5 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.19 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.05 POND 0.1 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Trapezoidal Pond 1, Trapezoidal Pond 1, ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Trapezoidal Pond 1 Bottom Length: 79ft. Bottom Width: 40ft. Depth : 3ft. Volume at riser head : 0.1801ft. Side slope 1: 3 To 1 Side slope 2: 3 To 1 Side slope 3: 3 To 1 Side slope 4: 3 To 1 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 2 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. NotchType : Rectangular Notch Width : 0.023 ft. Notch Height: 0.659 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter: 0.569 in. Elevation: 0 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 ___________________________________________________________________ Pond Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dschrg(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.000 0.073 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.073 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.067 0.074 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.100 0.074 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.133 0.075 0.010 0.003 0.000 0.167 0.075 0.012 0.003 0.000 0.200 0.076 0.015 0.004 0.000 0.233 0.076 0.017 0.004 0.000 0.267 0.077 0.020 0.004 0.000 0.300 0.078 0.023 0.005 0.000 0.333 0.078 0.025 0.005 0.000 0.367 0.079 0.028 0.005 0.000 0.400 0.079 0.030 0.005 0.000 0.433 0.080 0.033 0.006 0.000 0.467 0.080 0.036 0.006 0.000 0.500 0.081 0.038 0.006 0.000 0.533 0.082 0.041 0.006 0.000 0.567 0.082 0.044 0.006 0.000 0.600 0.083 0.047 0.007 0.000 0.633 0.083 0.049 0.007 0.000 0.667 0.084 0.052 0.007 0.000 0.700 0.084 0.055 0.007 0.000 0.733 0.085 0.058 0.007 0.000 0.767 0.086 0.061 0.007 0.000 0.800 0.086 0.063 0.008 0.000 0.833 0.087 0.066 0.008 0.000 0.867 0.087 0.069 0.008 0.000 0.900 0.088 0.072 0.008 0.000 0.933 0.089 0.075 0.008 0.000 0.967 0.089 0.078 0.008 0.000 1.000 0.090 0.081 0.009 0.000 1.033 0.090 0.084 0.009 0.000 1.067 0.091 0.087 0.009 0.000 1.100 0.092 0.090 0.009 0.000 1.133 0.092 0.093 0.009 0.000 1.167 0.093 0.096 0.009 0.000 1.200 0.093 0.099 0.009 0.000 1.233 0.094 0.102 0.009 0.000 1.267 0.095 0.106 0.010 0.000 1.300 0.095 0.109 0.010 0.000 1.333 0.096 0.112 0.010 0.000 1.367 0.096 0.115 0.010 0.000 1.400 0.097 0.118 0.011 0.000 1.433 0.098 0.122 0.012 0.000 1.467 0.098 0.125 0.014 0.000 1.500 0.099 0.128 0.015 0.000 1.533 0.100 0.131 0.017 0.000 1.567 0.100 0.135 0.018 0.000 1.600 0.101 0.138 0.020 0.000 1.633 0.102 0.142 0.022 0.000 1.667 0.102 0.145 0.024 0.000 1.700 0.103 0.148 0.026 0.000 1.733 0.103 0.152 0.029 0.000 1.767 0.104 0.155 0.031 0.000 1.800 0.105 0.159 0.033 0.000 1.833 0.105 0.162 0.035 0.000 1.867 0.106 0.166 0.038 0.000 1.900 0.107 0.169 0.040 0.000 1.933 0.107 0.173 0.043 0.000 1.967 0.108 0.176 0.045 0.000 2.000 0.109 0.180 0.048 0.000 2.033 0.109 0.184 0.107 0.000 2.067 0.110 0.187 0.215 0.000 2.100 0.111 0.191 0.356 0.000 2.133 0.111 0.195 0.522 0.000 2.167 0.112 0.198 0.711 0.000 2.200 0.113 0.202 0.919 0.000 2.233 0.113 0.206 1.146 0.000 2.267 0.114 0.210 1.389 0.000 2.300 0.115 0.214 1.649 0.000 2.333 0.115 0.217 1.923 0.000 2.367 0.116 0.221 2.211 0.000 2.400 0.117 0.225 2.513 0.000 2.433 0.117 0.229 2.827 0.000 2.467 0.118 0.233 3.154 0.000 2.500 0.119 0.237 3.492 0.000 2.533 0.119 0.241 3.842 0.000 2.567 0.120 0.245 4.204 0.000 2.600 0.121 0.249 4.576 0.000 2.633 0.121 0.253 4.958 0.000 2.667 0.122 0.257 5.351 0.000 2.700 0.123 0.261 5.753 0.000 2.733 0.124 0.265 6.166 0.000 2.767 0.124 0.269 6.587 0.000 2.800 0.125 0.273 7.018 0.000 2.833 0.126 0.278 7.459 0.000 2.867 0.126 0.282 7.908 0.000 2.900 0.127 0.286 8.365 0.000 2.933 0.128 0.290 8.832 0.000 2.967 0.128 0.295 9.306 0.000 3.000 0.129 0.299 9.789 0.000 3.033 0.130 0.303 10.28 0.000 ___________________________________________________________________ MITIGATED LAND USE ___________________________________________________________________ ANALYSIS RESULTS Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.019241 5 year 0.03636 10 year 0.049253 25 year 0.06664 50 year 0.080094 100 year 0.0938 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.011723 5 year 0.023748 10 year 0.036257 25 year 0.059412 50 year 0.083722 100 year 0.115865 ___________________________________________________________________ Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1950 0.056 0.029 1951 0.035 0.035 1952 0.028 0.017 1953 0.023 0.013 1954 0.010 0.009 1955 0.013 0.009 1956 0.017 0.008 1957 0.016 0.007 1958 0.027 0.013 1959 0.012 0.007 1960 0.032 0.021 1961 0.020 0.023 1962 0.012 0.009 1963 0.002 0.007 1964 0.012 0.007 1965 0.014 0.007 1966 0.027 0.024 1967 0.011 0.006 1968 0.017 0.008 1969 0.037 0.023 1970 0.009 0.008 1971 0.006 0.006 1972 0.038 0.037 1973 0.018 0.008 1974 0.016 0.012 1975 0.035 0.030 1976 0.147 0.299 1977 0.010 0.009 1978 0.011 0.007 1979 0.018 0.011 1980 0.010 0.006 1981 0.026 0.019 1982 0.018 0.008 1983 0.042 0.031 1984 0.020 0.025 1985 0.042 0.021 1986 0.007 0.007 1987 0.027 0.013 1988 0.017 0.015 1989 0.044 0.008 1990 0.011 0.008 1991 0.028 0.040 1992 0.050 0.083 1993 0.020 0.008 1994 0.019 0.008 1995 0.002 0.005 1996 0.004 0.007 1997 0.021 0.007 1998 0.091 0.023 1999 0.022 0.008 2000 0.012 0.007 ___________________________________________________________________ Ranked Yearly Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.1474 0.2994 2 0.0906 0.0831 3 0.0561 0.0401 4 0.0499 0.0371 5 0.0444 0.0346 6 0.0421 0.0310 7 0.0418 0.0298 8 0.0379 0.0288 9 0.0368 0.0246 10 0.0352 0.0235 11 0.0345 0.0229 12 0.0319 0.0227 13 0.0282 0.0226 14 0.0282 0.0215 15 0.0273 0.0207 16 0.0272 0.0195 17 0.0271 0.0172 18 0.0262 0.0155 19 0.0227 0.0129 20 0.0215 0.0126 21 0.0206 0.0126 22 0.0205 0.0115 23 0.0200 0.0108 24 0.0198 0.0091 25 0.0187 0.0090 26 0.0179 0.0088 27 0.0178 0.0088 28 0.0175 0.0083 29 0.0175 0.0083 30 0.0175 0.0082 31 0.0173 0.0081 32 0.0160 0.0080 33 0.0155 0.0079 34 0.0138 0.0078 35 0.0134 0.0077 36 0.0118 0.0077 37 0.0117 0.0075 38 0.0116 0.0073 39 0.0116 0.0073 40 0.0114 0.0071 41 0.0113 0.0071 42 0.0109 0.0071 43 0.0103 0.0071 44 0.0097 0.0071 45 0.0097 0.0068 46 0.0093 0.0068 47 0.0072 0.0065 48 0.0056 0.0065 49 0.0042 0.0064 50 0.0024 0.0058 51 0.0015 0.0053 ___________________________________________________________________ POC #1 The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. Flow(CFS) Predev Dev Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0096 4048 3855 95 Pass 0.0103 3556 2790 78 Pass 0.0110 3132 2426 77 Pass 0.0118 2793 2177 77 Pass 0.0125 2527 2002 79 Pass 0.0132 2275 1855 81 Pass 0.0139 2070 1718 82 Pass 0.0146 1873 1572 83 Pass 0.0153 1697 1430 84 Pass 0.0160 1526 1301 85 Pass 0.0167 1374 1201 87 Pass 0.0175 1254 1127 89 Pass 0.0182 1144 1054 92 Pass 0.0189 1030 984 95 Pass 0.0196 937 906 96 Pass 0.0203 852 834 97 Pass 0.0210 790 761 96 Pass 0.0217 734 706 96 Pass 0.0224 687 648 94 Pass 0.0231 636 593 93 Pass 0.0239 583 545 93 Pass 0.0246 532 502 94 Pass 0.0253 488 472 96 Pass 0.0260 441 440 99 Pass 0.0267 400 406 101 Pass 0.0274 369 382 103 Pass 0.0281 348 343 98 Pass 0.0288 320 302 94 Pass 0.0296 302 271 89 Pass 0.0303 288 256 88 Pass 0.0310 272 232 85 Pass 0.0317 249 217 87 Pass 0.0324 221 208 94 Pass 0.0331 198 194 97 Pass 0.0338 184 182 98 Pass 0.0345 165 167 101 Pass 0.0352 150 150 100 Pass 0.0360 140 137 97 Pass 0.0367 133 127 95 Pass 0.0374 124 117 94 Pass 0.0381 117 111 94 Pass 0.0388 113 104 92 Pass 0.0395 108 99 91 Pass 0.0402 106 91 85 Pass 0.0409 99 85 85 Pass 0.0417 91 81 89 Pass 0.0424 87 78 89 Pass 0.0431 85 74 87 Pass 0.0438 84 68 80 Pass 0.0445 80 66 82 Pass 0.0452 77 64 83 Pass 0.0459 73 59 80 Pass 0.0466 71 56 78 Pass 0.0473 70 52 74 Pass 0.0481 67 50 74 Pass 0.0488 63 47 74 Pass 0.0495 61 46 75 Pass 0.0502 58 45 77 Pass 0.0509 56 45 80 Pass 0.0516 54 43 79 Pass 0.0523 52 43 82 Pass 0.0530 50 43 86 Pass 0.0538 49 43 87 Pass 0.0545 46 42 91 Pass 0.0552 44 42 95 Pass 0.0559 42 41 97 Pass 0.0566 40 41 102 Pass 0.0573 40 41 102 Pass 0.0580 39 41 105 Pass 0.0587 39 41 105 Pass 0.0595 38 40 105 Pass 0.0602 38 40 105 Pass 0.0609 37 39 105 Pass 0.0616 37 39 105 Pass 0.0623 37 39 105 Pass 0.0630 36 39 108 Pass 0.0637 36 38 105 Pass 0.0644 35 36 102 Pass 0.0651 35 35 100 Pass 0.0659 34 34 100 Pass 0.0666 33 34 103 Pass 0.0673 33 34 103 Pass 0.0680 33 32 96 Pass 0.0687 32 32 100 Pass 0.0694 32 32 100 Pass 0.0701 30 31 103 Pass 0.0708 29 29 100 Pass 0.0716 28 29 103 Pass 0.0723 28 29 103 Pass 0.0730 28 29 103 Pass 0.0737 27 27 100 Pass 0.0744 27 26 96 Pass 0.0751 26 26 100 Pass 0.0758 25 24 96 Pass 0.0765 24 23 95 Pass 0.0772 24 23 95 Pass 0.0780 23 23 100 Pass 0.0787 23 23 100 Pass 0.0794 23 22 95 Pass 0.0801 22 21 95 Pass _____________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC 1. On-line facility volume: 0.0533 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0.01 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.047 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0.0251 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0263 cfs. ___________________________________________________________________ Perlnd and Implnd 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. APPENDIX 11 -2014 DOE BMP 15.108, TS.11, TS.12, and TS.13 Setbacks Local governments may requ ire specific setbacks in sites with slopes over 40%, land slide areas , open water features , springs, wells , and septic tank drain fields. Adequate room for maintenance access and equipment should also be considered. Examples of setbacks commonly used include the following : 1. All infiltration systems should be at least 10 feet from any structure, property line, or sensitive area (except slopes over 40%). 2. All infiltration systems must be at least 50 feet from the top of any slope over 40%. This setback may be reduced to 15 feet based on a geotechnical evaluation, but in no instances may it be less than the buffer width. 3. For sites with septic systems, infiltration systems must be downgradient of the drainfield unless the site topography clearly prohibits subsurface flows from inter- secting the drainfield. 111-3.1.2 Downspout Dispersion Systems (BMP T5.1 OB) Downspout dispersion systems are splash blocks or gravel filled trenches, which serve to spread roof runoff over vegetated pe rvio us a re as. Dispersion attenuates peak flows by slowing the runoff entering into the conveyance system, allowing some infiltration, and providing some water quality benefits. Applications & Limitations Downspout dispersion may be used in all subdivision lots where downspout full infilt- ration, full dispersion, and bioretention/rain gardens are not feasible. Runoff Modeling for Roof Downspout Dispersion In WWHM, roof areas may be modeled as grassed surfaces (landscape) if roof runoff is dispersed according to the requirements of this section on lots greater than 22,000 square feet, and the vegetated flowpath is 50 feet or larger through undisturbed native landscape or lawn/landscape area that meets BMP T5.13: Post-Construction Soil Qual- ity and Depth (p. 911 ) . If the ava ila b I e vegetated flowpath is 25 to 50 feet, use of a dis- pe rs ion trench allows modeling the roof as 50% impervious/50% landscape. This is done in \MNHM on the Mitigated Scenario screen by entering the roof area into one of the entry options for dispersal of impervious area runoff. For V\NVHM2012, see Appendix 111-C: Washington State Department of Ecology Low Impact Development Flow Modeling Guidance (p.587). Design Criteria 1. Use downspout trenches designed as shown in Figure 111-3.1.5 Typical Downspout Dispersion Trench (p.461) and Figure 111-3.1.6 Standard Dispersion Trench with 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for We stem Washington Volume Ill -Chapter 3 -Page 458 Notched Grade Board (p.462) for all downspout dispersion applications except where splash blocks are allowed below. 2. Splash blocks shown in Figure 111-3.1.7 Typical Downspout Splashblock Dis- persion (p.464) may be used for downspouts discharging to a vegetated flowpath at least 50 feet in length as measured from the downspout to the downstream prop- erty I ine, structure, slope over 15%, stream, wetland , or other impervious surface. Sensitive area buffers may count toward flowpath lengths. 3. Cover the vegetated flowpath with well-established lawn or pasture, landscaping with well-established groundcover, or native vegetation with natural groundcover. The groundcover shall be dense enough to help disperse and infiltrate flows and to prevent erosion. 4 . If the vegetated flowpath (measured as defined above) is less than 25 feet, a per- forated stub out connection per 111-3.1.3 Perforated Stub Out Connections (BMP T5.1 OC) (p.465) may be used in lieu of downspout dispersion. A perforated stub out may also be used where implementation of downspout dispersion might cause erosion or flooding problems, either on site or on adjacent lots. For example, this provision might be appropriate for lots constructed on steep hills where downspout discharge could culminate and might pose a potential hazard for lower lying lots, or where dispersed flows could create problems for adjacent off-site lots. This pro- vision does not apply to situations where lots are flat and on-site downspout dis- persal would result in saturated yards. Perforated stub-outs are not appropriate when seasonal water table is <1 foot below trench bottom. Note: For all other types of projects, the use of a perforated stub-out in lieu of down- spout dispersion shall be as determined by the Local Plan Approval Authority. 5. For sites with septic systems, the discharge point of all dispersion systems must be downgradient of the drainfield. This requirement may be waived if site topography clearly prohibits flows from intersecting the drainfield. Design Criteria for Dispersion Trenches 1 . A vegetated flowpath of at least 25 feet in length must be maintained between the outlet of the trench and any property line, structure, stream, wetland, or impervious surface. A vegetated flowpath of at least 50 feet in length must be maintained between the outlet of the trench and any slope steeper than 15%. Sensitive area buffers may count towards flowpath lengths. 2. Trenches serving up to 700 square feet of roof area may be s imp le 10-foot-long by 2-foot wide gravel filled trenches as shown in Figure 111-3 .1.5 Typical Downspout Dispersion Trench (p.461 ). For roof areas larger than 700 square feet, a dispersion trench with notched grade board as shown in Figure 111-3.1 .6 Standard Dispersion Trench with Notched Grade Board (p.462) or alternative material approved by the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual tor Western Washington Volume Ill -Chapter 3 -Page 459 Local Plan Approval Authority may be used. The total length of this design must not exceed 50 feet and must provide at least 10 feet of trench per 700 square feet of roof area. 3. Maintain a setback of at least 5 feet between any edge of the trench and any struc- ture or property line. 4. No erosion or flooding of downstream properties may result. 5. Have a geotechnical engineer or a licensed geologist, hydrogeologist, or engin- eering geologist evaluate runoff discharged towards landslide hazard areas. Don not place the discharge point on or above slopes greater than 15% or above erosion hazard areas without evaluation by a geotechnical engineer or qualified geologist and jurisdiction approval. 6 . For purposes of maintaining adequate separation of flows discharged from adja- cent dispersion devices, the outer edge of the vegetated flowpath segment for the dispersion trench must not overlap with other flowpath segments, except those associated with sheet flow from a non-native pervious surface. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume Ill -Chapter 3 -Page 460 Figure 111-3.1.5 Typical Downspout Dispersion Trench level outlet 18"min. 1 Yi .. -Y." washed rock Trench X-Section slope - ~ 700 sq. fl > 700 sq. ft. 2' x 10 ' level lrenches standard dispersion trench wf notched grade board length 1 o· per 700 sq. ft. of roof area Plan View of Roof ,... DEPARTMENT O F ECOLOGY State of Wash i ngton NOTTO SCALE Figure 111-3.1 .5 Typical Downspout Dispers ion Trench Revised November 2015 Please see http://www.scy.wa.gov/oopyright.htmlfor copyright notice including pe1TT1 issions, l imitati on of liability, and di sclaimer. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for We stem Washington Volume Ill -Chapter 3 -Page 461 Figure 111-3.1.6 Standard Dispersion Trench with Notched Grade Board 50· A I notched grade board 2· x 2" notches 18" O.C. Plan 12"min. 36" max 2"x 12" pressure treated grade board filter fabric Section A-A , ,..... DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY State of Washington clean out wye from pipe 4" or 6" perforated pipe laid flat/level A -influent pipe (max design flow s0.5 cfs per trench) Type 1 CB w/solid cover (locking) clean out wye from pipe ·1s% max for flow control/water quality treatment in rvra1 areas. Flow to second dispersal trench if necessary t - Flow to other branching CB's as necessary Notes: Type 1 CB w/solid cover --- 1. This trench shall be constructed so as to prevent point discharge and/or erosion. 2. Trenches may be placed no closer than 50 feet to one another. (100 feet along flowline) 3. Trench and grade board must be level. Align to follow contours of site. 4. Support post spacing as required by soil conditions to ensure grade board remains level. NOTTO SCALE Figure 111-3.1.6 Standard Dispersion Trench with Notched Grade Board Revised November 2015 Please see http://www.ecy.wa.gov/copyright.htmlfor copyright notice including permissions, limitation of liability, and disclaimer. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume Ill -Chapter 3 -Page 462 require use of LID principles and BMP's. • Public health and safety standards. • Transportation regulations to maintain the option for tutu re expansion or multi- modal use of public rights-of-way. • A local Critical Area Ordinance that provides protection of tree species . • A local code or rule adopted as part of a Wellhead Protection Program established under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act; or adopted to protect a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area established under the State Growth Management Act. BMP TS.1 OA: Downspout Full Infiltration Please refer to 111-3.1.1 Downspout Full Infiltration Systems (BMP T5.10A) {p.452). BMP TS.108: Downspout Dispersion Systems Please refer to 111-3.1.2 Downspout Dispersion Systems (BMP T5.10B) (p.458). BMP TS.1 OC: Perforated Stub-out Connections Please refer to 111-3.1.3 Perforated Stub Out Connections (BMP T5.1 OC) (p.465). BMP TS.11: Concentrated Flow Dispersion 1 Purpose and Definition Dispersion of concentrated flows from driveways or other pavement through a vegetated pervious area attenuates peak flows by slowing entry of the runoff into the conveyance system, allowing for some infiltration, and providing some water quality benefits. See El.9- ure V-5 .3 .1 Typical Concentrated Flow Dispersion for Steep Driveways (p.907). Applications and Limitations • Use this BMP in any situation where concentrated flow can be dispersed through vegetation . • F igure V-5.3.1 Typical Concentrated Flow D ispersion for Steep Driveways (p.907} shows tvvo possible ways of spreading flows from steep driveways. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 905 Design Guidelines • Maintain a vegetated flowpath of at least 50 feet between the discharge point and any property l i ne, structure , steep slope, stream, lake, wetland , lake , or other imper- vious surface . • A maximum of 700 square feet of impervious area may drain to each concentrated flow dispersion BMP . • Prov ide a pad of crushed rock (a min imum of 2 feet wide by 3 feet long by 6 inches deep) at each discharge point. • No erosion or flooding of downstream properties may result. • Runoff discharged towards landslide hazard areas must be evaluated by a geo- technical engineer or qualified geologist. Do not place the discharge point on or above slopes greater than 20 %, or above erosio n hazard areas , w ithout evaluation by a geotechnical engineer or qualified geologist and approval by the Local Plan Approval Authority. • For sites with septic systems, the discharge point must be ten feet downgradient of the drainfield primary and reserve areas (WAC 246-272A-0210). A Local Plan Approval Authority may waive this requirement if site topography clearly proh ibits flows from intersecting the drainfield. Runoff Modeling Where BMP TS.11: Concentrated Flow Dispersion is used to disperse runoff into an und isturbed native landscape area or an area that meets BMP T5.13: Post-Construction Soil Quality and Depth (p.911), and the vegetated flow path is at least 50 feet, the imper- vious area may be modeled as landscaped area. Where the vegetated flowpath is 25 - 50 feet, using a dispersion trench (see BMP T5.10B: Downspout Dispersion Systems (p.905)) allows modeling the impervious area as 50% impervious/50% landscape. This is done in the WWHM 3 on the Mitigated Scenario screen by entering the dispersed impervious area into one of the entry options for dispersal of impervious area runoff. For procedures in VVVVHM 2012, see Appendix 111-C: Washington State Department of Eco- logy Low Impact Development Flow Modeling Guidance (p.587). 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 906 Figure V-5.3.1 Typical Concentrated Flow Dispersion for Steep Driveways l 2-4" I--6' min --I Berm Detail Plan k? ~ ~ ~ ~!>- .;...." :~" .... .... -: ('CJ I I J /I~ I I I I tj~ : / I Locate drain 25': t ~ I 1 from ROW if '' i2 u; J I . I I: 700 sq. ft. max. between berms dnveway s opes1 I • • I toward street. ' - Driveway .. Slope / 6-o;\i. / I / j,~ I I I %~ f t' <;>'~\.... I 0~'-. ~~ Diagonal berm with Steep Driveway with Diagonal Benns dispersion trench Plan Steep Driveway with Slotted Drains NOTTO SCALE -I -I ~I I>-I fj? I ~I ""I :~ J 'V/ ""I I I.,!. I / Locate drain 25' from • 9 • I ROW if driveway ~~N' Gi I slopes toward street. iii , ~ 1 / I I 700 sq. ft. max. between drains 1 / !• I I •h • Driveway .. Slope / J '-.." I /.~)it I 1 ~ v<:!~ f I ~~ ~ll>~t. \.)_ I ~ &O'"" ' \ Diagonal berm with \ dispersion trench lllllUI ! =======·' I ~HH~~i \ l 25' vegetated 1: \ \ flowpath \ Figure V-5.3.1 ...... DEPARTMENT OF Typical Concentrated Flow Dispersion for Steep Driveways ECOLOGY State of Washington Revised January 2016 Please see http://www.ecy.wa.gov/copyright.htmlfor copyright notioe including permissions, limitation elf liability, and disclaimer. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 907 BMP TS.12: Sheet Flow Dispersion Purpose and Definition Sheet flow dispersion is the simplest method of runoff control. This BMP can be used for any impervious or pervious surface that is graded to avoid concentrating flows ). Because flows are already d ispersed as they leave the surface , they need only traverse a narrow band of adjacent vegetation fo r effective attenuation and treatment. Applications and Limitations Use this BMP for flat or moderately sloping (< 15% slope) surfaces such as driveways, sports courts, patios , roofs without gutters, lawns, pastures; or any situation where con- centration of flows can be avoided. Design Guidelines • See Figure V-5.3.2 Sheet Flow Dispersion for Driveways (p.910) for details for driveways . • Provide a 2-foot-wide transition zone to discourage channeling between the edge of the impervious surface (or building eaves) and the downslope vegetation. This transition zone may consist of an extension of subgrade material (crushed rock), modular pavement, drain rock , or other material acceptable to the Local Plan Approval Authority. • Prov ide a 10 -foot-wide vegetated buffer for up to 20 feet of w idth of paved or i mper- vious surface . Provide an additional 10 feet of vegetated buffer width for each addi- tional 20 feet of impervious surface width or fraction thereof. (For example, if a driveway is 30 feet wide and 60 feet long provide a 20-foot wide by 60-foot long vegetated buffer, with a 2-foot by 60-foot transition zone.) • No erosion or flooding of downstream properties may result. • Runoff discharge toward landslide hazard areas must be evaluated by a geo- technical engineer or a qual ified geologist. Do not allow sheet flow on or above slopes g reater than 20%, or above erosion hazard areas, w ithout evaluation by a geotechnical eng i neer or quali fied geologist and approval by the Local Plan Approval Authority. • For sites with septic systems, the discharge area must be ten feet downgradient of the d rai nfield primary and reserve areas (WAC 246-272A-0210). A Local P Ian Approval Authority may waive this requirement if site topography clearly prohibits flows from intersecting the drainfield . 2014 S totmwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 908 Runoff Modeling Where BMP T5.12 : Sheet Flow Dispersion is used to disperse runoff into an undisturbed native landscape area or an area that meets BMP T5.13: Post-Construction Soil Quality and Depth (p.911 ), and the vegetated flow path is 50 feet or more, the impervious area may be modeled as landscaped area. Where ·the vegetated flowpath is 25 to 50 feet, use of a dispersion trench (see BMP T5.1 OB : Downspout Dispersion Systems (p .905)) allows modeling the impervious area as 50% impervious/SO% landscape. This is done in the \/l/WHM3 on the Mitigation Scenario screen by entering the dispersed impervious area into one of the entry options for dispersal of impervious area ru naff. For procedures in \/l/WHM 2012, see Appendix 111-C: Washington State Department of Ecology Low Impact Development Flow Modeling Guidance (p.587). 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 909 Figure V-5.3.2 Sheet Flow Dispersion for Driveways . . I >-~ IQ ~ ~-.,, ., ,..,-·r ""'i~ I I Locate drain 25' from = ? IE ROW if driveway _ .2> slopes toward street. 1 a:: 700 sq. ft. max. between berms l ~-Driveway ., Slope Berm Detail ,...... DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY State of Washington Driveway Dispersion Trench Driveway Slope Varies and Slopes Toward Street I I I I I I I / / /" / Max. 2%1 cross slope t I ') / ~/ / I Driveway .,.. Slope Figure V-5.3.2 NOTTO SCALE Sheet Flow Dispersion for Driveways Revised January 2016 Please see http://www.ecy.wa.gov!copyrighl.html for copyright notice including permissions, limitation of liability, and disclaimer. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V-Chapter 5 -Page 910 BMP T5.13: Post-Construction Soil Quality and Depth Purpose and Definition Naturally occurring (undisturbed) soil and vegetation provide important stormwater func- tions including : water infiltration; nutrient, sediment, and pollutant adsorption; sediment and pollutant biofiltration; water interflow storage and transm issio n ; and pollutant decom- position. These functions are l argely lost when development strips away native soil and vegetation and replaces it with minimal topsoil and sod. Not only are these important stormwater functions lost, but such landscapes themselves become pollution generating peivious surfaces due to increased use of pesticides, fertilizers and other landscaping and household/industrial chemicals, the concentration of pet wastes, and pollutants that accompany roadside litter. Establishing soil quality and depth regains greater stormwater funct io ns in the post devel- opment landscape , provides increased treatment of pollutants and sediments that result from development and habitation, and minimizes the need for some landscaping chem- icals, thus reducing pollution through prevention . Applications and Limitations Establishing a minimum soil quality and depth is not the same as preseivation of nat- urally occurring soil and vegetation. However, establishing a minimum soil quality and depth will provide improved on-site management of stormwater flow and water quality . Soil organic matter can be attained through numerous materials such as compost, com- posted woody material, biosolids, and forest product residuals. It is important that the materials used to meet the soil quality and depth BMP be appropriate and beneficial to the plant cover to be established. Likewise, it is important that imported topsoils improve soil conditions and do not have an excessive percent of clay fines. This BMP can be considered infeasible on till soil slopes greater than 33 percent. Design Guidelines • Soil retention. Retain , in an undisturbed state, the duff layer and native topsoi l to the maximum extent practicable. In any areas requiring grading remove and stock- pile the duff layer and topsoil on site in a designated, controlled area, not adjacent to public resources and critical areas, to be reapplied to other portions of the site where feasible . • Soil quality. All areas subject to clearing and grading that have not been covered by impervious surface, incorporated into a drainage facility or engineered as struc- tural fill or slope shall, at project completion, demonstrate the following: 1. A topsoil layer with a min imu m organic matter content of 10% dry weight in planting beds, and 5% organic matter content in turf areas, and a pH from 6.0 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 911 to 8.0 or matching the pH of the undisturbed soil. The topsoil layer shall have a minimum depth of eight inches except where tree roots limit the depth of incorporation of amendments needed to meet the criteria. Subsoils below the topsoil layer should be scarified at least 4 inches with some incorporation of the upper material to avoid stratified layers, where feasible. 2. Mulch planting beds with 2 inches of organic material 3. Use compost and other materials that meet these organic content require- ments: a. The organic content for "pre-approved" amendment rates can be met only using compost meeting the compost specification for BMP T?.30: Bioretention Cells, Swales, and Planter Boxes (p .959), with the excep- tion that the compost may have up to 35% biosolids or manure. The compost must also have an organic matter content of 40% to 65%, and a carbon to nitrogen ratio below 25:1. The carbon to nitrogen ratio may be as high as 35:1 for plantings com- posed entirely of plants native to the Puget Sound Lowlands region. b . Calculated amendment rates may be met through use of composted material meeting (a.} above; or other organic materials amended to meet the carbon to nitrogen ratio requirements, and not exceeding the contaminant limits identified in Table 220-B, Testing Parameters, in WAC 173-350-220. The resulting soil should be conducive to the type of vegetation to be established . • Implementation Options: The soil quality design guidelines listed above can be met by using one of the methods listed below: 1. Leave undisturbed native vegetation and soil, and protect from compaction during construction. 2. Amend existing site topsoil or subsoil either at default "pre-approved" rates. or at custom calculated rates based on tests of the soil and amendment. 3. Stockpile existing topsoil during grading, and replace it prior to planting. Stockpiled topsoil must also be amended if needed to meet the organic mat- ter or depth requirements, either at a default "pre-approved" rate or at a cus- tom calculated rate. 4. Import topsoil mix of sufficient organic content and depth to meet the require- ments. 2014 Stonnwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 912 More than one method may be used on different portions of the same site. Soil that already meets the depth and organic matter quality standards, and is not com- pacted, does not need to be amended. Planning!PermittingllnspectionNerification Guidelines & Procedures Local governments are encouraged to adopt guidelines and procedures similar to those recommended in Guidelines and Resources For Implementing Soil Quality and Depth BMP T5.13 in WDOE Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. This document is available at: http://www.soilsforsalmon.org/pdf/Soil BMP Manual.pdf Maintenance • Establish soil quality and depth toward the end of construction and once estab- lished, protect from compaction, such as from large machinery use, and from erosion. • Plant vegetatio n and mulch the amended soil area after installation . • Leave plant debris or its equivalent on the soil surface to replenish organic matter. • Reduce and adjust, where possible, the use of irrigation, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, rather than continuing to implement formerly established practices. Runoff Model Representation Areas meeting the design guidelines may be entered into approved runoff models as "Pasture" rather than "Lawn." Flow reduction credits can be taken in runoff modeling when B MP T 5.13: Post-Con- struction Soil Q ual ity and Depth is used as part of a dispersion design under the con- ditions described in: • BMP T5.10B: Downspout Dispersion Systems (p.905) • BMP T5 .11 : Concentrated Flow Dispersion (p.905) • BMP TS . 12 : Sheet Flow Dispersion (p .9 08) • BMP T5.18: R eve rse Slope Sidewal ks (p.937) • BMP T5.30: Full Dispersion (p .939) (for public road projects) 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 913 Mulch Loose soil with visible dark organic matter Loose or fractured subsoil Figure V-5.3.3 Planting bed Cross-Section 8" Reprinted from Guidelines and Resouroes For Implementing Soil Quafily and Depth BMP T5.13 in WVOE Stormweter Management Manual for Western Washington, 2Q 10. Washington Organic Recycling Council Figure V-5.3.3 Planting Bed Cross-Section NOT TO SCALE Revised Janu ary 2016 ...... D EPART M E NT O F ECOLOGY Slate of Washington Please see http:/fwww.ecy.wa.gov!copyright.htmlfor copyright notice incl uding permissions, l im itation of liability, and disclaimer. 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume V -Chapter 5 -Page 914 5/7/20 t/' ,, I I . . :...-. ~·~ P:: ' --~:·. -,. SA-15518 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A: The East Half of the Southeast Quar,t'e~>:if the southwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 35 North, Range l East of th·~ Willamette Meridian; ·~--"-,' ·"J" ' EXCEPT the south 165 feet thereof; " ii··· ALSO EXCEPT the North 759 feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPT the East 336 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH that portion of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 35 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, described as follows: .. /Seginning at a point on the East l.ine of said Sotltbeast Quarter of the . :'Soy:\:-hwest Quarter which is 290 feet North of the Sbutl;e~st corner of said . $'~utheast Quarter Of the Southwest Quarter i 'tf).~nce North along said East line 16 feet; th,'en<:;e West 336 feet; the11c~<south parallel with the East line of ScuthW'es1; Quarter 16 feet, more or less, to a beginning; thenceE?is°t; to the point of beginning; said southeast ·Quarter of the point due west .·Of ·the point of ·' . -~ . ''· --,_ ·, EXCEPT, :r:ight-of-way for public road along the East boundary t~~~.e~f, known as Averi~e ·H\or Heart Lake Road; PARCEL B: That portion of,·~h~.Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section :;'4.S, Township 35 Nort,p,> Range l East of the Willamette Meridian, described/ a .s follows: : < ·,· ~( Beginning at a poin~ which is 306 feet North and 200 feet West of the Southeast corner of ~aid Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; tr.ence North along the -W~st line of that certain property conveyed to Gari Eugene Wollam and Carrie Wollam, husband and wife, by deed recorded under · · Auditor's File No. 750615 { records of Skagit county, Washington, 100 feet; thence West 136 feet, more .. or>less, to a point whieh is 336 feet West of the East line of said southeast Quarter of the southwe~t Quarter; the:-ice south parallel withthe East line of said southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter to a point.due :-west of the point of beginning; thence East 1:36 feet, more b:f:':ie~s, to the point of beginning. continued .•••• 9605020055 8!< I 5 4 4 PG 0 5 9 2 , .... ·' SJ..-15518 EXHIBIT "A0 F·age 2 PARCEL C: That portion of the East Half' of tlie, 's!out,h.east Quarter of tl:.e Southi.·est ·Quarter of section 25, Township 35 North1 /R.an9e l East of the Willamette Meridian, described as follows: ·-· ' , , \ Be9innin9 at a point on the East line o~ sa.id Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter which is 406 feet North. of the South.ea~t corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North along. said East line to a point 759 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence West 336 feet; thence south parallel with the East line of said South~ast Quarter of the 'Sio.uthwest Quarter to a point due West to the point of, J:>eginning; tlje.pce East to the point of beginning; · .•····EXCEPT right-of-way for public roac along the East bou."'l.dafy,,thereof, knoW!'l /as ... Avenue H or Heart Lake Road. · i / ' ...,,.... >'' , . ./ -END OF EXHIBIT "A" - .:, 9605020055 BK I S 4 4 PG 0 5 9 3 6/3/20 SURVEY DESCRIPTION SKASIT COUNTY ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER P-32OT1 THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 55 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M.; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 165 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPT THE NORTH -15(1 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPT THE EAST 556 FEET THEREOF; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 55 NORTH, RANGE I EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 WHICH IS 2(10 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF 16 FEET; THENCE WEST 336 FEET; THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 16 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT DUE WEST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PUBLIC ROAD ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY THEREOF, KNOWN AS AVENUE H OR HEART LAKE ROAD. SUBJECT TO AND TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, LIENS, LEASES, COURT CAUSES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD. SITUATE IN THE GITY OF ANAGORTES, COUNTY OF SKASIT, STATE OF WASH INSTON. UTILITIES EASEMENTS AN EASEMENT 15 HEREBY RESERVED FOR AND GRANTED TO THE GITY OF ANAGORTES, PUGET SOUND ENERGY; CASCADE NATURAL SAS CORPORATION; FRONTIER GOMMUN I GAT I ONS, ING; AND COMGAST GABLEVISION, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS UNDER AND UPON THE AREAS SHOWN AS UTILITIES EASEMENT AREAS AS SHOWN ON THE FACE OF THIS PLAT, OR AS NOTED, I N WHICH TO INSTALL, LAY, CONSTRUCT, RENEW, OPERATE, MAINTAIN AND REMOVE UTILITY SYSTEMS, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES ATTACHED THERETO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROV I D I NS UTILITY SERV I GE TO THE SUBDIVISION AND OTHER PROPERTY, TOGETHER WITH THE RISHT TO ENTER UPON THE LOTS AND TRACTS AT ALL TIMES FOR THE PURPOSES STATED, WITH THE UNDERSTAND INS THAT ANY GRANTEE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL UNNECESSARY DAMAGE IT CAUSED TO ANY REAL PROPERTY OWNER I N THE SUBDIVISION BY THE EXERG I SE OF RISHTS AND PRI VI LESES HEREIN GRANTED. PRIVATE STORMWATER DRAINAGE EASEMENT EASEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING ON -SITE STORMWATER RUNOFF WERE GRANTED I N FAVOR OF ALL ABUTTI NO LOT OWNERS I N THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON THE FACE OF TH115 SHORT PLAT. THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF PRIVATE DRAINAGE FAG I L I TI ES ESTABL I SHED AND GRANTED THEREON WAS TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF AND THE COSTS THEREOF BE BORNE EQUALLY BY, THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OWNERS OF THE ABUTTING PROPERTY AND THEIR HEIRS, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, AND ASSISNS. THE GITY OF ANAGORTES 15 ALSO GRANTED THE PERPETUAL RISHT OF ENTRY ACROSS DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND ADJACENT LANDS OF THE GRANTOR, AND OR ASSISNS, FOR PURPOSES OF ROUTINE INSPECTION OF STORMWATER DRAINAGE FAG ILITIES AND EMERGENCY MAINTENANCE PURPOSES AT ITS OWN DISCRETION. THE GRANTOR, OWNERS, AND ANY PERSON HAVING ANY PRESENT OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERSHIP INTEREST I N THE PROPERTIES, AND THEIR SUCCESSORS AND ASSISNS OF OWNERS, AGREED TO HOLD THE GITY, ITS OFF I GERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS HARMLESS I N ALL RESPECTS FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES WHICH MAY BE OCCASIONED NOW OR I N THE FUTURE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS EY REASON OF CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SAID DRAINAGE SYSTEM. NOTES I. • INDIGATES REBAR SET AND CAPPED WITH YELLOW GAP INSCRIBED LISSER 22c160. 0 INDIGATES EXISTING IRON PIPE OR REBAR FOUND ® I ND I GATES EX I S I TI NG MONUMENT OR SET MONUMENT 2. SURVEY DESCRIPTION IS FROM LAND TITLE SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE, ORDER NO. 0I-1772c12-F DATED MARCH 13, 2020 3. FOR ADDITIONAL MERIDIAN AND SURVEY INFORMATION SEE PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS PUD RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 2006011 a0126 AND RECORD OF SURVEY MAPS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBERS 8105280025 AND a507110020, RECORDS OF SKASIT COUNTY, WASHINSTON. 4. BASIS OF BEARING: EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 35 NORTH, RANGE I EAST, W.M. BEARING = NORTH 1 °30'24" EAST 5. MERIDIAN: ASSUMED 6. INSTRUMENTATION: LE I GA 1103 TGRA PLUS THEODOLITE DISTANCE METER 7. SURVEY PROCEDURE: STANDARD FIELD TRAVERSE 8. THIS PROPERTY 15 SUBJECT TO AND TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, LIENS, LEASES, COURT CAUSES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THOSE INSTRUMENTS SHOWN ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED TITLE REPORT AND RECORDED UNDER SKASIT COUNTY AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBERS 5104100027, 8105280025 AND (1501110020. (1. THIS SURVEY HAS SHOWN OCCUPATIONAL INDIGATORS (STRUCTURES, FENCE LINES) AS PER WAG CHAPTER 332-130. LINES OF OCCUPATION MAY INDIGATE AREAS FOR POTENTIAL CLAIMS OF UNWRITTEN OWNERSHIP. TH1S BOUNDARY SURVEY HAS ONLY SHOWN THE RELATIONSHIP OF LINES OF OCCUPATION TO THE DEEDED LINES OF RECORD. NO RESOLUTION OF OWNERSHIP BASED ON UNWRITTEN RISHTS HAS BEEN MADE OR IMPLIED BY THIS SURVEY. 10. ALL D I STANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE I N FEET. I I . OWNER/APPL I GANT: RONALD V. BAYEK RONALD V. BAYEK, JR. 2633c1 PRESIDENT AVENUE HARBOR GITY, GA G10710 12. SKASIT COUNTY ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS P-320T7 13. PROPERTY ZONING: RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY DISTRIGT (R-I) MINIMUM LOT AREA = 15,000 SQ. FT. MINIMUM SETBACKS: STREET = 20 FEET (HOUSE) 25 FEET (GARAGE) REAR YARD = 20 FEET INTERIOR SIDE YARD = 10 FEET SIDE YARD ALONG STREET = 20 FEET 14. WATER SUPPLY: GITY OF ANAGORTES 15. SEWAGE DISPOSAL: GITY OF ANAGORTES 16. STORM DRAINAGE : GITY OF ANAGORTES 17. CONTOUR INTERVAL : 2-FOOT 18. DATUM PER PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS PUD II. TRACT "Y" 15 FOR STORM DRAINAGE PURPOSE AND 15 TO BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE GITY OF ANAGORTES ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS P- 32080 AND P-52081 RONALD BAYEK SR AND RONALD BAYEK _JR 2633a PRESIDENT AVE HARBOR GITY, GA c10701 P-32082 GARY AND CARRIE HOLLAM 4518 H AVE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-32116 JAMES AND BETTY TARTAS 4402 H AVE ANAGORTES, WA '18221 P-124002 JENNINOS REVOCABLE TRUST 181 G1 ORCHARD PLAGE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-I24001 JOHN AND MARLA HOVEY I (105 ORCHARD PLAGE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-124000 LG ANAGORTES LLG 504 E. FAIRHAVEN AVE BURL I NSTON, WA (18233 P-124003 SERALDAND BONNIE BOWERS 4413 ORCHARDS AVE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-124004 MI GHAEL AND K I MBERLY LATSHA 4415 ORCHARDS AVE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-124005 GARTUS FINANGIAL CORP G/O OLD REPUBL I G RELOGATI OI N SERVICES 1000 BURNETT AVE, SUITE 330 CONCORD, GA (14520 P- 124006 TERRILL VELIN 441 T ORCHARDS AVE ANAGORTES, WA (18221 P-I24044 THE ORCHARDS PUD HOA P.O. BOX 1633 ANAGORTES, WA (18221 LOT AREA AND ADDRESS INFORMATION LOT I 16,a68 SQ. FT. 0.5a ACRES CHERRY COURT LOT 2 17,471 SQ. FT. 0.40 ACRES CHERRY COURT LOT 3 16,682 SQ. FT. 0.38 ACRES CHERRY COURT LOT 4 20,5(12 SQ. FT. 0.47 ACRES CHERRY COURT LOT 5 23,472 SQ. FT. 0.55 ACRES CHERRY COURT LOT 6 15,041 SQ. FT. 0.35 ACRES CHERRY COURT TRACT "Y" 12,624 SQ. FT. 0.2c1 ACRES CHERRY COURT RISHT OF WAY 12,726 SQ. FT. 0.261 ACRES SHEET 2 OF 4 DATE: 4/O8/20 CITY OF ANAGORTES SHORT PLAT NO. SPL-2O2O-- SURVEY IN A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1 /4 OF SECTION 25, T. 55 N., R. 1 E., W.M. SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON FOR: RONALD V. BAYEK AND RONALD V. BAYEK JR. FB: PC: MERIDIAN: ASSUMED L I SSER ASSOC I ATES, PLLG SURVEYING 8 LAND —USE CONSULTATION MOUNT VERNON, WA c1S213 36O-41G-1442 SCALE: DNS: IG-I30 SP MONT IN GAGE (DEC. 2019) LOT 24 LOT 54 588°5ci'2-1"E 230.43' 280.01' TO PI CN ( PARK/OPEN P-124044 LOT 23 P- 124006 I a _� = O 1 � 0 if I0 tu o N1 H 5 LOT 22 in Im u_ Q lll o_ I d 0 1 d z 0 w 0 TRAIL P-124005 LOT 21 P- 124004 LOT 20 P-124003 P-1231 LOT 16 P-124000 LOT 17 NGPE NO C-ON 5. LINE OF THE N. 7561' OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 LOT 55 ,-TOE MON'T IN CASE (DEC. 2011) S88°5G'2-1"E P-124001 LOT 18 NSG °32'05 "W ONS 'df ASPHALT 1 P-52155 LOT 19 2q \ f 41 ST ST. I 1 X X UNOPENED ROAD RIGHT OF WAY O X 29. X x�—x x E x x m _1588°SG'2�"E 336.01' 306.01' — 0.00' x ENTERL I NE OF AGE,OE HEARTS GREEK x P-32080 APPROX. LOCATION OF 10' EASEMENT TO PUGET POWER A.E. NO. 810410002-7 (PORTION WITHIN SHORT PLAT TO BE RELINQUISHED) Seq °32'05 "E 136.02' P-32081 136.02' P-124001 0 25 50 SE' °32'05 "E O O O O w • N O z 336.05' 200.03' P-32082 200.00' S89 °32'05 "E 110.03' 584 °32'05 "E I \ 336.05' 306.05' , \24" CMP CULVERT 336.00' ROS A.E. NO. 8105280025 P-32116 306.05' NS1°32'05"W 100 150 SCALE: 1" = 50' CENTERLINE OF AGE OF HEARTS GREEK 336.05' P-32I35 0 0 ( 0 0 N N m 25 i SOUTH 1/4 CORNER MON'T IN CASE 3� DEG. 201G SHEET 5 OF 4 MON'T IN CASE 0.14'5 AND 0.14'W OF GAL(' OF GALL 1/16 CORNER NI °30'24"E N DATE: 6/03/20 CITY OF ANAGORTES SHORT PLAT NO. SPL-2O2O-- SURVEY IN A PORTION OP THE SE 1/4 OP THE SW 1/4 OP SECTION 25, T. 55 N., R. 1 E., W.M. SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON POR: RONALD V. SAYEK AND RONALD V. E AYEK JR. EB: PO: MERIDIAN: ASSUMED L I SSER ASSOCIATES, PLLG SURVEYING 8 LAND -USE CONSULTATION MOUNT VERNON, WA G82-13 360-41G-1442 SCALE: I "=50' DNS: IG-150 SF MONT IN CASE (DEG. 2019) TRAIL NUM GI G2 G3 G4 G5 LOT 24 588°5c1'2-"E 230.43' 280.01'TOFI O U) N f PARK/OPEN P-124044 LOT 23 P- 124006 LOT 22 P-124005 LOT 21 P- 124004 LOT 20 P-124003 P-1231 LOT 16 CURVE TALE DELTA ARC 81 °56'24" 48°31'51" 140 ° 14'45" 20°43'3G1" 30°4,4'08" 35.15' 42.35' 122.3a' 18.OG' 26.8a' m O z • cv ✓ O LU O LOT 54 ORCHARD AVE. 145.01' 125.00' 10' PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOT 1 16,c168 Sq.ft. 0.4 Acres. MON'T IN CASE (DEC. 2011) ▪ 32.0C )vr-iL LOT 55 S88 °5G'27 "E 100.00' - ss I 10' PRIVATE -'--4 I DRAINAGE EASEMENT O • I _73 U 2 t- LOT 6 15,041 Sq.ft. • 0 0.3 Acres. W 3 ,--- 5' UTILITIES x - EASEMENT 5' UTILITIES_4 U EASEMENT N 22' n 10' 588°501'21"E 123.00' LOT 2 11,411 Sq.ft. 0.4 Acres. L 5' UTILITIES ESM'T _W , TO BENEFIT LOT 3 z- • 3� N"• ct S&G°32'05"E z 16' INGRESS, EGRESS-' AND UTILITIES ESM'T TO BENEFIT LOT 3 LOT 3 16,682 Sckft. 0.4 Acrs. i$ I PRIVATE AS -DREMENT _ • 13a.02' • w m t o N ° z RADIUS 25.00' 50.00' 50.00' 50.00' 50.00' P-124000 LOT 17 NGPE N8a °32'05 "W 0) I 5. LINE OF THE N. 15G' OF THE SE I/4 OF THE SW I/4 TOE 333.461' NI °2q5q "E 161.28' ,-EX DITCH 78.48' TRACT 'Y' 12,624 Sq.ft. 0.3 Acres. ASPHALT NI °30'24"E 131E5'- 78.45' 58q°32'05"E 122.24' 20' STORM AND I UTILITIES ESM'T 1 LOT 5 23,142 Sq.ft. 0.5 Acres. 10' PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT--,(1;! S81°32'O5 "E N 115.44' O O 0 O v -Y LOT 4 20,3.512 Sq.ft. 0.5 Acres. 114.42' 333.44' P-124001 LOT 18 NSG °32'05 "W ASPHALT P-52155 LOT 19 O 25 50 100 SCALE: 1" = 50' /- 0 (Ni P-124001 �x-x- X x FENCE 588 °5G'27"E 306.01' CENTERLINE OF AGE OF HEARTS GREEK P-32050 APPROX. LOCATION OF 10' EASEMENT TO PUGET POWER A.F. NO. 8104100027 (PORTION WITHIN SHORT PLAT TO BE RELINQUISHED) / 58G °32'O5 "E S&G °32'05 "E 136.02' P-32081 150 136.02' FENCE 0 O O O NI °30'24"E 584 °32'05 "E 306.05' 336.00' ROS A.F. NO. 8105280025 F-32116 306.05' NS1°32'O5"W NS MA SEE NOTE NO. 12 336.05' 200.03' P-32082 200.00' SHED n 336.05' 24" CMP CULVERT 41 ST ST. UNOPENED ROAD RIGHT OF WAY x 336.01' S89 °32'05 "E 110.03' \ 0 O CENTERLINE OF AGE OF HEARTS GREEK 336.05' P-32I35 N 0 u� N 0 O. 0 N N m 25 SOUTH 1/4 CORNER MON'T IN CASE 3� DEG. 201G SHEET 4 OF 4 MON'T IN CASE 0.14'5 AND 0.14'W OF GAL(' OF GALL 1/16 CORNER N DATE: 6/03/20 CITY OF ANAGORTES SHORT PLAT NO. SPL-2O2O-- SURVEY IN A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1 /4 OF SECTION 25, T. 55 N., R. 1 E., W.M. SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON POR: RONALD V. SAYEK AND RONALD V. E AYEK JR. L I SSER ASSOCIATES, PLLG SURVEYING 8 LAND -USE CONSULTATION MOUNT VERNON, WA G8213 360-41G-7442 FB: PO: MERIDIAN: ASSUMED SCALE: 1 "=50' DNS: IG-130 SF 5/7/20 "' E--t';" LOT 27 <[j]]JJ APPROX. LOCATION EX. 6"" PVC SS "' U) ... , -Him-r-t-------SS __,'-71----J APPROX. LOCATION EX. 6" PVC SD LOT 29 ~ UJ UJ u"' >"' a_ • "' x '" z 0 "" <( u '3 U) U) 307_55 LOT 24 ~ S88°59'27"E --- 280.0!'TOPI PA~EN ~ LOT 23 <jJJW LOT 22 <iilP • "' x W. x .300.2 29 .91 LOT 54 APPROX LOCATION OF EX POWER @ 8" MJ RESTRAINED 'AP w I A 2" BLOW OFF ASS BLY--· IE 8" CAP=291.9 (PER PREVIOUS DESIGN P~ #C233 ··,··· NNCES. ·~~ 5. • nio.c.1 x298.70 If g ____.----APPR. OX. LOCATION J}--_ EX. GAS LINE & I > . COMCAST LOT 30 <[{BJ t------SS -,-t----J LOT 31 <[jJgJ U) U) #3445 "' U) / . I APPROX. LOCATION~ i EX. 12" CPEP SD / 1 .. I / c,0 ~~~SS z..c--w -,---I ....... ~ APPROX. LOCAT\)N EX. FH --~- LOT 21 ~ LOT 20 <[[jJJ APPROX. LOCATION Ex. s rvc-so "' U) "' U) APPROX. LOCATiON 1 1/Z""POLY SS f---t-.... .C-~'-'----+ UGC-GA.S----'--+----UGC-.GA,S---------U(;c_:_GAS>-----4---UGC-GA APPROX. LOCATION EX. GAS LINE & COMCAST REV. NO. LOT 15 4411 REVISION DATE BY LOT 16 @j) LOT 17 (fjjJ) APPR VED Ravnik & .. Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND•USE PLANNING 1633 LINDAMOOD LANEJP.O. BOX 361 BURLINGTON, WA 9823~ PH: (360)707-2048 FAX: (360) 707-2216 EX CB #4000 TOP ~ 294.4 IE 12" CPP W = 290.9 IE 12" CPP N ,.. 290.9 INSTALL SILT SAC IN ALL CB'S THAT POTENTlALY COULD ,,.'COLl£CT RUNOFF FROt.l THE SITE lil!TP-5 LOT 18 ~ SHEET DESCRIPTION: LOT 55 @§]:> I I RAISED ASPH. EDGE -------------------------------------------- CONTRACTOR TO REFER TO THE SwPPP PLAN APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR .THIS PROJECT FOR SPECIFICS IDN THE FOLLOWING BMPS. BELOW IS A LIST OF BMPS WHICH CAN BE USED BY THE CON! CTOR TO MANAGE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS SITE AS TAKEN FROM THE APPROVED S PP, HOWEVER THE CONTRACTOR MUST DETERMINE WHICH BMP'S ARE TO BE USED WH N AND WHERE TO STABILIZE SITE APPROPRIATLEY. I MARI< CLEARING LIMITS BMP #C103 f/233 ESTASLISH CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 1BMP #C105 CONTROL FLOW RATES BMP #C233 INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROLS BMP 120, C233, PROTECT DRAIN INLETS~BMP #C22 .EX. CULVERT-TO BE REMOVED lE 4" PVC INLET-W=293.02 IE 4" PVC OUTLET-E=292.88 FIELD ACCESS 289.'98 c!c C107 235, c!c C241 289.61 "' '•,., EX. CULVERT '"-..... IE 12"" CMP INLET-SW.;292.1 293.0 , ~'-..tf.: ~182 OUTLET~NE==292.31 ><293_ 3 .,~,,~.87~-292.95 ·-~:re:-s ,IL---==--t-7"1' 5o.o· ...... ·-...._ BUFFER "'"'l-IH--'"cB""U"'F"'FE'"'R,-----j( -----·----- ' ,-···-···-·-···-·-·--~~"' . 2p1 ){295.3 \ EX. OVERHEA EAVE EX BARN ( 293 \ 2g2,, \ ' \ \ 50.0' ){293.57 29,.59 -"' \ <?, \ I 293.41 EX. HOUSE APPROX. LOCATION I EX. FH x --lE=- ~ ! ! I i \ \ ~32'05,~_'E-. 306.05' EX. BUFFER AREA I 294.74 zgs;oo 295.97 I I/ I I I -1i6~os· ·"n•_.,._,_, IE 24" CMP INLET-N=295.77 IE 24" CMP OUTL.ET-S=295.18 /~CENTERLINE . , ACE OF HEARTS CREEK 1303.88 \30254 PLAN STATUS: SCALE: 1 '=30' SHEET TITLE: DRAWN BY: DLR CITY ENGINEE1 CONSTRUCTIO 1 YEAR OF CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR " APPROX. LOCATION EX. 8" CPEP CULVERT SCALE: 1" 30' 0 15 30 60 " APPROX. LOCATION ,,..<---EX. SSMH B-117 0 ,., .: ~APPROX. LOCATION EX. 8" CONCRETE CULVERT .00' " " APPROX. LOCATION EX. GAS LINE APPROX. LOCATION EX. SSMH B-118 APPROX. LOCATION EX. 6"' CONCRETE CULVERT 5uW DA ISlRUC ON IN ACCORDANCE 'AITH THE CITY OF AQJu CONFORMANCE OF THE DESIGN 'AITH I TY OF THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, WHOSE ACQUIRING, COMPL 'l'ING 'AITH, .AND PROVIDING TY, AND LOCAL LAWS, PERMITS. AND MANDA 1ES. GER SPECIES ACT, FEDERAL WEll.AND PERMIT, RAU CS PERMIT, FED£JIAL. Ft.000 PLAIN !NATION ~ PERMIT IS THE ER, AND THEIR ENGINEER. THE ISSUANCE OF oar OF COMPLIANCE MTH APPLICABLE DATE EPTED PROJECT IS TO START WITHIN DRAWING NO. 19013SITE.dwg JOB NO. 19013 EXISTING CONDITIONS, SITE PREPARATION & EROSION CONTROLS CHECKED BY: HLN CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC DA TE: 05.06.20 SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N,, R. I E., W.M. SHEET NO. 2 OF 11 0 u "' >VJ a. E----tf ix, LOT 24 LOT 27 <@PJ APPROX. LOCATION EX. 6" PVC SS r:i ~ "' <( u 0 ~ EX. SSMH ~ S88°59'27"E J07.55 --- 280.01' TO PI 1#4006 ~x'lio'ff1.'1T---,;,-t--t SS --~==....,Cc:BC"ii#4~".~---. JYPE l.,.STD_ Gjy.TE ,.,--------TOP 299.8± MATC~. "'H"Fl,.;;N""ISff '1f / GRADE c I IE 4• PERF IN-5=298.30 Lo T 2 8 I z 1E 5• PERr oUT "-E-296.JO I. PA~. PEN <iIJ§J er-t--~t-t----1,_li ~ ~ I~ 0 VJ r-------SS -1'":7,----, LOT 29 <iIJ9J LOT 30 ([J_jJ) LOT 31 <iil_?) I "' "' u"' >"' a. "' "' "' U) I~ "z1 ····~·-·-f):: ~ /· 0 "' I~ I& < I I 'ii I d LOT 23 ~ LOT 22 <iEP - I ~APPROX .• LOCATION I ? EX. GAS LINE & , ,.. COMCAST ' I fB 0 ' VJ I -p I APPROX. LOCATiON EX. FH LOT 21 <[jj}) LOT 20 @):; "' U) 1E 4" C0=306.!l8 APPROX LOCATION LOT 54 ~ OF EX POWER APPROX LOC6<J10N OF EX STREET LIGHT APPROX. LOCATION LOT 55 ~ MON'r IN CASE SITE .. BENCHMARK ~ TOP OF MON=294.51.. RITTR TO SURVEYORS NaTE ON SHEET 1 CB #6 TYPE I-VANE!) GRATE TOP 299.8± MATCH ANISH GRADE IE 6" IN-W=293.62 1E 6" SD OUT ... E•293.62 RAISED ASPH. EDGE x .314.60 ~ ·-·-.. ~ APPROX. LOCATION 1 1/2"POLY SS ---------UGC-GAS-------;---UGC-GA f---1--o"l>"'--~--:------r ~ " APPROX. LOCATION UGC GA -----,-==:-UGC-GA::r LOT 16 1 1 /2"POLY SS UGC-GA,s-------1 UGC-GAS--------r--UGC-GA,S--'--------LOT 19 ,s---..._~----UGC-G:As-o---------, REV. NO. LOT 15 4411 REVISION _J DATE EX. GAS LINE & COMCAST @J) LOT 17 (jjJJ) BY APPROVED Ravnik. & Associates, Inc. CIVIL. ENGINEERING & LAND-USE P.LANNING 1633 LINDAMOOD LANE/P.p. BOX 361 BURLINGTON, .WA . 98233 PH: (360) 707·2048 FAX: (360) 707-2216 LOT 18 ~ SHEET DESCRIPTION: OVERALL SITE PLAN P....32082 I I '~. '"'y, \ ><294.74 II ) 1 / ~I A.F. NO. 750615 @J;ffJ m , I I I ! I~ \ I ;1k I!/ I ~ .. \ I I I \\ I '/ I '\ / 1ii 1 I \·~. ~ ... f .'/ d. /;~,;~rn '-._ ·~ "'\ : · i.bo 170.03' 1\ll9'32'05"E -x~-20 ~x ~ .) 1 77=·-97.82 2988 zgo';g7,;go~-Igsso - - "299_31 ' \ ( ~~:8 - - - _Qro. ~32'0~"E_ '1 \ "" 336 05' s ,, ~~' ~"'"' . -------- 0 306.05' >1298.00 295.18 295.97 I I ~ CENTERLINE ACE OF HEARTS CREEK \303.88 ®LOT ACCESS LOCATION PLAN STATUS: I I I SCALE: 1 '=30' DRAWN BY: HLN SHEET TITLE: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR I 0 ,~· ~· SCALE: 1" -30' --- - 0 15 30 " APPROX. LOCATION EX. SSMH B-117 APPROX. LOCATION EX. GAS LINE . '. ,. APPROX. LOCATION EX. SSMH B-118 DATE DA 60 EPTE&> PROJECT IS TO START WITHIN DRAWING NO; 19013SITE.dwg JOB NO. 19013 CHECKED BY: HLN CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC DA TE: 05.06.20 SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. I E., W.M. SHEET NO. 3 OF 11 MQN'T IN CASE SITT: BENCH.tMRK TOP OF MON-294.51. REFER TO SURIJE\'oRS NOTE ON SHEET 1 EX. STREIT LIGHT EX CB #4000 TOP = 294.4 IE 12" CPP W = 290.9 ; IE 12" CPP N = 290.9 •1'<'. <3 <l'. • I .S SEE SHE 3 FOR I INSTALL 123 LF/,• COPPER x IUTIUTIEi :&AST OF LOT 61 OR POLY (AS ROD BY CITY) I TH/,.S vrpr ;''!// WAlERUNE FROJ,l MElER BOX / TO =LOT P3208L .1 STA 0-1{43.83, 19' RT. TO SHEET 3 INSTAI,(. 1• TAP fAST W/ I ~ 34 LF1 1 • COPPER SERVICE PIPE 1 i <ri1 STUB1 FOR SINGLE Sfli\'llCE. / / ~ INSTf,:1-MElER BOX ~ / STA tl-74.17, 33.46' Lli" I 15' LT. SE£ CllY DEl)ljL . / bi END 8' WIDE I I LO'.f 6 SEWER SEf!VICE I ~CRE"TE SIDEvlAµ< -.... I / STA. o+.53.114. 3.5' LT __j i I .. ! 38' UPSTREAM (SOUTH) F,ROM EX. APPROX LOCA TI .. ~·.OF . SSMH TO. AN 8"X6" lEE.,.wyE £AST. PROPOSED S.1r.~ET I 1S LF. 6" SOLID INSTALL 12 LF 5• PVC ;fAST AT LIGHT.. COORDINAlE; WITH · ~~ .S=0.0175 SMIN.,,0.0200 TO A 6"/SSCO. PSE FOR EXACT L09'ATICIN fil J DOWNHILL .fAST IE 8" AT TEE•289.50 / j rf;1 (BELOW ROAD) IE 6" AT TEE .. 289.5!1' I /A IE 6" SSC0•289,821 . , STA 1+78.67, 19' RT.;iNSTALL 1• · 0l / · 7 5.00 TAP £AST W/ 85 LF·1" COPPER I UTILITY SERVICE PIJ>J; sru~~R DOUBLE . /EASEMENT WATER SERVICE.~~~ .METER --· -. -/:___ _j __ ~o-xES_o 68' ~_r. sL c.:'._'.'~L/ LANDSjAPE '-:lf'""'f+:-:....J. W 55 LF 8 DI AlER . .. 1.73,LF • / , ' . • · 4° DI WATER / w -tirr== .·~ I / g I LQI 1 s~ sFJMCE I STA. o+37. 3.5' LT 19, 7' UP,fREAM (SOIJTH) FROM EX I SSMH AN 8"x6" TEE.i..W'i'E WEST. INS!: 30 LF s• PVC ~ AT Is "'0.0200 TO. A 6' ~00. 8" AT TEE=286.87 IE 6" AT TEE=288;95 LOT· . 1 IE s• ssco-289.55 I SEE S 'ET 3 FOR. UTJUTI. 'S WEST 0 305 300 li:I 'b 295 3 ± EX SSMH 40 1 STA 0+17.8, .51' LT TOP = 295.4 IE 8" PVC IN 0+2(1;J8, 19' RT. REMOVE 8" CAP &: EXlEND NEW 8" M REST~A!ND C f; WiTK A 2" 8! OW OFF ASSEMfiLY ~ui"' IE 13" CAP=291,9 (PER PRf.ViOUS DES! 40.oo· 'VERTICAL CUR I STA = Q+31 00 llER CAL cu \IE \IP1 STA 0+80.00 . IN. SLOPE'. { NCLUDING 6 ) AS ES EDS STA DAROS. IN ALL 3 . D . AS REQ . IRED BY fH Cl1Y, 0 THE EXIST NG WATERLI E 8,0 ' s-o. 328 PROJECT BA EU.NE -R AD ct. Cl! #2 . STA 1483.3$ TYPE l°"STD G TOP;.302 • ..0 IE 4" IN.-"W'-2 • ---- SEE SHEET 3 FOR 1 LOT 5 \ fnlUTlES EA.ST OF I . ~ _ . . ' fTH~ Xl.EW -LOT./5 WAlER SERVICE · STA./ 1+88.26 .• 3,5• J I C• ' ' ! ') ' m-._ ......_ ~~ALL 20 .LF 1" 171)' .. LF. U. PSTR·'. EAM. (. OUTH).·FRQM , _ -... _ ~uBBEO INTO LOT EXISSMH TO AN 8 , TEE-WYE ~. . -I ' EAST. FROM. TEE WYE INSTALL. 69 LF I I SCALE: 1" - 20 . " 8'i PVC £AST AT s-.o,c1950 TO A "-tfoeo. . . \ '. , 1£.:§" AT 1EE-WYE=294;'i:5 _,. ' ,iE ~· 0 C0=295.10 \ .~ I I aJ I ""-·-I I N ~ IY) I 20· I I 40 ! \ \F!roM co INSTALL 124 LF,8"Cl'VG f ;:o SEE SHEET 3 FOR •" ·. \ \ ~T~ 8 "xs• WYE W/ 6\xC'o' I ! x"' liTILITIES NORTH OF SHEEI' 3 1 1.9. 1 4. SEWE. . RI ~.ERlllCE THIS VIEW i \ \ . . 6 , WIDE \ FROM SSMH #\ \· \ \.· CON.CRElE. . c~\ I lNsTALL 71 LF 6" PVC SOUTH AT (' 1.s. M.IN.,0.0704 T0~6".x6' WYE W/6" 'i, SIDEWALK .• I'\' SSCO. INSTALL 6 • WYE SE TO 5 "' ''jlEPRE:sSED . . · ' I LF s• SD o. s~o.o o sw. TO 6" . I CURB/GUITTR. \ CAP AND MARKER . • !' LOT 4 'fltlERE SIDEWALK · \. IE s• 0 WYE/C0=302.~ I 15\~ENT WALK \ I \~ \ \1 0 138' .. EAM OF CB #2 I \, INSTALL 6 4" TEE £AST WITH / 5 LF 4". SD TO A 4• CO. FROM / '!' / CO l~ALL 5\ LF 4" SO fAST 0 00 1/. · -;.... SMIN•O.Q200_ Tfl 4" CAP, &, a -MARKER POST \ "' ~+1Yss1.·~=~'::f.::::;:::=;.; \ IE 6" 0 TEE=3C15.2s '.:' / SSl_-c:. ;ss ---IE-A! ~ 11-/ I 229 LF ft ¢0 ,.§• \ IE 4• 0 CAP-J . -:::::,r-- / (SOIJTH. T0/GB"'#1) SD SD --,,.~'---I v~ !Qj?'-'-. -,/ // / ui<. I ----~/ . -. . -71; ""'= -, -fbT jVSEWER siiDCE :::/ '.ST .. A 2+4. 2.~. '" .. I 9. RT .. •.· j fRoM SSMH ff';' // INSTALL 1" !,.;,-SOUTHtASf W/ j JN'sTALL 7JN C' PW/SOUTH ~T, ?; \ , . . . . , . . 15. LF .1" 9P,PPER SERVICE PIPE I / / SMIN=0_..0704 TO Ail 0x6" Wfk'!'fi/6" -/ / L STUB FOR; DOUBLE SERVICE.. I . . ~ / ~ SSCQ/INSTALL ,s"xs' 10 _ . _____ / __ / · . . . l~sTALL MITER BO.XES. 0 O. . 118' UP F CB H~Af:!" S 0 s-o 00 TO 6" WEST FROM CB #2 / 5 RT. $ CITY OETAIL INSTALL 6'•4 WEST ..ffAP AND KER ST INSTALL 31 LF 4" SD / . $TA 2+4&!93; 19' RT . 10 LF 4• .s . A 4•, • ~J.. IE 6" WYE/ =;:;50 : S=0.0300 TO 4' CAP! INSTALL i Lf 2" COPPER PIPE .· =O INST LF 4/'.SD)fl/I O / / IE. 0 4 .• GAP~99.95 .TO At2 ... "/. co···M.· B .. 1 .. NA· .. JIOl'I .. "' ..•. R. v~ .• NE . Is .. M .. IN·""··' •. 20 . TO y.· CJ GAP, . / ": ; ASSEM Y/VAULI AT HI' RT OF I . · ·· •· · ·· . . '.'..' / LQT 2 S~EB seiyicr sEE; s AIR RELEASE DfJ'AIL"/ IE 4• 0 -~l2 / ~ /-·"---~ ! PROJEi !!ASEIJNE.. >-"1E 6" C> • · '.34 L · x" /~-§'' STA; 1 +68 •. 93, .3.5 l.T . ON,~E. Er. 7 .. • .·· ·.. ;' ·;;· IE 4• 0 ,.;,304,.w. I '" / :g '-."-151 UPSTREAM (SOUTH). EX IoPVOF VAULT LEVEi.. W/ , . w 7• / · ;:::/ // m '-., sSM. H. TO. AN 8"X6~-:WYE WEST. .. ~1.N.1.N~ s.•.10. EW. .AU<. • AT . / . :ii / , . / / ;;i · / ;;o \ INSTALL 30 LF 6" WEST AT 1;1£v .. 306.7:1: . . 1 x I . ; / / /0 ( x 1 ~M~.-~To~ .. ;~.9~· ssco. //SQ.v~ UTH.l/E. ~.~. B~~. ~.:n.oN /J:. CAP I / ~ ( / / ~ j \ IE s· AT TEE , 4.o5 // WITH 2.3 Sf THRUST ~K I ' 1 f • 1 .,. . 1E s· ssco 94.65 LOT 2 / ~~~~<:AP:itit'::ocnyOET111L I ! \ ' ~ ~. ~ LOT 3\ 65.30' S=O.O ~ O> ~ I + ol 'b ~ -Ill ,.: (/) . • II "! ~ ~· ~ .... .... - I "' --IE " IN~S-.296.99 IE • Ot1T ~N .. 296. 9 RUST BLOCK ENGINEER VIEW / / / T 3 8t 4. SEW 305 SERVICE 300 295 5k LO D TE x I LOT,6 SEE~HEET 3 FOR U11 ES £AST OF THI VIEW I II) I \ 0 j ,,., C3: PC..(_T TO PRC-LT R•i5' £.ofBCT41'22.8" L:F3S.22' ~-0.0111 I I CONSTRUCT rSmON FROM FULL-H~~ . D I CURB/GuflU< l' 7 / REOUCEOf:HEIGHT D AY I --· -----•i. ______ _,,__ SECTION<FROMTHE 0 I !J:J'· ,/ STA 1..97.54, 12' RT, S .{ TO STA 2+ 12.53, 16.0' RT / ~ · CUL-OE-SAC STA~NING: WHERE: SIDEWALK ABUTS TH / I PC-LT: 1+49.~.( 10' LT. GUTTER~301.09 c~iNG. ALL SIDEWALKS I / I PC-RT: 1 +s7 .,.,. 1 o· RT. GUTTER-302. 79 s BE 8" THICK AS 7 ,. 1 PRC-LT: 1~.19, 31: LT. GUT1ER=301.48 S~ClflED ADJACENT TO ALL l,., I . PRC-RT/. 1 7 .54, 12 RT. GUITTR•303.24 DI RESSEO CURB SECTIO~S /'II I ICl: ::25rrr TO PRC-RT ./' /' 2: PRC-RT TO PRc/ilT II A=23'46'27.1" R=40' V L•10.37' £.=284"27'49.9" I I LOT 1 . . S=0.0434 . / LOT 2 / L•198.56' I I I CUL DE SAC DETAIL VIEW F;O.C. ~ 5'---j L = 7.851 A= 90"0'0" / SCALE: 1" = 20' I /--r-iiiml!!;-'11•• fil I PC ST/.. o+45.66, 1 o· LT I GUTTER = 296.48 MC sfA. 0+24.42, 18.4' LT I GIJT)'tR -295.25 Cij(~'A. 0+15.66, 39.7' LT I G R • 294.78 P:t STA. 0+20.61, 44.7' LT : I/UTTER -295.01 I ii. ·( F.O.C .• I R•JO" I I L = 46.87' I A -89'30'53.5" I..-- .. ----al---~-t;-':-' rv PC STA. 0+46.~ 1 O' RT I GUT1ER -296.~ fil MC STA. 0+25.,ll4, 18.8' RT ~ I GUTTER = 296'.30 Ii! PT STA. 0+ 1 jl.34, 40.2' RT I GUTTER = ?96.50 I I F.O.C. I R • 30'1 I L -47'.38' LOT 1 A ,90:29'6.5" INTERSECTION DETAIL VIEW SCALE: 1" = 20' REVISION REV. NO. DATE BY APPROVED Ravnik • & . Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND·USE PLANNING SHEEf DESCRIPTION: SCALE: HORIZ. 1'=20' VERT. 1 '= 2' SHEET TITl.E: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR DRAWING NO. 19013SllE.dwg DRAWN BY: DLR 1633 LWJi~£8.fo~~~!'p~2ffX 361 PH: (360)707•2048 FAX: (360) 707-2.216 PLAN & PROFILE CHECKED BY: HLN DA TE: 05.06.20 CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. I E., W.M. JOB NO. 19013 SHEET NO. 4 OF 11 5/7/20 ---~-~~-'-------"-'-c--'--~~---· --· -- © 0 PUBLIC EASEMENTS PAVED.STREET © 0 @ -------------------------·-------------------·-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MINIMUM CONCRETE\ PAVED SJREET GENERAL .NOTES: @ IA. 3 INCH .MINIMUM .CLASS B ASPHALT, PER SECTION 2-06,3(2) .OF THE 2002 \IJ.SDDT STAN-DARD SPECIFICATIONS FDR ROADS, BRIDGES AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION. lB. CONCRETE PATCH TO BE THE: SAME. 'DEPTH AS 'EXISTIN CONCRETE STREET. ~ (§) IC. 12 INCHES -COMPACTED DEPTH TOP so.IL T.tJ BE ~ FINISHED 'J!TH SEED DR SOD. SEED TD BE 'JEED PRE . 2. SAY/CUT 3. ALL JOINTS BEt\./EEN .OLD AND NE'w' ASPl-iAL T TD '.BE SEALED. <SECTION 5-05.3(8YB> USIN~ A HOT F'OURED JOINT SE'.ALANT, PER SECTION 9~04.2(1). 4. '6 INCHES -CRl,JSHED SURFACING, PE_R, ,SECTION 9-03.(9)3, AND PREPARED PER SECTION 2-06.3(2), "SU'BGRADE FDR SURFACING', 5(A). GRAVEL BASE MATERIAL, APPROVED \IS.DOT SPECIF!£ MATERIAL, DR _SPECIFIED IN __ THE -APPROVED PLANS. MATERIAL TO BE cCTMPACTED TD 95~, PER SECTION 7-09.-3<11) '"'COMPACTION' BACKFILL'. ,SEE ALSO, SECTION 7-08.3C3) 'BACKFILLING", 5CB>. CONTROL DENSITY FILL \./ILL BE REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR IF lHE TRENCH CROSSING, FAILS. 6, THE-PIPE ZONE SHALL BE :BACKFJLLED IJITH SAND B'ACKFILL-TO 12-INCHE-S ABOVE THE -P_IPE, PER SEC:flDN 7-09.3<10> 1 BACKF'ILLING TRENCHES'. THE PIPE. ZONE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 90%, PER SECTION 7-b.8.3<DC. 7. SAND BACKFILL -PIPE ZONE ~. 6 INCHES -SAND BACKF'lLL 9. LAY ALUMINUM LOCATE TAPE A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES BELO\/ FINISHED GRADE AND 12 INCHES ABOVE PIPE. · ® @-----Kl-<J.c-O<J.D -h-<H>-< I 1 I 'I I I I I I I I.ml :x:i-c>-0-0-0 ,I I ~I . ' ;.·_-.: .. · .. <·· ... .·· . : : ; :· TRENCH NOTES @'o.5-INCH HMA ASPHALT (SEE SECllON FOR DEPTH) COMPACTED TO 92 PERCENT MAX. DEN- SITY. IF EXISTING ASPHALT IS GREATER THAN 3 INCHES, IT SHALL BE REPLACED PER CITY OF SEDRO-WOOLLEY REQUIREMENTS WITH AN EQUAL AMOUNT COMPACTED IN 2 INCH UFTS, UNLESS DESIGNED SECTION IS THICKER. 0-coMPACTED DEPTH OF CRUSHED SURFACING TOP & BASE COURSE MATERIAL TO. BE COMPACTED TO 95 PERcENT OF MAXIMUM DENSITY, REFER TO ASPHALT SECTIONS. @-GRAVEL BORROW COMPACTED ro 95 PERCENT OF MAXIMUM DENSITY. LOOSE LIFT THICKNESS SHALL NOT EXCEED 8 INCHES IN DEPTH. @ @-6" DEPTH OF SAND BACKFILL OR PEA GRAVEL TO BE HAND COMPACTED ABOVE CROWN OF PIPE. PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE USED ® IN ANY WATERLINE TRENCHES. @-HAND COMPACTED SANO BACKFILL TO BE TAMPED AROUND THE PIPE. THICKNESS EQUALS OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF PIPE. (§}-s" DEPTH OF SAND QR PE.A GRAVEL BACKFILL TO BE HAND COMPACTED. PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE USED IN ANY WATERUNE TRENCHES. @-EXISTING ASPHALT. @-TACK ALL EDGES AND FACES OF .EXISllNG ASPHALT. SEAL SURF ACE JOINT AS SPECIFIED. @-6 INCH DISTANCE MIN. FOR UTILITIES INSTALLED WITHIN niE LIMITS OF EXISTING ASPHALT. @-TRENCH LINE. @-UNDISTURBED EARTH. @-TRACER TAPE PLACED .12"-18" BELOW FINISHED GRADE, AND PER WSDOT STD SEC 9-15.18 GENERAL NOTES: ~ -THIS UTILITY TRENCH DETAIL IS FOR RIGID OR FLEXIBLE PIPE INSTALLATIONS. GRAVEL BORROW SHALL BE USED AS TRENCH BACKFILL IN ALL AREAS TO FIVE FEET BEYOND ASPHALT, SHOULDERS; AND HEAVY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AREAS. (NOTE-3) -ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS MUST FIRST BE APPROVED BY niE ENGINEER, -NO NATIVE SOIL BACKFILL IS ALLOWED 'MTHIN ANY UTILITY TRENCHES IN .EXISTING OR PROPOSED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS. GRAVEL BACKFILL MUST BE USED IN THESE AREAS. ·I Jll d= 111 111 1 -111 . ' _j ' . ,'.'• .h IT ® © TRENCH NOTES CD -BACK FILL SHALL BE NATIVE MA TERI AL COMPACTED IN 12 INCH LIFTS. IN CASES WHERE THE MATERIAL IS TOO WET OR UNSUITABLE, 2.50 INCH MINUS BANK RUN GRAVEL SHALL BE USED. @ -6 INCHES OF SAND BACKFILL OR PEA GRAVEL TO BE HAND COMPACTED ABOVE GROWN OF PIPE. PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE USED IN ANY WATERLINE TRENCHES. -HAND COMPACTED BACKFILL TO BE TAMPED AROUND niE PIPE. nilCKNESS EQUALS OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF PIPE. ©-6 INCHES OF SANO BACKFILL OR PEA GRAVEL TO BE HAND COMPACTED. PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE USED IN ANY WATERLINE TRENCHES. ® ® 0 ® TRENCH LINE. -UNDISTURBED EARTH. RESTORATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE Wini GENERAL NOTE-1. -1'-0" OF CLEAN NATIVE SOIL NOT CONTAINING SOD, ROCKS, STICKS, OR DEBRIS LARGER THAN 3" IN ANY DIMENSION. ® -TRACER TAPE PLACED 12"-18' BELOW. FINISHED GRADE, AND PER WSDOT STD. SEC 9-15.18 GENEltAL NOTES: {f!OTE-~ -RESTORATION SHALL CONSIST OF REMOVING AUL OBJECTS GREATER niAN 1 INCH IN DIAMETER AND BLENDING THE TOP OF THE TRENCH WITH THE SURROUNDING GRADE. -NATIVE MATERIAL TRENCH BACKFILL MAY ONLY BE USED BEYOND FIVE FEET FROM ASPHALT, SHOULDERS, AND HEAVY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AREAS. (NOTE-~ -NO NATIVE SOIL BACKFILL IS ALLOWED 'MTHIN ANY UllLITY TRENCHES IN EXISllNG OR PROPOSED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS. GRAVEL BACKFILL MUST BE USED IN THESE AREAS. SCAl£: NOT 10 SCALE DRAv.I BY: S.L DETAIL: ST-01 UTILITY TRENCH DETAIL WITHIN THE PAVING AREAS TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH DETAIL BEYOND PAVING AREAS ALE: ST-01 UTILITY TRENCH TYPICALDWG EFFEcTIVE DAIE: RElllEW BY DAIE: REVIEWER: STREET CUT REPAIR TYPICAL 01-02-2017 10.-31-2018 SJiJAR811CK IX A ~ STANDARD .DRAWJNG 2017 32' WIDE ROW ' u 10' 10' '""~~~f------'------+-----'----~i---55' 6'~-1<_.,>L_.!LLl!.._..., EASEMENT LANDSC-A~PE-t-~S-IDEWALK EASEMENT I I I I I 6 I I 5 3• DEPTH OF HMA 0.5-INCH 3" CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 12• GRAVEL BORROW GEOTEXnLE FABRIC AS SPECIFIED. CROSS-SECTION GRAVEL BALLAST TO EXTENDED 1.0' BE:YOND BACK OF CURB. GRAVEL DEPTH BELOW SIDEWALKS IS 6". GRAVEL DE:PTH BELOW DRIVEWAYS IS 12". ~---SUBGRADE PREPARED PER WSDOT SECnON 2-06.3(1) AND 2-06.3(2) GEOTE:XnLE FABRIC MAY NOT BE DELETED WITHOUT CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL NOTES G) ALL ASPHALT SHALL BE HMA 1/2-INCH HMA CONFORMING TO SECTION 5-04 OF .THE 2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 927, RICE DENSITY. WHERE PROPOSED ASPHALT ABUTS EXISTING ASPHALT, THE EXISTING ASPHALT SHALL BE SAWCUT FULL.DEPTH AND TACK COATED IMMEDIATELY BEFORE PAVING. ALL SURFACE JOINTS SHALL BE SEALED WITH CSS 1 AND SAND, APPLIED WITH HEAT. @ CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE, BEING 100% FULL FRACTUR.E: fACE AS. MANUFACTURED AT. A QUARRY, SHALL CONFORM TO SECTION 9-03.9(3) OF THE 2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, COMPACTED. TO A MINIMUM OF 953 MAXIMUM DENSITY IN ACCORDANCE Wini ASTM D-1557 TESTING. ALL CRUSHED SURFACING SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH SOIL RESIDUAL HERBICIDE A MAXIMUM OF 24 HOURS PRIOR TO PAVING, ACCORDING TO SECTION 5-04.3(5)D OF THE 2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. (0,) STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL SUPPORT ALL PAVEMENT AREAS AN.D CONCRETE AREAS AS NOTED. STRUCTURAL FILL °S'HALL CONFORM TO GRAVEL BORROW REQUIREMENTS, SECTION 9-03.14(1) OF THE 202D STAN.OARD SPECIFICATIONS. THE PERCENTAGE PASSING TH.E #200 SIEVE SHALL NOT EXCEED 5%. STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 953 MAXIMUM DENSITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASllM D-1557 TESTING AND niE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT BY MATERIALS TESTING & CONSULTING, INC .. 14) THE EXCAVATED SUBGRADE s.HALL BE FREE OF TOPSOIL, ORGANICS, AND OTHER D.ELETERIOUS MATERIAL, COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 953 MAXIMUM DENSITY IN ACCOR.DANCE WITH ASTM 0-,1557 TESTING, PREPARED CONFORMING TO SECTION 2-06.3(1) OF THE. 2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. SOFT. SUBGRADE AREA.S SHALL BE OVER EXCAVATE.D AND BACKFILLED WITH MECHANICALLY COMPACTED .GRAVEL BORROW, PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIAL, ANY SUBGRADE AREAS niAN CONTAIN CONCENTRATED ORGANIC MATERIALS, SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO REMNANTS FROM BURN PILES OR $TUMP HOLES, SHALL BE a.VER-EXCAVATED TO .EXPOSE UNDISTURBED, NON-ORGANIC MATERIAL AND BACKFILLED WITH MECHANICALLY COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. @ CAST IN PLACE CEMENT CONCRETE TRAFFIC CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PER WSDOT STANDARD PLAN F~10.12-03. AT THE LOCATIONS IDENTIFIED ON THE CIVIL PLANS. SEE THE CUL-DE-SAC GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET 5 FOR CURB-HEIGHT TRANSITIONS AT ENTRY INTO niE CUL-DE-SAC WHERE THE CURB IS DEPRESSED AROUND THE CUL-DE-SAC. @ ALL CONCRETE WALKS SUBJECTED TO HEAVY TRAFFIC SUCH AS IN bRIVEWAY5 SHALL BE 8" THICK WITH FIBER MESH. ALL SIDEWALKS NOT SUBJECT TO HEAVY TRAFFIC LOADS SHALL BE 4" THICK .. DRAINAGE GRATE GRATE FRAME SEDIMENT A'NO DEBRIS •• •• I> • . /). • '. FILTERED WATER • • • •• I> • , /). • ••• , /). . /). . ~-~....,,~~---,---~·· . . - I> I> , . .. . .. • • I> • NO SCALE 1. .SIZE THE BELOW INLET GRATE DEVICE (BIGD) .FOR THE STORM WATER STRUCTURE IT WILL SERVICE. 2. THE BIGD SHALL HAVE A BUILT-IN HIGH-FLOW RELIEF SYSTEM (OVERFLOW BYPASS). 3. THE RETRIEVAL SYSTEM MUST ALLdw REMOVAL OP THE BlGD WITHOUT SPILLING THE COLLECTED MATERIAL. 4. PERFORM MAINTENANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD SPECIFICATION 8'01.3(15) OVERFLOW BYPASS BELOWlNLET GRATE DEVICE DRAINAGE GRATE -RECTANGULAR GRATE SHOWN BELOW INLET GRATE,DEVIC~ RETRIEYAL -~SYSTEM (TYP.) OVERFLOW BYPASS (TYP.) NO SCALE CONSTRUCT 1.0' WIDE TRENCH FOR PERFORATED PIPE, SEE· T'HIS SHEET FOR PIPE INVERTS. TRENCH BOTI6M TO BE 4 n BELOW PIPE INVERT. ENTIRE TRENCH Tb BE FILLED WITH FREE DRAINING GRANULAR MATERIAL SUCH AS BUCKSHOT, PEA GRAVEL, DRAIN 'ROCK, OR CLEAN FREE-DRAINING GRAVEL. DO NOi COVER TRENCH WITH ,GRASS AND SOIL. CONSTRUCT 6~ HIGH BERM ALONG DOWNHILL SIDE OF TRENCH, WITHIN PROPERTY, TO DAM ANY SURFACE FLOW F'ROM ENtE'.RING THE P~OPERTY. fX. GROUND AT LOCATIONS 'WHERE VEHICLES HAVE T11E POTENTIAL TO DRIVE OVER THE PERIMETER-DRAIN, THE UPPER FOOT OF TRENCH SHALL BE BACKFIU.ED -WITH CLEAN CRUSH~ ROCK AND THE UNDERLYING PIPE SHALL BE SUFFICIENT TO WITHSTAND , THE VEHICLE: LOAD. STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION BMP C220) PERIMETER STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM INSTALL DRIVEWAY CULVERT IF ROAOSIDE DITCH PRESENT 4" -8" QUARRY GEOTEXTILE NOT TO SCALE DRIVEWAY SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMITIING AGENCY IT IS R.ECOMME.NDED THAT THE ENTRANCE BE CROWNED SO THAT RUNOFF DRAINS OFF THE PAD PROVIDE FULL WIDTH OF INGRESS/EGRESS AREA JOINTs IN FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE SPLICED AT POSTS. USE. STAPLES, WIRE RINGS O.R EQUIVALENT TO ATTACH FABRIC TO POSTS NTS 2"x2" BY 14 Ga. WIRE OR EQUIVALENT, IF STANDARD STRENGTH -T-7"---FABRIC IS USED --...._ 11 ~f, U-6'MAX · POST SPACING MAY HE I~ TO 8' IF WIRE BACKING IS USED FILTER FABRIC MINIMUM 4"x4" TRENCH BACKFILL TRENCH WITH NATIVE SOIL OR i" -1~" WASHED GRAVEL 2"x2" WOODEN POSTS, STEEL FENCE POSTS, OR EQUIVALENT T 24" MIN DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PER.lODICALLY INSPECT THE .SAND FOR ACCUMULATED DEBRIS. SAND MUST BE REPLACED WITH CLEAN MATERIAL AS SOON AS ACC.UMULATED DEBRIS IMPACTS niE FUNCTION OF THIS FILTERING DEVICE. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS ARE TO BE PROMPTLY HYDROSEEDED AS SOON AS CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED. 10' PLAN VIEW 12" PERF. PVC STANDPIPE TOP ELEV=295.63 i---5 .o· ----t"-7~ SAND FILL 3.0' CONsl'RUCT 1 O'xrb' SOU.ARE FENCE, 3.0' HIGH,. AROUND PERFORATED STANDPIPE USING EXPANDED METAL LATHE OR EQUAL WITH STEEL FENCE POSTS AT A MINIMUM ---t OF 2'. O.C. LINE INSIDE .fACE WITH FILTER I II II II FABRIC AND FJLL FENCED AREA WJTH SAND TO TOP OF STANDPIPE. IE 12" 90"~292.63 PROFILE VIEW TEMPORARY SAND FILTERING STRUCTURE FOR DETENTION POND ALL SIDE SEWERS MUST HAVE LOG.ATOR TAPE OR ~RE BURIED WITH PIPE f-· O Zo ""- AS SPECIFIED 3 T 3' N.T.S. PRESSURE TREATED, 4"x4", WOOD MARKER POST, STENCILED, AS SPECIFIED 12n SD TO CB #7 CONTROL STRUCTURE u T I L I T y 4' © LENGTH AS IDENTIFIED ON 11-------CIVIL PLAN ------, 1 ALUMINUM OR CAST IRON FOGTIGHT VALVE CASING COVER OR EQUAL. AS REQUIRED IN HARD..:.SURFACEO AREAS AS SPECIFIED (?}-niREADED PVC PLUG @-EXISTING GROUND (3' MINIMUM) ALL JOINTS SHALL BE GASKETED @-pvc ST AND PIPE @-pvc 45 BEND ~VC 45 DEGREE WYE @-pvc CAP OR PIPE AS DICTAlED BY PLANS @-rlPE ZONE MATERIAL (ij-UPSTREAM OF C.0., INSTALL IN-LINE PVC FITllNG AS SPECIFIED, & PVC PIPE TO PVC END CAP CLEAN OUT DETAIL ENGINEER ® THIS PLAN SHEET IS ACCEP1ED. F'OR CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE .WITH lHE CITY Of' ANACORlES ORDINANCES AND POLICIES. AClUAL CONFORMANCE OF niE DESIGN WITH APPLICABLE LAWS IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY .OF THE PROFESSIONAL. ENGINEER, WHOSE NAME AND STAMP APPEAR ON THIS SHEET. ACQUIRING, COMPLYING WITH, AND. PROlllDING Ml11GATION F'OR All. FEDERAL, STAlE, COUNTY, AND LOCAL LAWS, PERMllS, AND MANDATES, INCLUDING. BUT NOT LIMl1ED TO THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT, FEDERAL WETI..AND PERMIT, STAit: DEPARlMENT OF .FISHERIES AND HYDRAULICS PERMIT, FEDERAL FLOOD PLAIN PERMllS, NATIONAL POU.UT.ANT DISCHARGE EUMINA TION S'!SlEI! PERMIT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DE'<ELOPER, LAND OWN.ER, AND niEIR ENGINEER. THE ISSUANCE OF nilS PERMIT SHAU. NOT BE CONS'IRUED AS PROOF OF COMPLIANCE 'MTH APPLICABLE LAWS AND PERMIT REQUIREMEN'IS. CITY ENGINEER DAlE TYPICAL. ROAD CROSS-SECTION TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (BMP Cl05) ·si·LT ·FE.Nee· DETA. IL(BMP c 233 > coNsTRucTioN FOR THE AccEPlED PROJECT 1s To sTART WITHIN --1 YEAR OF .THE DA lE. REV. NO. REVISION VIE'w' LOOKING SOUTH NOT TO SCALE DATE BY APPROVED NOT TO SCALE Ravnik & Associates,. Inc. SHEET DESCRIPTION: CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1633 LIND~OOD LAl\fE./P.O. BOX 361 BURLINGTON, WA. ,8233 PH: (360) 707·2-048 FAX: (360) 707·2216 DETAILS NOTTO SCA~ ..................................................................... .J. ........ ..--... ................ ..-.... .._J.::;~~~j;;;;:;:;;;;:;;~~~:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;~ PLAN STATUS: SCALE: AS SHOWN SHEEl TITLE: DRAWN BY: D. REMSEN CHECKED BY:HLN CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR CORNER 9 PROPERTIES, LLC DRAWING NO. 19013.DET.dwg JOB NO. 19013 DA lE: 05.06.20 SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. I E., W.M. SHEET NO. 19 OF 11 THRUST BLOCK -TABLE MINIMUM ~ M£A AGAINsT uNDIS'rutlaED SOii. SQU,111£ FEET PIPE PRESSURE S!Zf, PSI: ABCDEX 4• 6" s· 10• 12• 14° 16° 18"' 20• 24• ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 90" BEND TEE !J ~IB CAP 45• BEND 2 -3/4' DIA. RODS f'llR 10' SIZE 8. SMALLER .---le -1' DIA. RODS LARGER THAN Ill" SIZE 0 I "+-.-...!•"'~ X 1-"'"""'-'"""-IX GATE VALVE SAFE BEARING l.OADS 111 ~/SQ.FT. THE SAFE BEAAING LOADS GIVEN IN 1HE RX.l.OllVllLTAJILE ARE FOi HOR!Zl»ITAL 1HRIJSJS 'MiEN 1HE DEPTH OF ~ O\'ER 1HE PIPE EXCEEDS 2. FEET. SOIL 10<UCK. PEAT, ETC. SIFT CLAY -SAND'-AND-GRAVEL SAND Alai SMVEL. ..... CEl4ENTED, 'tfI1H a.A ..,.-,~- SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DRAWl'I BY: S.L FILE: WA-07 TB1 .DWG .sAFE BEAlllNG I.DAD ~ PER SQ, FT. 0 J,000 ~ ..... 4.000 IO.!IOO Cll'IE OA TE: ftE"1Ew BY DA 1E: REl1EWER: SHJARBACK 22 1/2" BEND THRUST BLO.CK NOCTES: E 11 1/4" BE:NI> I. SQUARE FEET Of' ~ETE lHRUSlS -BLOCI< AR£A BASED ON SAFE BEARING LOAD Of' 2000/3000 POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT. 2. =:sSTAN~ ~ti~Dl~i11HER SIZE PIPE. J. CONCRETE .BLOCKING SHALi, BE. CAST IN PLACE ,>JilD HA\IE MINIMUM Of' 1/4 SQUARE FOOT BEARING AGAl!o!ST lHE ATllNG. 4. BLOCK SHALL BEAR AGAINST FITTINGS ONLY AND SHALL BE CLEAR Of' • JolN'fs TO PERMIT TAKING UP OR Di5"" MANTIJNG JOINT. 5. CON1f!AClOR SHALL INSTALL ·BLOCKING ADEQUATE TO WllHSTAND FULL. TEST PRESSURE NO \l£lJ. NO TO CON- TINUOUSLY WITHSTAND DPERAllNG PRESSURE UNDER ALL CONDITIONS OF SER\10E. 6. ADDITI!ll(AL BLOCKING MUST BE PROVIDED IF GATE VAL\IE IS AT END Of' LINE DURING TESTING. 7. WNOTE BLOCKS MAY BE ALLOW!'D IN ARENO Of' UNOIS11JRBED S(lllS. .lHE ·SllE OF lHE BLOCK DEPENDS ON lliE SIZE. OF PIPE. PRESSURE, ETC. POU.R CONcRETE BETWEEN lHE WNOTE. BLOCK ~~DO:v ~ lHE VOID. lHIS ACTION IS BY llRITTEN DETAIL: WA-08 THRUST BLOCKING HORl.ZONTAL BENDS AND VALVES ----------- DETAIL NOTES: 1. 8 INCH OFFSET FROM CENTER. LINE DH SEVER l..INES ENTERING THE MANHCLE BASE AT LESS THAN BO DEGREES. 2. LESS THAN BO DEGREES TYPICAL. 3. Bo· ClR MllRE TYPICAL. 4. caNCRETE SHELF" SHALL HAVE A BRllOM FINISH 5. FLC'J CHANNELS MUST BE FINISHED SMOOTH 6. PRECAST BA.SE TYPICAL 7. PVC TC Clll'ICREtE: ADAPTOR COLLAR e. COLLAR SHALL. EXTEND INTO THE: MAN loll!LE ND MORE 1HAN 3/4 ar AN INCH. 9, ALL C11U.ARS AND LIFTING HOLES S1W.J.. BE 6R!lUfE!J IHSlliE MID DUTSillE THE HAN Ill.ES ro STIP lNFllTRATl!JI. SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DRAWN BY: S.L DETAtL: S-01 5-12 Flow Credits • Where BMPTS.12 is used to disperse runoff into an undisturbed native landscape area or an area that meets BMP TS.13, the impervious area may be modeled as landscaped area. This is done in the WWHM by entering the impervious area into the" landscaped area" field. . ' ~' M, ' I I ' ' --~ r ~· ' f!'min BERM DETAIL , , PLAN Driveway Disperslon Trench Drfve:i.vay Slope Varies and Slopes Toward Street ff/' ~' I ' ' I PLAN ,,, ~I ' I ' ' Sh_eet Flaw-Di;fersion trom a. Dr!Ve\Vay I _ ... ------·----------~-------·· .~ ..... .£~!g Mg~er ... ~§.~.~ ... !?EY.~~Y~---·-····--··..1 Figure 5.5 -Sh.eel Flow Dispersion for Driveways Volume V ~Runoff TreatrnentBMPs February 2005 FILE: S-01 FLOW CHANNEL TYP .OWG FLOW CHANNEL TYPICAL SHEET FLOW DISPERSION FOR DRIVEWAYS EFFECTIVE DAlE: REVIEW BY DAlE: Ol-'Q2,o.2017 10-31-~()iB GRADE BREAK BROOMED FINISH. (TYP.) 3" (IN) R (TYP.) 15' MAX. (SEE NOTE 6) (TYP.) GRADE ** BREAK VARIES SEE CONTRAC PLAN VIEW TYPE 1 VARIES (SEE CONTRACT) NOT STEEPER THAN ROAD GRADE . . ...... .. . . . . . . . . . ' . PEDESTRIAN RAMP CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK (TYP.) 112" (IN)R (TYP.) -• a: ., ~ SECTION 0 (SEE CONTRACT) ..... ~···.·!·.-,. ..• ·· .. ~ .. ......... :·.·!",t,.:·~ ... * CEMENT CONc. PEDESTRIAN CURB (TYP.) (WHEN SPECIFIED IN CONTRACl) - SEE $TANDARO:PLAN F-1-0:12 CEMENI CONC. SIDEWALK CEMENT CONCRETE CURBAND GUTTER (SEE NOTE 3) 15' MAX. (SEENOTE 6) (TYP.) GRADE BREAK ** MATCHSIDEWALKWIDTH (SEE CONTRACT) PEDESTRIAN RAMP 1 3/6" (IN) ~PANS ION JOINT (TYP.)- SEE STANDARD PLAN F-30.10 112" (IN) LIP BElWEEN ROADWAY GUTIER AND GURB (OR SEE CONTRACT) DEPR.ESSED CURB ANDGUITER (SEE NOTE 3) DRIVEWAY RAMP DRlVEWAY (SEE NOTE 7) 3/8" (IN) EXPANSION ~DINT (TYP.) - ~. EST. ANDA. ·RD·PLAN F-30.10 SECTION \,V REFER Tb WSDOT STD PLAN F-80.10-04 FOR FURTHER REQUIREMENTS OF DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION TYPE 1 DRIVEWAY CE!y'IENT CONCRETE' SIDEWALK • • BUFFER STRIP (TYP:) REVIEWER: . SHJAABACK PPENDIX B -STANDARD DRA'JING 2017 • BROOMED FINISH ( i'YP.) VARI.ES (SEE C:ONTRACT.PlANS) {SEENOTE 1) PLAN VIEW TYPE 3 E 318" (IN) ~PANSl.ON.JOINT (TYP.)- SEE STANDARD·PLAN'f-30.10 *I • X-6" 2'-6" (TYP.) {TYP.) MATCH:SIOEWALK WIDTH (SEE·CONTRAcn • • • • CEMEl'l"f OONC~TE c;:·URB AND GUTTER (SEE NOfE3) DRtVEWA Y'ENTRANCE SIDE SLOPE (TYP.) TI'PE 3 DRIVEWAY 112"'(1N) R. {TYP.) D~Y (SEE NOTE 7) MATCHSIDEWAtf<WIDTii (SEE CONTRACT) * .••r ::. ·•· •,. ···•;•.•· SIDEWALK 318" Oii!) EXPAN.SIO'N JOINT (r{P.) -. SEE STANDARD PLAN F..S0.10 112" (IN) LIP 8El'NEEN.ROADWAY GUTTER AND CURB (OR SEE CONTRACT) SEECONTRAC DRIV~~ DEPRESS.!"0 SECTION© CURB AND GUTTER (SEE NOTE3) CEMENT CONCRET.E DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE DOEBMP TS.12 NTS ENGINEER THIS Pl.AN. SHEETJS ACCEPlED. FOR CONSlRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE ·'Mllf THE CITY OF ANAcORTES ORDINANCES AND POLICIES. /\Cl\J.AL CONFORMANCE OF lliE DESIGN Willi . APPIJCABLE.LAws IS THE SQL.E.R[Si>ONSIBIUTY OF THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, WHOSE NAME AND STAMP APPEAR ON THIS SHEET. ACQUIRING, COMPL 'l'ING WllH, AND PR0\1DING MITIGATION FOR ALL FEDERAL. ST ... TE. COUNTY, AND LOCAL LAWS. PERMllS, AND MANDATES, INCLIJDING BUT NOT UMITED JD lHE ENDANGERED. SPECIES ACT, FEDERAi. WETLAND PERMIT, STATE DEPARJMENIT OF fiSHERiES AND HYDRAUUCS. PERMIT, FEDERAL. FLOOD PLAIN PERMITS, • NATIONAL POLLUTANT .DISCHAR.GE JilJMINA TION SYSlEM PERMIT IS lHE RESl'ONSIBIUTY OF. THE. DE\IELQPER, LAND OW!o!ER, AND lHEIR ENGINEER. lHE ISSUANCE OF lHIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS PROOF OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPUCABLE LAWS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. DATE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ACCEPTED f'ROJECT IS TO START WITHIN 1 YEAR OF. THE. DA TE. 6" mln . 18" min. I--24" min, ---I Trench X~Section !eve! outlet 4" .perf. pipe 1 ~ n -:x~ washed rock small catch basin or yard drain slope _ __,_ 5 700 sq. ft. > 700 sq. ft. Plan View of Roof 2' x 10' level trenches Type 1 CB standard dispersion trench w/ notched grade board length 1 o· per 700 sq. ft. of roof area NOTTO SCALE Figure 111-3.1.5 ..... Typical Downspout Dispersion Trench DEPARTMENT OF Revised NOvember 2015 EC Q L Q·G Y r--P-le-as_e_s_e_e_h-ttp-:/-lw-ww-.e-c_y._w_a_.g_o"-'c_b_p-yn-.g-ht-.h-tm-l_fo_r_co_p_y-rig_h_l_no-t-ice-in-cl-ud-in_g_p_e_rm_i-ss-io-n-s.--1 1 State of WaShington /imitation of."liability, and disclaimer. fi pipeO.D. ---\ 1• min. ---1' min.~ Flow to second dispersal trench if necessary ~~--end cap or plug ]__:..-.,--clean but wye from pipe • 1._.,_,-4n or 6" perforated pfpe laid flat/level 50· A I A "' influent pipe {niax design t - Type 1 CB w/solid cover notched _grade board 2" x 2" notches 18" O.C. l'l'i'>=;-r-,::>'<-' flow s0.5 cfs per trench) Plan 2" x 12" pressure treated grade board 6' min-. filter fabric Section A-A Type 1 CB w/solid cover (locking) clean out wye from pipe Flow to other branching CB's as necessary j 18" o.c. I-- bl -'"-j 2" grade j -<?:;:2" ~ board notches 4"x4" support post 4" or 6" perforated pipe laid flat clean (~5% fines) 1 Yi" -%"washed rock *15% max for flow control/water quality treatment in rural areas. Notes: 1. This trench shall be constructed so as to prevent point discharge and/or erosion . 2. Trenches may be placed no closer than 50 feet to one another. (100 feet along flowline) 3. Trench and grade board must be level. Align to follow contours of site . 4. Suppcrt post spacing as required by soil conditions to ensure grade board remains level. NOTTO SCALE Figure 111-3.1.6 Standard Dispersion Trench with Notched Grade Board TYPICAL DOWNSPOUT DISPERSION TRENCH DOE BMP T5.10B . WSDOT STD PL;AN ·F:,;80.10•G4 PLAN STATUS: REV. NO. RE.VISION DATE BY APPROVED Ravnik & Associates, Inc. CIVIL NGINEERING & LAND•USE PLANNING f633 LINDAMOOD LANE/P.O. BOX 361 BU.RLINGTON, .WA 98233 PH: (360} 707,2048 FAX: (360) 707-2216 SHEET DESCRIPTION: DETAILS SCALE: AS SHOWN DRAWN BY: D. REMSEN CHECKED aY: HLN DA TE: 05.06.20 SHEET TITLE: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR CORNER 9 PROPERITES, LLC SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. 1 E., W.M. DRAWING NO. 19013.DET.dwg Joa No. 19013 SHEET NO. 7 OF 11 2 1 -0• MIN. SEE PLAN ~ CHAMBER 2• TC PORT ('NP.) ~~· ~ TRA~HISSmN LINE I NO MORE llfAN 1o' FROM OPERATING NUT TO THE DRl\IE SIDE OF CURB • w z ::i I ~I 6' BERM .Jll,""t---~--OPERATING NUT SHALL BE 1 1/4" PENTAGON. ----4• PUMPER PORT WITH P.C. T. THREADS. MEAS!)RING 4.72 INCHES O:D •• (STORZ AQAPTER AS LISlm BELOW IN GENERAL NOTES f$) _]_ r- @ g§ IPoND 2'-:"0' HIN.-..._" Z ITOP=295.63 NOlE: SEE ST-01 UTILI1Y '!RENCH ttPICAL FOR BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS DOUBLE SERVICE -@ -PLAN.VIEW NO.: ITEM: MATERIAL: e/8 OR 3/4 1 INCH lioiiai:t ' 1 IEIIR lllX C!tC. MD.I ..... .... 2 NIUDMU. Flit ...... '• l llDI l llDI ~-DCH IEIIR'$TG' -Ill .1/l.licl( ViMnd 3/4DDI t::SFl!'ER 3 PIPt T1I'£ • ·-l DICll l DDf CROSS~SECTION JIUaCJPEX: A "' $$, JNiiERrs 4 QJP, Sl'EP-.......... ·-lDDI ·--5 ........ atMS 'Ji1Dy S.S IR- ,IRlllZE mw ~-UD/IS) 6 m: .... ' JX3'4X31'4 7 lllW'Tlll ..... I INCH ' - ·@·" " . : e : SLOPE ~ ~: 1. LOCA1E THE AIR REIFASE VALllE TAP AT 'THE HIGH POINT Of THE TRANSMlsSlON MAIN. 2. ALL FITTINGS SHALL BE IRoN PIPE 'THREADS. LEGEND: r.:;-., #2 .. ~ETER BOX OR I.!../ 311•• PRECAST MANHOLE . SECTION 36" LONG ATTACH VEN.T TO 9•x5• CONCRETE POST ...... -;u fTI EPQXYCOA~ SHllE (I NSlllE AND OUTSmE). CONC. THRuST BLOCKING. (SEE NO.TE 1) FIR£ HIQRANf NOTES: ···::·.:{::.:;:::::::;:~:~~:*::*i:·:~·:-::.w:.~ . SANO BEtlDING .. ,, I .... Cl»ICRETE COil.AR DROP'CO\IER WITH "WATER• ON CO'Yal. 8 PIPE ..... ' , 31'~,·-x ,,. 9 ... EJ.lll\I ..... 31' .. ,QOI WATER S£RVIC£ NOTES: 10 PIPE -3/'4'DDI X CUISE © © STRAP VENT JO pOSt . USING 1/+• X 1 • STAIN.LESS SlEEL STRAPS & 1/4• ANGHORBCll.lS © 2• .RESILENT WEDGE B . GA\E VAi.VE. W/2" NUT EPOXY COATED {;;\ 2• COMBINATION AIR ~ RELEASE/AIR .VACUUM PROVIDE 6° ALUMINUM OR PLASTIC DUCT FOR VAJ.llE BOX JO WITHIN SIX (6) INCHES OF THE SURFACE. PROVIDE COVER FOR DUCT. ::c -< 0 ;u )> z ...... 0 fTI 1. A. ll!RUST BLOCK $HALL BE PLACED AT. THE BACK OF THE H'tDRANT SHOE FROM THE DITCH BOTTOM TO A POINT 3/4 Of THE WAY UP THE BACK Of THE SHOE ANO '"V' SHAPED TO SOIJD .GROUND ANO SHALL BE A MINIMUM Of x-o· WIDE AT THIS POINT AND SH<\LL NOT OBSTRUCT Bill.TS OR DRA!N Hdi.Es ON THE.SHOE. ALL B.Cl.TS BELOW GRADE SHALL BE CHECKED FOR TIGHTNESS BEFORE BACKFIWNG. THE Ul!E .or MEGA.~lJJGS OR• CRIP RINGS IS. Al.SO ACCEPTABL£. .2. THE FOU.OWING, H'l'DRANlS HA\IE BEEN ACCEPlED AS A STANDARD BY THE CITY OF ANACORTES: MUELLER (SUPER CENlURION 200), EAST JORDAN AND M+H •. 11 . _,,,. PVC ..... ' FIRE A. SEE EDS STANDARDS '112-20 FOR METER BOX SIZES. SPRINKLER SYSTEMS MAY REQUIRE LARGER © © © © 180" .RETURN BEND VALllE. JO SE DE1ER~ MINED BY ENGINEERING. tf3'. . IN SULA TE WITH 1.5• RIGID ~ STYROFOAM ' ;;! 3. REO HEAil .BRAND OR EQUIVALENT Wl'IH 5• stQRz RIGID FEMALE AQAPlER WITH CAP AND CASl.E. B. METER. WILL BE l'ROVIDEO BY THE Cl1Y METER AND SERVICE .PIPING .TO MEET !".IRE FLOW AFTER FEES ARE PAID. REQ£JIREMENTS. COORDINATE WITH BUILDING 1/4• MESH BRONZE BIRD SCREEN C\ 2" COPPER PIPE OR ~ MUNICtPEX A W\ SS INSERTS © €> © BRASS 90" BENDS 2• CORP. VAL \IE C. ANGLED METER BALL STOP AND CORPORATION STOP SHAil. BE MU~ 110. FORD QUICK .QR DEPARTMENT IF AY McDONALD JOINT COMPRESSION flTllNGi OR APPRO\IED EQUAL. D. THE !lAJ)DLE SHALL BE RESEAi EO IN 8. MIL SPRINKLERS ARE PROPOSED. 2•1 GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE POLY BAGGING. THE CORP AND COPPER SERVICE. SHALL BE WRAPPED IN TAPE 3'-4' FOR CATHODIC PRD'IECTION. E. <>MIER SHALL SUPPL¥ PRESSURE REDUCING VAL\IE AT BUILDING ENTRANCE IF STATIC OR FIRE PUMP PRESllRE EXCEEDS 80 PSI. 2• GALVANIZED IRON GROUND JOINT UNION (2 REQD) ft"\ 5/16• OIAMQND PLATE. lt!.J TRAFFIC RA TED COVER. LINE SIZE BRASS SADDLE W/2• 1.P. TAP 0 DRILL 1 /a• HOLE FOR DRAIN F. FOR DOUBLE SERVICE, A .U-BRANCH MUELLER MOila. ND: H~15364 OR OR EQUAL MAY BE USED. G. ALL FITllNGS SHALL BE IRON PIPE THREAQS. SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DRAWN BY: S.L FILE: WA-04 SERV-St.IALLOWG DETAIL: WA-04 SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DRAWN BY: S.L DETAIL: WA'07 ~-c o,1' EFFECll'IE DAIE: REVIEW BY DAIE: REVIEllER: 11-1e~201a 07-15-2020 SHARBACK WATE'.R SERVICE UNO.ER 2" FILE:. WA~D6 2 AIR RELDWG 2 INCH COhlBINATION LANDING GRADE BREAK - SEE CONTRACT PLANS - 4'·0" MIN. "\ CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK -SEE NOTE 5 FLARE (lYP) -~ 318" EXPANS10N JOINT (TYP.) -SEE'. STA:NOARD PLAN F-30.10 \ C -STANnARD DRAVING 2018 EFFECll\IE DA TE: REVIEW. BY DA 1E: 07-15",2020 ALL SIDEWALK RAMPS TO BE STAMPED, PER EDS STANDARDS, CHAPTER-3 STREETS, SECTION STR-06 DETECTIBLE WARNING DEVICES SHALL BE EITHER "WHITE OR "BLACK" fN COLOR ALONG CllY SlREETS AND 'YELLOW" ALONG WSDOT ROUTES. CURB RAMP WIDTH 4' -O" MIN LANDING TO MATCH r CURB RAMP WIDTH -SEE CONTRACT PLANS ~ CURB RAMP WIDTH 4' • O" MIN. NOTES R£111£wER: SHJARBACK AIR RELEASE\ VACUUM BREAKER VALVE APPENDIX C -STANDARD DRAWING 2018 CONlRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR GRADING SIDEWALK SURROUNDING RAMPS AS NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE REQUIRED LANDING AND/OR RAMP TO ROAD GRADES I y / LANDING TO MATCH CURB RAM,P 1 WIDTH -SEE CONTRACT PLANS 1. At _marke,<J crosswalks,,the conn_ectiOn_ between ,the Curb ramp and the road- way must be contained within the width of the crosswalk mar1<.ings. I I I -r GRADE BREAK I SEE CONTRACT-PLANS- 1/ 2. Where "C3RADE BREAK:' is called out,, the entire length of the grade' break between the' two adjacent surface planes shall be flush. r-----IJ,f//"" GRADE flREAK r~~f~~~~~~i~N::::ONTRACTPLANS-, )<-Al// ~12·--o"I / SEE~ONTRACT LANDING~ CURB RAMP -\· " CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK-SEE NOTE 5 V-'c--t---r7\/ .r 4' • O" MIN \, 3. Do not plaCe Gratings,,Junction-Boxes,-Access Co~rs, or other appurten- ances--on any 'part of1!)e Curb_Ramp or Landing, -or in_front of the Curb Ramp where it connects to the roadway. * I ' I l-- .-·-CURB RAMP GRAOE BREAK 4' -O" MIN. --,-~ * MIN. //~ PLANS_ -4' _-O" MIN. 318" -!=XPANSION, \\,;--,l's;°::::'"::~-,""'~ BUFFER WIDTH -MAICH JQlfllT (T'(P.) -SEE --··-·-. > '\ II ,.·, TO CURB-RAMP DEPTH STANDARD PLAN F·30.10 )' (TYP.) ~/· '-------· 4. See Contract Plans_ f6i" the Curb design Specified. See Standard Plan F~1_0.1_2 for Curb,_Curb-and Gutter; Depressed Curb and Gutter, and Pedestrian Curb details 5 S~e Standard Plan F-30.10 for Cement Concrete Sid9Walk Details. See C'.;~ntracl p'1anS fur Width arid placement of sidewalk. Gf!AOE BREAK ""\, ·~:""--·~--~~·-.-_ * -~. mmm~11m1![l .~--~--~--- CURB. OR CUR·a:· "·/-------;· r-·: '---t====::e=ii=:+' ::=::=:.C--'•'''···· .. TRANSITION 1:0 SID,EWALKBUFFER IF\ PRESl:NT,-OR TO BACK OF CURB {TYP,)-.\ SEE CONTRACT PLANS . -~ ,..,..----~-I ___ ,_ I ~, ___--> "'I ~-----, 1-----· ~· 6. The Bid'ltem "CementConctete Curb Ramp Type_" does not include the_, adjacent Curb, Curb and Gutter, Depressed Curb and Gutter, Pedestrian u:l CUrb, of Sidewalks. 8 " 7. The, CUrb Ramp length is not required to exceed 15 feet (unless shown z oth'erwfse in the Contract Plans). ,When applying 1he: 15-foot max. length, ~ the-_run.riing slope ofttie Curb Ramp is allowed to exceed 8:3%. Use a single constant slope_-from_ bottom of ramp_ to ~op-of ramp-Jo match into AN~-&u;ro~~; .. .1 / · ·" .. '"·./·I_ -: ····\···\~···~~;~_~TA8)£ WARNING SURFACE- / ' SEE STANDARD PLAN F-45.10 CEMENT CONCRETE CURB. OR CURB --;C;~""'~,;!._l-',,~--.::C· PEDESTRIAN CURB -AND GllnER -·--/ SEE NOTE 4 SEENOTE4 I B \ FACE OF CURB _! SEE STANDARD'PLAN F-46.10 the land mg over a horizontal distance of 1_5 feet. -Do not inci_ode the ~ r PLAN VIEW TYPE PARALLEL A PEDESTRIAN CURB - \~EE NOTE 9 318. ' (IN.) EXPANSION ··sEE".CQi\j"f~t1¥-~0.~§l JOINT (TYP.) -SEE ., STANOARO, PLAN f·30.f0 '\. \, LANDING -~ / SIDEWALK / [-\ SIDEWALK ,--:; DETECTABLE,WARNING-SliRFACl'O - SEE 'STANQARD PLAN F-45.10 7 4'"0','MIN , I CROSSWALK PL.Ali! VJEW TY,PE PARALLEL B 1/ .. \ \. OEJECfABLE WARNING SURFACE - \ DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTtR FACE OF CURB --' j/1 · ·1 ·· \: ·· MEASURED PARALLEL _J 4t_ \_ ~~~~~lf~ CURB AND GU1TER - TO CURB (TYP.) CROSSWALK CROSSWALK abutting landing iri the 15-fOot max measurement -~ 8. Curb-~ciinµs and Landings shall receive a bi'oom finish. See Stan'darct Specifications 8-14. <Y CONTRACTION JOINT {lYP.) --SEE STAN,DARD PLAN,1"·30.1 FOR CURB RAMP LENGTHS GREATER THAN 8' ~ O''PROVIOE CONTRACTION JOINT EQUALLY SPACED 4' -O" MIN. OC SEE CbNlRACT PLANS ;/ /-GRADE BREAK -:-/ I' , OPE , 1 ~! .. >= /: // couNTER-Sl' -TOP OF -1.. C. * 5.0%-1 'ROADWAY k 9. Pedestri8fi Curb m'ay be omrtted if the ground -surface at the baek of the Curb R_amp and/or Landing-will-be at the'sani_e elevation as the Cu_rb Ramp-or Landing and-there-will not be material to retairi. CEMENT CONCRETE PEDJi'STRIAN __J CURB -SEE NOTE 9 , DEPRESSED CURB-AND GUTTER - \__,SEE S"T'.ANDARD PLA'N F-1o:r2 AND NOTE 6 4' -O'"MIN PEDESTRIAN CURB - SEE NOTE 9 15' -O" MAX. (TYP.) PLAN VIEW <Y CONTRACTION J61NT (i'v'P) -: SEJ:: STANDARD Pl.AN F-3o-:t0 FOR CURB RAMP LE~QTHS GREATER THAN' 8' -O" PROVIDE CONTRACTION JOINT EQUALLY SPACED'-4" -O" MIN. OC. PLAN VIEW L LANDING SECTION(~ SEE CONTRACT PIANS SEE NOTE 7 TYPE PERPENDICULAR A TYPE -PERPEN!)ICULAR B (SHOV\IN INITH BUFFER) DETECTABLE -WARNING SURFACE. - SEESTANbARD·PLANF-45.10 \ 4'. O" MIN c-+---~1~5·~· ='"c;M"'AX"'. o;<TY:"?2.) __ '~-.-S r GRADE BREAK SEE CONTRACT Pl.ANS SEE NOTE 7 ! ;/ ·-COUNTER SLOPE - LEGEND * SLOPE IN EITHER DlRECT:ION 1:5 OR,FLATTER RECOMMENDED FOR DESIGNl~ORMWORK {2% MAX.) ,1~S'·C?:' ~AX.....:.~~1 I 4'-0"MIN. ',' 15'-0" M.A,X.(TYP.) SEE NOTE ?SEE CONlRACTPLANS! SEE NOTE 7 '~ GRADE BREAK \ .10: * * ' "l";~ NOTES 1. At marked crosswalks, the connection between the landing and the roadway must be contained within the width of the crosswalk markings. 2. Where "GRADE BREAK" is called out, the entire length of the grade break between the two adjacent surface planes shall be fluSh. 3. Do not place Gratings, Junction Boxes, Access-covers, or other appurte- nances on any part of the Curb Ramp or Landing, or ln the Depressed Curb and Gutter where the Landing connects to the roadway. 4. See Contract Plans for the curb design specified,. See Standar<I Plan F-10.12 for Curb, Curb and Gl.itter, Depressed Curb and Gutter, and Pedestrian Curb details. See Standard Plan F-30.10 tor Cement Concrete Sidewalk Details. See Conttact Plans for wfdth a11d placement of sidewalk. The Bid Item "Cement Concrete Curb Ramp TYPe _" does not include the adjacent Curb, Curb and Gutter, Depressed Curb and Gutter, Pedestrian Clirb, or Si~walks. 7. The Curb' Ramp length is not required to exceed 15 feet (Unless otheiwise shown 1n the Contract Plans). IJIJhen applying the 15-foolmax:. length, the running slope_ of the curb ramp is allowed to exce_ed 8:3%1. Use a single constant slope frcim bottom of ramp to top of ratnp to match,into'the,sidewalk over a horizontal distance of 15 feet. Do not include ab_utting landing(s) in the15-fodt max. measurement Wheh a ramp is constructed on a radius, thE!! 15-foot max. lenglh is measured on the inside radius along the back al the walkway. 8. Curb Ramps and Landings shall receiVe a broom finish. See standard Specifications 8-14. 9 Pedestrian Curb may be omitted if the ground surfu~ -at the back of the Curb-Ramp and/or Landing will be at-the same elevation aS the Curb Ramp or Landing and there will be no material to retain. LEGEND ,-SIDEWALK I * ** SLOPE IN EITHER DIRECTION 1.5% OR FLATTER RECOMMENDED FOR OESIGNIFORMWORK (2% MAX.) 7.5% OR FLATTER RECOMMENOED FOR DESIGN/ FORMWORK (11.3% MAX.) -SEE NOTE 7 SLOPE TREATMENT - SEE STANDARD PLAN F-30.10 j ,r GRADE BREAK '\ ii // j 5.0% MAX * * I I / ,-TOP OF ROADWAY I, .-....4- ** 7.5% ,OR FLATTER RECOMMENDED FOR DESIGNfFORMWORK {8.3% MAX) G B I I , , .... , GRADE BREAK '- SIDEWALK "·, /-RADE REAK -\ ' ' /; I I I \ ,/ { I~~ \I * i/ ** \ } PEDESTRIAN CURB -~ SEE NOTE 9 \ I \. CURB RAMP\ \ ~ \_ 3i'8" (IN) EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) - LANDING CURB RAMP \ SECTION 0 \~ CEMENT CONC,RETE CURB RAMP ~ryPE PERFENDICUlAR ''A" PAY LIMIT-SEE NOTE 6 -r\: / DETECTABLE WARNING SU,RFACE ~ /--SEESTANOAROPLAN~-46.10 DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTER - SEE NOTE 4 CEMENT CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER -SEE NOTE 4 / / '~~:cc-~ ISOME'tRIC VIEW \_ DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTER - SEE STANDARD PJ.AN'F·10.12 CEM,ENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP "TYPE . * * * 9.5% OR FLATTER,RECOMME,NOED FOR DESIGNIFORMWORK (10% MAX.) PERPENDICULAR "B" PAY LIMIT -SEE NOTE 6 I )x.-~~~ I ISOMETRJC-VIEW -~,$ Zdkt:, SwU ~ J1D12420167:20AM P.Effl'i;NDICULAR CURB RAMP STANDARD PLAN F-40.15-03 -SHEET 1 OF 1,SHEET APPROVED F'OR PUBLICAflON {.....,.,Joll Jun 2~ 2{116 2,28 PM STJ\TE DESmN'ENGl~EER CURB RADIUS DETAIL 0 TYPE PERPENDICULAR A PAY LIMIT TYPE P'ERPEN0'1cui.AR 'e PAY'LIMIT I h: I . : . >' I " : \. ' ' \ ;,.1~ " \\ , ~URB RAMP \ I~ \ .. CURB'RAMP '-LANDING \ \._ 3111" EXPANSION ,_\OINT {T'iP.) -~--<$> SEE STANDARD PLAN F-30.10 SECTiON 0 (ALONG INSIDE RADIUS AT BACK OF WAU<:WAY) LANDING _J ·-.,Y SEE STANDARD PLAN F·30.10 -SECTION 0 (ALONG INSIDE RADIUS AT BACK OF WALY;WAY) ··~=Cef~~cP~~~1~1~R! ~~Ji:~'"\ I 1$0METR~C VIEW TYPE PARALLEL B PAY LIMIT Zeller, Scott JUl1 242016'-7:19 AM G~ PARALLEL CURB RAMP STANDARD PLAN F40.12-03 SHEET 1 Of 1 SHEET APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION Catp.o1.+. Jon· ea~. pe/I hnl~20162:27PM ST~TE DESIGN f~IGINrlER Woihlnglon State, Dei\<ll'lll*fl of Ttamporlmlon PLAN STATUS: APPROX >----------------100.50' ---------------..; ~ 9.0' GRADE FROM TOP OF POND [5i TO EXISTING GROUND AT 2:1 MAX &:I AFPf3.QX_Q ..QRAD~ -t ¥• FREEBOARD --------------=-------=---+-~--= -..:=. FRE~ B-;-A;D =-:---=-=---_ - -" --PONO TOP=295.63 - -- --- --~ - ----<:i· -rop LIVE STORAGE=294.63 i 2-FT LIVE STORAGE -'\-" -BOTTOM LIVE STORAGE=:: TOP OF DEAD I 0.9 FT DEAD, STORAGE STORAGE=292.63 , I lPOND BOTTOM (bEAD STORAGE)=291.73 VIEW LOOKING EAST >--------52.50' -------! 4.5' 6' BERM w z :J 1' FREEBOARD d---t2 --,----._r--.._ POND TOP=295.63 1-FREE BOARD I -~---~~-POND TOP LIVE STORAGE=294.63 l.1vE STORAGE 2-FT -...~ONEA~O=-oeST~O°'R"A°'G"'E~O.~.",~,-~--+,l'-----~sorroM LIVE STORAGE=TOP OF DEAD STORAGE=292.63 -~~~=~...-~---~------I POND BOTTOM (DEAD STORAGE'.:)=291.73 VIEW LOOKING NORTH POND CROSS-SECTIONS SCALE: NTS 2' MIN: CLEARANCE TO ANY PORTION OF OROP-T ANGLE AS NECESSARY FRAME. GRATE & ROUND SLOTTED COVER MARKED "DRAIN" WITH LOCKING BOLTS SEE NOTE 3 12" DIA. ALUMINUM CMP STANDPIPE ASSE:MBLY WITH ORIFICE, & ONE 8" STUB FOR SHEAR GAlt 12" PVC IN FROM (POND) SW IE 12" PVC=292.63 B" SHEAR GATE W/CONTROL ROD FOR CLEANOUT DRAIN (ROD BENT AS REQ'D FOR VERTICAL ALIGNMENT W/COVER) ROD ATIACHEO 12" TYP. I'- \ ' NE OFFSET FRAME SO OPENING IS DIRECTLY OVER LADDER AND ORIFICE ASSEMBLY IS VISIBLE. SECURE SLOTIED. LOCKING LID ASSEMBLY TO TOP OF STRUCTURE CAST CB LID WITH CAST ll~ON FRAME SO TOP IS FLUSH WITH CONCRETE CB #7 CONTROL STRUCTURE TYPE 11-60"-SOLID TOP TOP=295.6.3 EL. '295.63 IE 12" IN-SW~292.63 IE 12" OUT-NE=292.63 4" MIN EL. 294.96 EL. 294.63 MAX. DESIGN W.S. ~"'l-1--1-WEIR 0.023' (0.276") WIDE @ ELEV=263.97 PIPE SUPPORTS 12" PVC ri=:::io;:-Ll-----·~rUTLET NE PIPE TO 'CB #8 IE 12" OUT-NE=292.63 TO HOOK AT BOTTOM OF FRAME FOR EAsY ACCESS. REFER TO WSDOT STD PLAN 8-1 0.40-00 FOR 8" SHEAR GATE CONNECTED TO 8" STUB FROM 12" DIA STANDPIPE 1 ' SECTION OF 12" DIA. -+---~,~'i---1---PIPE ATIACHED BY -GASKETEO BAND TO ALLOW REMOVAL INSIDE BOTIOM ELEV=288.6i3-t~--../------_J ORIFICE RESTRICTOR PLATE WITH 0.569" ORIFICE AS SPECIFIED ELEV=290.63 STD. CALV. HANDHOLDS, --- STEPS OR LADDER NOTES: 1. USE 60" DIAMETER CATCH BASIN TYPE 2. 2. METAL PARTS: ALL METAL PARTS MUST BE ALUMINUM OR MADE OF ALUMINIZED STEEL. 3. FRAME AND LADDER OR 'STEPS OFFSET SO: A. CLEANOUT GATE IS VISIBLE FROM TOP. 8. CLIMB-DOWN SPACE IS CLEAR OF RISER AND CLEANOUT GATE. 4. PROVIDE AT LEAST ONE 3" x D.OSD GAGE SUPPORT BRACKET ANCHORED TO CONCRETE WALL (MAX. 3'-0" VERTICAL SPACING). PROPOSED CB #7 CONTROL STRUCTURE NTS THIS PLAN SHEET IS ACCEPTED FOR CONSTRUCTION IN ACCOl!DANCE WITH .THE Cl1Y OF ANACORTES OROINANCES AND POl,JCIES. ACTUAL CONFORMANCE OF THE DESIGN WITH APPLICABLE LAWS IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBIU1Y OF THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, .WliOSE NAME AND STAMP APPEAR ON THIS SHEET. ACQUIRING, COMPLYING WITH, AND PROVIDING MITIGAl)ON FOR ALL FEDERAL. STATE. COUN1Y, AND LOCAL LAWS, PERMITS, .AND MANDATES. INCLUDING B~T NOT LIMITED TO THE ENDANGERED .SPECIES ACT, FEDERAL WElLAND PERMIT, STATE DEPARTMENT Of FISHERI~ AND H'tDRAULICS PERMIT, FEDERAL FLOOD PLAIN PERMITS, .NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT IS THE RESPONSIQllJlY OF THE DE\/El.DPER, LAND Dv.tlER, AND THEIR ENGINEER. THE 1.SSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SH.ALL NOT .BE CONSTRUED AS PROOF OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. CITY ENGINEER DAlE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ACCEPlED PROJECT IS TO START WITHIN 1 YEAR OF THE DA lE. REV. NO. REVISION DAlE BY APPROVED Ravnik & Associates, Inc. SHEET DESCRIPTION: SCALE: AS SHOWN SHEET TITLE: CHERRY COURT SHORT PLAT FOR DRAWING NO. 19013.DET.dwg CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND-USE PLANNING 1633 LINDA.MOOD LA.NE/P.O. BOX 361 BURLINGTON, WA. 98233 PH: (360) 707·2048 FAX: (360) 707·2216 DRAWN BY: D. REMSEN DETAIL.S CHECKED BY: HLN DA lE: 05.06.20 CORNER 9 PROPERITES, LLC SW 1/4 SECTION 25, T. 35 N., R. 1 E., W.M. Joa No. 19013 SHEET NO. 8 OF 11 LOT 1LOT 2LOT 6LOT 3LOT 4LOT 5TRACT 'Y'DOUGLAS FIR #140" DBHTO REMAINSEE TYPICALLANDSCAPE PLANSHEET L-2AME GRASTE PSEGRA MLLCRA CRITSU MERACE CI210' WIDE PONDLANDSCAPING PER AMC19.60.070 (H)TREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEACE CI2 17Acer circinatumVine Maple6` Ht.AME GRA 11Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance` Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry 2" Cal.CRA CRI 7Crataegus laevigata `Crimson Cloud`Crimson Cloud Hawthorn 2" Cal.PIN CO5 6Pinus contorta contortaShore Pine7` Ht.STE PSE 6Stewartia pseudocamelliaJapanese Stewartia2" Cal.TSU MER 4Tsuga mertensianaMountain Hemlock6` Ht.SHRUBSCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEMYR BUX 7Myrica californica `Buxifolia`Pacific Wax Myrtle2 gal.PRU OTT 18 Prunus laurocerasus `Otto Luyken`Luykens Laurel2 gal.SYM MAG 19 Symphoricarpos albus `Magic Berry`Compact Snowberry5 gal.GROUND COVERSCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEGAU SH2 119 Gaultheria shallonSalal6"SOD/SEEDCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEGRA MLL 10,049 sf Grass Erosion Control Mix Locally Proven Pond MixseedGRA ENM 3,157 sf Grass Low Grow Lawn Seed Mix Locally Proven Lawn MixseedPLANT SCHEDULEL-1LANDSCAPE PLANPLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN1" = 30'-0" (CHECK SCALE BAR FOR ACCURACY)Tree Density Requirements -(see tree preservation sheet for quantity calculations)LOCATIONRequiredProvidedTOTALEntrance Road and Cul-d-sac17Along Orchard Ave7Detention Pond32SUBTOTAL49Lot 110Lot 210Lot 310Lot 411Lot 511Lot 69SUBTOTAL61TOTAL110110Tree Location RequirementsRequredProvidedTOTAL TREES REQUIRED110Trees located outside ResidentialLots (25%)284120322032land5.2.2020N/A1" = 30'PDPDPDREVISIONDATEREV.BYNO.CHECKED:DRAWN:DESIGNED:::VERTICALHORIZONTALSCALES:SHEET:JOB NO.:DRAWING:ISSUE DATE:DesigneccosLLCeccosDesignLandscape Architecture and PlanningMount Vernon, WA 98273p. 360.419.7400f. 800.508.2017www.eccosdesign.com0' 30' 60' 90' 120'NORTHCherry CourtAnacortes, WA prepared for:prepared by:contact: Anna Nelsonone inch12permit set3456PATRIK DYLANCERTIFICATE NO. 793STATE OFWASHINGTONREGISTEREDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCorner 9 Properties, LLC504 E. FairhavenBurlington, WA 98233LANDSCAPE STATISTICSPLANT SCHEDULEGENERAL NOTES1. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED BY PERSONS FAMILIAR WITH THIS KIND OF WORK AND UNDER THE SUPERVISIONOF A QUALIFIED FOREMAN.2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SIZES AND QUALITY TO CONFORM TO AMERICAN ASSOC. OF NURSERYMEN, AMERICANSTANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, MOST RECENT PUBLISHED.3. PLANT LOCATIONS ON THE PLANS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO ADJUSTMENT IN THE FIELD BY THELANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR.4. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE OF NURSERY STOCK AND SHALL BE OF THE TYPE, SIZE AND CONDITION SPECIFIED.THE PLANT MATERIAL SHALL EXHIBIT NORMAL HABITS OF GROWTH FOR THE SPECIES, SHALL HAVE BUDS INTACT ANDSHALL BE FREE OF DISEASE, INSECTS, SCARS, BRUISES, BREAKS, SEED AND WEED ROOTS.5. SEE NOTES THIS SHEET FOR TOPSOIL DEPTH AND SPECIFICATION.6. MEDIUM BARK MULCH IS TO BE INSTALLED AT ALL NEW PLANTING AREAS WITH A MINIMUM OF 2 INCHES.7. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL SITE UTILITIES PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE IMPLEMENTATION.PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED TO AVOID CONFLICT.8. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS,PAVING, WALLS, AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION ANDAT NO ADDITIONAL COST.9. PLANT COUNT IS FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE; IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY, THE PLAN SHALL GOVERN.ACTUAL PLANT QUANTITIES TO BE DETERMINED BY REQUIRED PLANT SPACING.10. ALL AREAS TO BE PLANTED WITH GROUNDCOVER ARE INDICATED ON THE PLAN WITH A HATCH PATTERN. SEE PLANTLIST FOR PLANT TYPE, SIZE, AND SPACING.11. SUBSTITUTION OF PLANT VARIETIES DUE TO LACK OF AVAILABILITY SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE OWNERSREPRESENTATIVE AND CITY.12. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ASSUMED TO BE PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13. ALL SOIL GRADES TO BE A MINIMUM SIX INCHES BELOW ADJACENT FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE ALL GRADES ADJACENT TO A BUILDING SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5% 3' FROM FOUNDATION.14. ALL GRADES, DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.15. SUPPLEMENTAL HAND WATERING WILL BE DONE DURING FIRST TWO YEARS TO GUARANTEE PLANT ESTABLISHMENT.IF CITY REQUIRES AUTOMATED IRRIGATION SYSTEM THEN BIDDER DESIGNED SYSTEM WILL BE PROVIDED.16. BASEMAP PROVIDED BY RAVNIK AND ASSOCIATES, BURLINGTON, WASOIL NOTES1. CONTRACTOR MAY STOCKPILE SITE TOPSOIL FOR POSSIBLE RE-USE IN LANDSCAPE BEDS. STOCKPILED TOPSOIL TOBE APPROVED BY OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. ROAD BASE, GLACIAL TILL, GRAVEL OR CONTAMINATED SOILS ARENOT ACCEPTABLE AND WILL BE REJECTED.2. SITE TOPSOIL SHALL HAVE ALL ROCKS, GRASS CLODS AND DEBRIS LARGER THAN 1" WHENEVER VISIBLE ON THESURFACE3. EXISTING SITE TOPSOIL TO BE AMENDED WITH COMPOST AT A RATIO OF 3:1. 3 UNITS OF EXISTING SOIL TO ONE UNITOF COMPOST. COMPOST TO BE WSDOT CERTIFIED.4. IN LIEU OF AMENDING SITE TOPSOIL CONTRACTORS MAY CHOOSE TO USE IMPORTED 2-WAY TOPSOIL.5. TOPSOIL DEPTHS5.1. TOPSOIL TO BE PLACED AT A MINIMUM OF 9" IN ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS AND INCORPORATED INTO EXISTINGSUBGRADE. LIGHTLY TAMP 6" LAYERS OF SOIL BY HAND OR LIGHTLY WITH EXCAVATOR.5.2. TOPSOIL TO BE PLACE AT AT MINIMUM OF 12" IN ALL TREE-PIT AREAS. SEE DETAIL THIS PAGE.5.3. LAWN / GRASS AREA HAVE A MINIMUM 2" PROFILE OF TOPSOIL. ROTO-TILLER MAY BE USED TO PROVIDE ASMOOTH GRADE FOR LAWNS.6. TOPSOIL SHALL NOT BE MOVED, MIXED OR PLACE WHILE SATURATED.7. IN ALL INSTANCES, PLACED TOPSOIL TO BE INCOPRPORTED INTO EXISTING GRADE.MAINTENANCE NOTES -1. PLANTING PLAN EMPHASIZES DWARF AND LOW GROWNG TREES. TREES ON EACH LOT ARE TO BE MANTAINED AT AHEIGHT NO GREATER THAN THE HOME ON THE SAME LOT.2. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE ARE STREET TREES TO BE TOPPED OR PRUNED WITHOUT PERMISSION AND DIRECTIONOF THE CITY ARBORIST.3. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE ARE SHRUBS IN COMMON AREAS TO BE SHEARED OR SHAPED. SHRUBS ARE DESIGNEDTO FILL AND GROW IN TO A PERMANENT MATURE SIZE.4. WEEDS TO BE REMOVED IN A TIMELY MANNER BY MECHANICAL OR CHEMICAL MEANS, IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALLLOCAL AND STATE GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS.5. BARK MULCH IN PLANTER BEDS TO BE TOPPED OFF WITH 1" LIFT MIN, ONCE PER YEAR IN THE SPRING.Other RequirementsRequredProvidedSTREET TREES REQUIRED1 PER 30 FEET PER CODEPOND LANDSCAPE REQUIRED10 FOOT WIDEBUFFERPER CODE5/7/20 4' WALKWAY, TYP.LOT 4STEPPING STONESOR PAD OFF DOORPATIO OR DECKL A W NCOVERED ENTRY, TYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAY, TYP.TreesQuantitySymbolScientific NameCommon NamePlanting Sizesee sheetAcer palmatum 'Atropurpurea'Red Japanese mapleAmelanchier grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' ServiceberryCercis canadensis 'Forest Pansy'Forest Pansy RedbudCornus Sp. 'Eddies White Wonder'Ornamental DogwoodChamaecyparis nootkatensis 'Gracilis' Narrow Hinooki Cypress 6' minPerennials, Grasses and FernsSymbolScientific NameCommon NamePlanting SizePolystichum munitumSword Fern1-GalCarex morrowii variegataMorrow's Sedge1-GalHelictotrichon sempervirensBlue Oat Grass1-GalMiscanthus sinensis 'Little Kitten'Dwarf Maiden Grass 1-GalGround CoverQuantityScientific NameCommon NamePlanting SizeArcostaphylos uva-ursiKinnikinnick1-GalCalluna vulgarisScotch heather1-GalHemerocallis 'Stella de Oro'Daylilly1-GalLiriope muscariBig blue lily turf1-GalRudbeckia fulgida var. sullivantii Dwarf Black Eyed Susan 1-GalSedum telephium 'Autumn Joy'Autumn Joy Sedum1-GalShrubSymbolScientific NameCommon NamePlanting SizeBerberis thunbergii 'Crimson Pygmy' Crimson Pygmy2-GalBuxus microphylla japonica 'compacta' Dwarf Boxwood2-GalCornus Stolinifera 'Kelseyi'Dwarf Redtwig Dogwood 2-GalCornus stolonifera 'Flaviramea'Golden twig dogwood 2-GalEuonymus alatus 'Compactus' Dwarf Burning Bush 2-GalGaultheria shallonSalal2-GalHydrangea macrophylla 'Bailmer''Endless Summer'2-galPhysocarpus opulifolius 'Nanus'Little Devil Ninebark 2-GalPieris japonica 'Bisbee Dwarf'Bisbee Dwarf Pieris2-GalPrunus Laurocerasus 'Otto Luyken'Otto Luyken Laurel2-GalRhododendron 'PJM'PJM Rhody2-GalRhododendron 'Ramapo'Ramapo Rhod.2-GalSarcococca humilisHimalayan sarcococca 2-GalSpirea Japonica 'Little Princess'Little Princess Spirea 2-GalSyringa patula 'Miss Kim'Miss Kim Lilac2-GalViburnum davidiiDavid's Viburnum2-GalSymbolFragaria chiloensisBeach Strawbery1-GalRubus calycinoidesCreeping Bramble1-Galn/aLawn GrassL-1Acer circinatumVine Maple6'Acer Japonicum 'Dissectum'Weeping Japanese Maple 1-1/2"-cal1-1/2"-cal1-1/2"-cal1-1/2"-cal1-1/2"-calTreeminimumperhomeonwerlotMagnolia SieboldiiDwarf Flowering Magnolia1-1/2"-calStyrax japonicus 'SnowconeDwarf Styrax1-1/2"-calL-2LANDSCAPE PLAN.TYPICAL HOME LANDSCAPE PLAN1" = 10'-0" (CHECK SCALE BAR FOR ACCURACY)20322032land5.2.2020N/A1" = 30'PDPDPDREVISIONDATEREV.BYNO.CHECKED:DRAWN:DESIGNED:::VERTICALHORIZONTALSCALES:SHEET:JOB NO.:DRAWING:ISSUE DATE:DesigneccosLLCeccosDesignLandscape Architecture and PlanningMount Vernon, WA 98273p. 360.419.7400f. 800.508.2017www.eccosdesign.com0' 30' 60' 90' 120'NORTHCherry CourtAnacortes, WA prepared for:prepared by:contact: Anna Nelsonone inch12permit set3456PATRIK DYLANCERTIFICATE NO. 793STATE OFWASHINGTONREGISTEREDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCorner 9 Properties, LLC504 E. FairhavenBurlington, WA 98233PLANT SCHEDULETYPICAL PLANTING DETAILSNO SCALE1L-22" DEPTH BARK MULCH8 FOOT, 2" ROUND GUYING APPARATUS:HEAVY DUTY POLY CHAIN LOCK4" WATERING BASINSURROUNDING TREEPLANTING BACKFILL MIXSCARIFY PLANTING SET ROOTBALL ON MOUNDOF COMPACTED PLANTINGBACKFILL MIXEXISTING SUBGRADEFINISH GRADE1.5 - 2 TIMES ROOTBALL DIAMETERPIT WALLS2 PER TREE4 TIMES ROOT BALL DIAMETERPLANT TREE 1/2" HIGHER THANDEPTH GROWN AT NURSERY.FERTILIZE ALL TREES WITHAPPROVED STARTER FERTILIZERAPPLIED AT MANUFACTURER'SSUGGESTED RATESTREE STAKES TO BE VERTICAL,PARALLEL, EVEN-TOPPED,UNSCARRED AND DRIVEN INTOUNDISTURBED SUBGRADE12"MIN.MULCHLODGEPOLE PINE STAKES,COMPLETELY REMOVE ALLBURLAP, GROWBAG, STRINGAND FOREIGN MATERIALS FROMTHE ROOT BALL.TOPSOIL DEPTH ANDTYPE AS SPECIFIEDGROUNDCOVER PLANT.SEE PLANT LISTBARK MULCHEXISTINGSUBGRADEGROUNDCOVER PLANTSPACING AS INDICATEDON PLANT LIST (TYPICAL)EQUALDISTANCEEQUALDISTANCE DISTANCEEQUAL60°EDGE OF PLANTERSECTIONPLANCUTBACK, PULL OUT AND DISTURB ALLCIRCLING ROOTS FROM ANY CONTAINERGROWN PLANTS1/2DISTANCE2" DEPTH BARK MULCH4" WATERING BASINSURROUNDING PLANTFINISH GRADESCARIFY PLANTING PIT WALLSPLANTING BACKFILLSET ROOTBALL ON MOUND OFCOMPACTED PLANTING BACKFILL MIXEXISTING SUBGRADE 2 TIMESROOTBALL DIA.COMPLETELY REMOVE ALLBURLAP, GROWBAG, STRINGAND FOREIGN MATERIALSFROM THE ROOT BALL.·PLANT SHRUB 1/2" HIGHER THAN DEPTHGROWN AT NURSERY.·FERTILIZE ALL PLANTS WITH APPROVEDSTARTER FERTILIZER APPLIED ATMANUFACTURER'S SUGGESTED RATES·SCARIFY ROOTBALL OFCONTAINER-GROWN PLANTS. PRIOR TOBACKFILLING SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE A Liability: $ 2,000.00 Policy No.: 5003353-0002737e Dated: March 13, 2020 at 8:00 A.M. Order No.: 01-177292-F Fee: $350.00 Tax: $29.75 Name of Assured: LANDED GENTRY REALTY & DEVELOPMENT The assurances referred to on the face page are: That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matters relative to the following described real property: (See Schedule “A-1,” attached.) Title to said real property is vested in: RONALD V. BAYEK, who also appears of record as RONALD V. BAYEK, SR., and RONALD V. BAYEK, JR., each as their separate property, in indeterminate interests subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. EXCEPTIONS: 1.Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. 2.Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in the United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 3.Title to any property beyond the lines of the real property expressly described herein, or title to streets, roads, avenues, lanes, ways or waterways on which such real property abuts, or the right to maintain therein vaults, tunnels, ramps, or any other structure or improvement; or any rights or easements therein unless such property, rights or easements are expressly and specifically set forth in said description. 4.Until disbursement has occurred in the subject transaction, the Company reserves the right to raise exceptions and requirements or determine that it will not issue a title policy based upon the details of the transaction, the review of the closing documents, and changes in recording and title searching capabilities resulting from the COVID-19 virus and its impact on the applicable county recording offices. 5/7/20 SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE Order No.: 01-177292-F Policy No. 5003353-0002737e SCHEDULE A EXCEPTIONS CONTINUED: 5.General taxes, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, first half delinquent May 1, 2020, if unpaid, second half delinquent November 1, 2020, if unpaid: Amount Amount Balance Account No. Year Billed Paid Owing 350125-3-091-0009 2020 $2,538.68 $1,269.38 $1,269.30 Property I.D. No.: P32077 6.Municipal assessments and impact fees, if any, levied by the City of Anacortes. 7. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any; rights of vendors and holders of security interests on personal property installed upon said Land, and rights of tenants to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. 8.Easements, restrictions, and other matters shown on Schedule "B-1" attached are also excepted from coverage. The easements, restrictions and other matters shown as lettered exceptions on Schedule “B-1” are excepted from policy coverage to the same extent that the numbered Schedule “B” Special Exceptions shown herein are excepted from policy coverage. NOTE #1: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, AND PURSUANT TO AMENDMENT OF WASHINGTON STATE STATUTES RELATING TO STANDARDIZATION OF RECORDED DOCUMENTS, THE FOLLOWING FORMAT AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET. FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENTS BY THE RECORDER. Margins to be 3" on top of first page and 1" on sides and bottom, 1" on top, sides and bottom of each succeeding page. Font size of 8 points or larger, paper size of no more than 8 1/2" by 14". No attachments on pages such as stapled or taped notary seals, pressure seals must be smudged. INFORMATION WHICH MUST APPEAR ON THE FIRST PAGE Title or titles of documents. If assignment or reconveyance, reference to auditor's file number of subject deed of trust must be included. Names of grantor(s) and grantee(s) with reference to additional names on following pages, if any. Abbreviated legal description (lot, block, volume/page of plat or section/township/range and quarter section or government lot for unplatted). Assessor's tax parcel number(s). Return address which may appear in the upper left hand 3" top margin. Pursuant to item c.) above, the abbreviated legal description for the subject property is as follows: Ptn SE 1/4 SW 1/4, 25-35-1 E W.M. SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE Order No.: 01-177292-F Policy No. 5003353-0002737e SCHEDULE A EXCEPTIONS CONTINUED: NOTE #2: The property description included herein is based upon the application for Title Insurance. Before any instrument(s) pertaining to this property is/are prepared, the description should be verified and approved by all parties. NOTE #3: The attached ‘Affidavit of Understanding and Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement due to the Covid-19 Emergency’ must be executed by the transaction parties. Said instrument must be executed before a Notary Public and submitted to this company PRIOR to closing. NOTE #4: Unless otherwise specified, this Company has assigned this file to the following Underwriter for the policy to issue: First American Title Company. Schedule “A-1” Order No.: 01-177292-F Policy No.: 5003353-0002737e DESCRIPTION: The East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 35 North, Range 1 East, W.M.; EXCEPT the South 165 feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPT the North 759 feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPT the East 336 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH that portion of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 35 North, Range 1 East, W.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter which is 290 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North along said East line of 16 feet; thence West 336 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter 16 feet, more or less, to a point due West of the point of beginning; thence East to the point of beginning; EXCEPT right-of-way for public road along the East boundary thereof, known as Avenue H or Heart Lake Road. Situate in the County of Skagit, State of Washington. Schedule “B-1” Order No.: 01-177292-F Policy No.: 5003353-0002737e EXCEPTIONS: A. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Grantee: Gary Eugene Wollam and Carrie Wollam Purpose: Underground electric system Area Affected: Portion of subject property Dated: March 31, 1981 Recorded: April 10, 1981 Auditor's No.: 8104100027 B. MATTERS DISCLOSED BY RECORD OF SURVEY: Recorded: May 28, 1981 Auditor’s File No.: 8105280025 C. MATTERS DISCLOSED BY RECORD OF SURVEY: Recorded: July 11, 1995 Auditor’s File No.: 9507110020 5/7/20 5/7/20 i ! -... ( -.. . I i•' ~,....... ':.£ l(:'"'t'<1 ~ , ,...., ..... ,. . ... • ... :"'• '' STAO::·E OF WA$~i~~TON ) \,. ,;·:·' ', , ...... ',. / : SS c ou1;TY OF SKAG!;T<';,< ) On this.·(~·'; p;;::s,pnally appeared before me Ed J. Stonack and · -_;:_<:" __ .J::;:· ,::::/> ":iL., :t::·:. ,/~·:' :'.'.:/',/ \:-\·~ . ~va E. Stonack,, to me,t:.~nown to be the. individuals described in and .. ·\\\lllllli1,, . . ~,,,,-~''.. !.~ oll-,;~?(5-7,~t e~ the wi~9-i~.c·b.nd fore going ins tr um en t, and a c kn ow le d ge d ~;~~jjj~4i;~:0 signed arid:·;e~~~:~)the same as their free and voluntary ~-': ·~,,.~\'il·t; an!f:= ,•a. aed, for th~ ;~s~~,:Fang,,purposes there.in mentioned. ~ ~" ~ ' .. » . ....... ; ... . ..... \.:--:.' ~., :• 3 .'\ ~~ ~; ven under my ha~/.afl~·· of fi oial seal this r J "'!!-day .. • /,,~ • . • • . '' \ . """" I . v .. , ... \· ~dt:t._;,._ , 19~. of n and or the tate of residing at Anacortes VOL 3340' P/\Cf 379 • ... - • ' • • • - I~ --· ' .. \ ~ . . . ·----·- • . •'. ' ~ ,. • . ( • • • . 4 .. ' ·~ • . . • 5/7/20 Lot Closure Report -Lot : LOT 2 ================================= file-P:\2019 Jobs\19-130\mscad\19-130 SP.msj\lc_LOT 2.txt Tuesday , April 7 , 2020 , 10:06 :45a .m. Starting location (North , East) = ( 4958.4940 , 17104 .223 1 (In the table below, the Length of Curves refers to the chord length. and the Bear i ng of Curves r efers to the chord bearing .) Leg Segment Bearing Length Front End_Northing -------------------------------------- 1 Line S88°59 '27"E 123.0000 No 4956.3277 17227 .2040 2 Line S01°29'39"W 68 .9400 No 4887.4112 17225 .4064 3 Curve S35°3 1 '47 "E 26 .5715 No 4865.7869 17240.8478 ARC= 2 6. 8 94 6 , RAD= 50 .0000 , DELTA= 30°49'08" BC TO RAD= N69°52 '47"E RAD TO EC= S39°03'39"W SUBTRACT ARC AREA 31. 9563 4 Line S01°29'39"W 44 .1400 No 4821 .6619 17239 .6968 5 Line N89°32'05"W 139.0200 No 4822 .7908 17100 .6814 6 Line N01°29'39 "E 135.7500 No 4958.494 7 17104 .2211 Ending location (North , East) = ( 4958 .4947, 17104 .2211 ) Total Distance 537 .7446 7 End _Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA S72°43'44"E (from ending location to starting location ) 0 .0021 1 :256692.9 0.0000 0 .0 percent 17471.331 sq. ft . (straight segment added to close traverse) 0.401087 Acres *********** 1 Lot Closure Report -Lot : LOT 3 ================================= file-P:\2019 J obs\19-130\mscad\19-13 0 SP.msj\lc_LOT 3 .txt Tuesday , April 7 , 2020 , 10 :08 :5 5a.m . Start ing location (North, East) = ( 4822.7958, 17 1 00.5937 ) (In the table below , the Length of Curves refers to t h e chord length . and the Bearing of Curves re fers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Bearing Length Front End_Northing -------------------------------------- 1 Line S89 °32'05 "E 139.0200 No 4821. 6669 17239 .6091 2 Line S01°29'39"W 120 .0200 No 47 01 .6877 17236.4796 3 Line N89°32'05"W 139.0200 No 4702.8166 17097 .4642 4 Line N01°29'39"E 120.0200 No 4822.7958 17100.5937 Ending location (North, East) = ( 4822 .7958 , 17 1 00 .5937 ) Total Distance To tal Traverse Stations Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA *********** 518.0800 5 < 0 .001000 l:INFINITY 0 .0 000 0 .0 percent 16682.490 sq . ft . = 0.382977 Acres 1 End_Easting ----------- Lot Closur e Report -Lo t : LOT 4 ================================= file-P :\2019 Jobs\19 -130\mscad\19-130 SP.msj\lc_LOT 4.txt Tuesday , April 7 , 2020, 10 :11 :58a .m. Starting location (North , East) = ( 4865.7901 , 17240 .8523 (In the table below , the Length of Curves refers to the chord l ength. and the Bearing of Curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Bearing Length Front E nd_Northing --------------------- ----------------- 1 Curve S61°18'10 "E 17.9897 No 4857 .1519 17256 .6323 ARC= 18 .0882, RAD= 50 .0000 , DELTA= 20°43 '39" BC TO RAD= N39°03'39"E RAD TO EC= Sl8°20 '00"W SUBTRACT ARC AREA = 9.7992 2 Line S01°29'39"W 55.6300 No 4801 .540 8 17255 .1817 3 Line S89°32'05"E 178 .4400 No 48 00 .0917 17433 .6159 4 Line S01°30'24"W 100 .0200 No 4700.1063 17430 .9860 5 Line N89°32'05 "W 194 .4200 No 4701 .6851 1 7236 .5724 6 Line N01°29'39"E 120.0200 No 4821.6643 17239 .7020 7 Line N01°29 '39 "E 44.1400 No 4865.7893 17240.8529 Ending location {North , East) = ( 4865 .7893 , 17240.8529 ) Total Distance 710 .7582 8 End _Easti ng ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA N37°39'55"W {from ending location to s tarting location) 0.0010 1:685526 .1 0 .0000 0 .0 percent 20392.090 sq . ft . (stra ight segment added to close traverse) 0 .468138 Acres *********** 1 Lot Closure Report -Lot : LOT 5 ================================= file-P:\2019 Jobs\19-130\mscad\19-130 SP.msj\lc_LOT 5.txt Tuesday , April 7, 2020 , 10:17 :02a.m . Starting location (Nort h , East) = ( 4931 .0458 , 17314.8020 (In the table below, the Length of Curves refers to the chord length . and the Bearing of Curves re fers to the chord bearing .) Leg Segment Bearing Length Front ----------- 1 Line S89 °32 '05 "E 122.2400 No 17437 .0379 2 Line S01°30'24"W 89 .0000 No 17434.6978 3 Line S8 9°32 '05"E 306 .0500 No 17740.7378 4 Line S01°30'24"W 16.0000 No 17740 .3171 5 Line N89°32 '05"W 306 .05 00 No 17434 .2772 6 Line S01°30'24"W 25 .0 100 No 17433.6196 7 Line N89°32'05"W 178 .4400 No 17255 .1854 8 Line N01°29'39"E 55.6 300 No 17256 .6360 9 Curve N38°12'36"E 94 .0427 No 17314.8057 ARC= 122 .3883 , RAD= 50.0000 , DELTA= 140°14'48" BC TO RAD= Nl8°20'00"E RAD TO EC= N58°05 '12 "E SUBTRACT ARC AREA = 2260 .3530 End_Northing ------------ 4930 .0531 4841. 0839 4838.5986 4822 .6041 4825 .0894 4800.0881 4801. 5371 4857 .1482 4931.0421 Ending location (North , East) = ( 4931 .0421 , 17314.8057 ) Total Distance 1220.8083 10 End_Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direct i o n Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA N45°15'47"W (from ending locat ion to starting location) 0 .0052 1 :234374 .6 0.0000 0.0 percent 23741 .610 sq. ft . (straight segment added to close traverse) 0 .545032 Acres *********** 1 Lot Closure Re port -Lot : LOT 6 ================================= f i le-P :\2019 Jobs\19 -130\mscad\19-130 SP .msj\lc_LOT 6.txt Tuesday , April 7 , 2020 , 10:20 :07a .m. Starting l ocation (North , East) = ( 5093 .6768, 17262 .8020 (In t he table below , the Length of Curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearin g of Curves refers to the chord bear ing .) Leg Segme nt Bearing Length Front End_Northing -------------------------------------- 1 Line S 88°59 '27 "E 100 .0000 No 5091 . 9156 17362.7865 2 Line S01°29'34"W 161 .2800 No 4930 .6903 17358.5851 3 Line N89°32'05 "W 43.7800 No 4931. 0458 17314.8065 4 Curve N56°10'47 "W 41.0977 No 4953 .9205 17280 .6631 ARC= 42.3526 , RAD= 50 .0000 , DE LTA= 4 8°31'57 " BC TO RAD= S58°05 '12"W RAD TO EC= N09°33 '15"E SUBTRACT ARC AREA 1 22 .1506 5 Cu r ve N39°28 '33"W 32 .7832 No 4979 .2256 17259 .8211 ARC= 35.7531, RAD = 25 .0000 , DELTA= 81°56'24 " BC TO RAD= N09°33'15"E RAD TO EC= N88°30'2l"W ADD ARC AREA = 137 .5003 6 Line N01°29 '39 "E 114.4900 No 5093.6767 17262 .8064 Ending location (North , East ) = ( 5093 .6767, 17262.8064 ) Total Distance 497 .6557 7 End _Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA N88°07 '29"W (from ending location to starting location) 0 .0044 1 :112432 .2 0 .0000 0 .0 percent 15041.450 sq. ft . (straight segment added to close traverse) 0.345304 Acres *********** 1 Lot Closure Report -Lot : TRACT Y ================================= file-P:\2019 Jobs\19-130\mscad\19-130 SP .msj\lc_TRACT Y.txt Tuesday, April 7 , 2020 , 10:29:06a.m. St arting location (North , East ) = ( 50 91 .9157, 17362.7901 ) (In the table below, the Length o f Curves refers to the c hord l e ngth . and the Bearing of Curves refe rs t o the c ho rd bearing .) Leg Segment Bea ring Length Front End_Northing -------- ------------------------------ 1 L ine S88°59'27"E 78 .48 00 No 5090.5335 17441.2579 2 Line S01°30 '24"W 160.5400 No 4930 .0490 174 37 .0368 3 Line N89°32'05"W 78.4500 No 4930 .6861 17 358 .5894 4 Line N01°29'39"E 161.2800 No 5091.9112 17362 .7948 Ending location (North , East) = ( 5091 .9112 , 17362 .7948) Total Distance 478 .7500 5 End _Easting ----------- Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclo sure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA N46°14 '44 "W (from ending location to starting location ) 0 .0065 1 :73624.5 0 .0000 0 .0 percent 12624.327 sq . ft. (s traight segment added to clos e traverse ) = 0 .2 89815 Acres *********** 1 Lot Closure Report -Lot : CHERRY CT ================================= file-P:\2019 Jobs \19 -130 \mscad\19-130 SP.msj\lc_CHERRY CT.txt Tuesday , April 7 , 2020 , 10:41:47a .m. Starting location {North, East) = { 5094.2403 , 17230 .8058 ) (In the table below , the Length of Curves refers to the chord length. and the Bearing of Curves refers to the chord bearing.) Leg Segment Bearing 1 Line S88°59 '27"E 17262.8009 2 Line S01°29 '39"W 17259 .8155 3 Curve S39°28'33"E 17280.6575 ARC= 35.7531, RAD= 25 .0000, DELTA= BC TO RAD= S88°30'2l"E RAD TO EC= S09°33 '15 "W SUBTRACT ARC AREA= 137 .5003 4 Curve S56°10 '47"E 17314.8009 ARC= 42 .3526 , RAD= 50 .0000 , DEL TA= BC TO RAD= S09°33 '15"W RAD TO EC= N58°05'12"E ADD-ARC AREA= 122 .1506 -5 Curve S38°12'36"W 17256 .6313 Length Front ----------- 32.0000 No 114.4900 No 32.7832 No 81°56 '24" 41.0977 No 48°31 '57" 94 .0427 No ARC= 122.3883 , RAD= 50.0000 , DELTA= 140°14 '48" BC TO RAD= S58°05'12 "W RAD TO EC= Sl8°20'00"W ADD-ARC AREA = 2260 .3530 6 Curve N61°18'10"W 17.9897 No 17240 .8513 ARC= 18.0882, RAD= 50 .0000 , DELTA= 20°43'39 " BC TO RAD= Nl8°20'00"E RAD TO EC= S39°03'39"W ADD-ARC AREA = 9.7992 7 Curve N35°31'47"W 26 .5715 No 17225 . 4099 ARC= 26 .8946 , RAD= 50.0000, DELTA= 30°49 '08" BC TO RAD= N39°03 '39"E RAD TO EC= S69°52'47"W ADD ARC AREA = 31.9563 8 Line N01°29 '39"E 68 .9400 No 17227.2075 9 Line N01°29'39 "E 137 .9600 No 17230.8048 1 End_Northing End_Easting ----------------------- 5093 .6767 4979 .2257 4953 .9206 4931.0459 4857 .1520 4865 .7902 4887 .4145 4956 . 3311 5094 .2442 Ending location (North, East) = ( 5094.2442, 17230 .8048 ) Total Distance Total Traverse Stations Misclosure Direction Misclosure Distance Error of Closure Frontage Frontage/Perimeter AREA traverse ) *********** 598.8667 10 S14°25'32"E (from ending location to s t artin g location) 0.0039 1:151910 .7 0 .0000 0.0 percent 12725 .907 sq. ft . (straight segment added to close = 0.292147 Acres 2 LOT 1LOT 2LOT 6LOT 3LOT 4LOT 5TRACT 'Y'APPROXIMATE STAND OF ALDER TREES TO BE REMOVED.FINAL LOCATION OF 13 ALDER TREES TO BE SURVEYEDAFTER LIFTING OF GOVERNORS STAY AT HOME ORDERSHOULD C.O.A. REQUIREDOUGLAS FIR #140" DBHTO REMAIN21TREE PROTECTION FENCESEE REQUIREMENTS THIS SHEETLOCATION IMAGE IS TAKEN FROMLOCATION IMAGE IS TAKEN FROMALDER #13TO BE REMOVEDCHERRY? #1TO BE REMOVEDTP-1TREE PRESERVATION PLANTREE PRESERVATION PLAN1" = 30'-0" (CHECK SCALE BAR FOR ACCURACY)ALDER #1ALDER #2ALDER #3ALDER #4ALDER #5ALDER - AWINDTHROWN HAZARD TREE, NOTCOUNTED IN INVENTORYALDER #6ALDER #7ALDER #8ALDER #9ALDER #10ALDER #11ALDER #12IMAGE 1 - EXISTING TREE INVENTORY ALONG ORCHARD PLACE (PVT)LOOKING NORTHIMAGE 2 - EXISTING TREE INVENTORY ALONG ORCHARD AVELOOKING SOUTHALDER #13DOUG FIR #1CHERRY? #1Tree Density Requirments - COAS.F.GROSS ACREAGE130,752Public and Private ROW(12,726)Subtotal118,026divided by 1000Subtotal Tree Credits Required118Credits from Retained Tree( 8 )see table belowTOTAL tree credits Required110Tree Unit Credits - COATREESIZE - D.B.H. REMOVED RETAINED CREDITALDER # 15.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 25.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 35.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 45.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 55.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 65.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 75.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 85.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 910.1" to 25"X0ALDER # 105.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 115.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 125.1" to 10"X0ALDER # 132-5"X0CHERRY? # 15.1" to 10"X0DOUGLAS FIR # 140"X8Tree Location Requirements#TOTAL TREES REQUIRED110Trees located outside ResidentialLots (25%)2820322032land5.2.2020N/A1" = 30'PDPDPDREVISIONDATEREV.BYNO.CHECKED:DRAWN:DESIGNED:::VERTICALHORIZONTALSCALES:SHEET:JOB NO.:DRAWING:ISSUE DATE:DesigneccosLLCeccosDesignLandscape Architecture and PlanningMount Vernon, WA 98273p. 360.419.7400f. 800.508.2017www.eccosdesign.com0' 30' 60' 90' 120'NORTHCherry CourtAnacortes, WA prepared for:prepared by:contact: Anna Nelsonone inch12permit set3456PATRIK DYLANCERTIFICATE NO. 793STATE OFWASHINGTONREGISTEREDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTCorner 9 Properties, LLC504 E. FairhavenBurlington, WA 98233TREE PRESERVATION STATISTICSTREE PRESERVATION NOTES -1. APPROVED TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL BE DESIGNATED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF ANY CLEARING OR GRADING PER TREEPRESERVATION PLAN. TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGH SITE DEVELOPMENT UNTIL PROJECT COMPLETION, OREARLIER WITH PRIOR AUTHORIZATION BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.2. A TREE PROTECTION AREA SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROTECT EACH TREE OR TREE STAND DURING SITE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION.THE TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROVED TREE PRESERVATION PAN.3. IDEALLY, TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHOULD EXTEND TO THE DRIP LINE OF THE TREE PLUS SIX FEET. HOWEVER, IN MANY INSTANCES, THIS WILLNOT BE POSSIBLE DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS. TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL BE AS LARGE AS FEASIBLE GIVEN SITE CONSTRAINTS AND THENATURE OF THE PROJECT.4. TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL BE CLEARLY SHOWN ON ALL APPLICABLE SITE DEVELOPMENT, PRELIMINARY PLATS, AND CONSTRUCTIONDRAWINGS.5. TREE PROTECTION AREAS SHALL BE DESIGNATED THROUGH THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM STANDARDS:·CHAIN LINK OR OTHER TYPE OF STURDY CONSTRUCTION FENCING ATTACHED TO POSTS SET IN THE GROUND A MINIMUM OF TWELVE INCHESAND SPACED NO MORE THAN TEN FEET APART; AND·COLORED TAPE, RIBBON, AND OTHER IDENTIFICATION TAGS ATTACHED TO PROTECTED TREES.6. METHODS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PROTECTION FOR TREE ROOTS INCLUDE:·PLACING LAYERS OF PROTECTIVE MULCH, SIX INCHES — TWO FEET DEEP, OVER TREE ROOTS TO HELP AVOID SOIL COMPACTION OVERROOTS THAT MAY BE SUBJECT TO NEARBY EQUIPMENT USE. ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE, EXCESS MULCH SHALL BE REMOVEDLEAVING A MAXIMUM OF TWO INCHES MULCH COVER OVER PRE-EXISTING GRADE. THEN SOIL SHOULD BE AERATED BY DRILLING HOLES.·TUNNELING UNDER ROOT SYSTEMS OR CIRCUMVENTING THE ROOTS INSTEAD OF CUTTING ACROSS THEM.·NO TOXIC CHEMICALS SHALL BE USED IN TREE PROTECTION AREAS.7. NO CLEARING, GRADING, FILLING, OPERATING OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT, TRENCHING, OR OTHER DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES SHALL OCCUR WITHINTREE PROTECTION AREAS. TREE PROTECTION AREAS MAY ONLY BE MODIFIED OR TEMPORARILY RELOCATED WITH THE PRIOR WRITTENAPPROVAL OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.5/7/20