20020288.pdfA"s`tl4 DATE RECEIVED
If
W'"•",I+
PERMIT EXPIRES Yh-
PERMIT
TONE
CITY OF EDMONDS � -J.� NUMBER T�)
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB BDHE,APTu
ADDRESS
rt� t Q f p/ ^ o
OWNER NAMENAME OF BUSINESS
AylEt UO/D Np'
1}}V(�ta`]G LOT ,S
IS/S
L,AGDES D FEE
PUBLIC RIGH/T OF WAY PER OFFICIAL �S(TREE T MAPLe ) per11PP a p
C�T,Y EXISTING 4/ `(
IP PROPOSED
ZI,( TELEPHONE /-(� L) _ wxix neeuu a OO
Vl` /F ,.• Y;'r� REQUIRED DEDICATION FTng9recuena ep
W W
NAME METER SIZE
1 .I -"'re'
C-<J s T
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FI%TURFS
PRV EOUIRED
YES / NO 0
ADD ESS REMARKS
OWNERiCONT�R�ACfTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION GON/�T;fROUDRAINAGE
�-'c GIr++ (i) L1"�"�� z^F �. t l
T
:ITY 21P LZr
TELEPHON /
�� �3�h..-f✓71U.:/.
' I&S
NAME [� rf II +,,, i -, /1 //�✓ J�- �.�� • !..X�"L .i. ,A,; G.Q�IY.t�iti �LNFI%��
oCITY
T
LIP TELEPHON �, ,�C7
DATE
+s
O t
SiE caw
O
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
EXP
N D YE K 6V
VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADBn INSPECTION BOND
..I '-
PoL
1 j-/') .-v �f♦ ��^ O REO'� POSTED
v (J VES t
m
m
l-I-
EIGHT
GEPq RE41EW SIGN NEA HEIGHT
-' PR PEATY TAX ACCOUNT
PARCEL NO.
COMPLETE EXEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED
w
J
- 0
E%P ✓ -- 3g.�s �4 7s1
uj
TtZL NEW
RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING/MECH
LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS IFT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS(FT.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT URSIIDDEE REAR
y :{
Z Cm
AUDITION
COMMERCIAL
❑ CCOMPLIANCE ORHANGE OF
�� it �D ��e to 1 Z' �
?
USE
_G
PARKING LOTAREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE
-I0
S Oc
❑REMODEL
APARTMENT
❑ ❑ SIGN
REO'D PROVIDEDy
FENCE
.} q.
3 JO S 7 V2,1 O
Z FIR
❑ REPAIR
YP
❑ i % FTI
REMARKS
m Z
AS
1
❑ DEMOLISH
❑ TANK
❑ OTHER
C Z
sZ.
(LS4
r"I
GARAGE
ARPORT
RETAINING WALL ❑ RENEWAL
("T \ _O�' h
eo coLY! (,�(y
.-•�
O
TYPE OF USE. BUSINE'
OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
CkjF.•
BY TYPE ION C T
{
m
/-�
]UNDER
CHECKED OF CO E [OCCUR
1 0
w
NUMBER OF
DWELLINGAREAS
CRITICAL
%1
SPECIAL IN "TOR AREA OCCUPANT
! -I
mF
TORIES
UNITS +
NUMOER �4
REQUIRED VES LOAD
m m
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONElLe�
O
REMARKS
O
/
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REO'D
o C y
L'
'S co
( r Cr C % w -c
Z
') cR)f7-w ' c1t1 a6 c,
rQ
'. �O
.(j
l `
Z
-
VALUATION
FEE
—I
rPLANCHECK FEE
!
En
?Fir
"'7
7
rt?v✓li�/�
7�n X/nPLAN
Z
VESTED DATE
,
IT
C ECK NO:
MECHANICAL
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
(�
I DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
GRAOING'FIL_
PERMISSION.
f
AT�S R!'
J CHARGE
Arm.
PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS
PERMIT LIMIT:1 YEAR "PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
ENG. REVIEW FEES
rn •APPLICANT. ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
IN INTEREST AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE Cliv OF
LANDSCAPING
EDMONDS.WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES. AND AGENTS FROM ANYANU
INSPECTION FEE
All CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING OIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO MODIFY. WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REOUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
RECEIPT -
s NOR LIMIT IN ANYWAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.'
RECEIPT j ++.�..✓✓��
TOTAL AMOUNT DUEIHERE
THIS APPLICATIN, THAT THE INFO
GIVENS
VENBIS CORRECT,EDGE AND THAT I AM THEEOWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED ADENTION OF
APPLICATION APPROVAL
THE OWNER, I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUG.
CALL
Thrs nppllc:nwn rs not 8 p—T until slgnod by Ina
TION, AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN'S COPPE4ATION INSURANCE AND RCW 1827
BUIIE,,q OII,F.l or his/hor DOWIy. and Faoz arp palU. antl
FOR INSPECTION aco p,,,dpd.
SIGN AT RE( R GENT) . DATf..GNEO
(425)
OFFICIALS TUR TE
/
7 •%1 -022o
-FELEA.b BY DATE
ATTENTION
EXT 1333
IT IS UNLAWFUL
;
TO US R OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
771.0221
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFh
oAIGINA . FI YELLOW t INSPE .Ton x
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 100
FAX
PINK' -OWNER • GOLD ASSESSOR
E198
I
Mgt , (Zs- 1
'
AVERAGE GRADE CALL•
SEiBA `.
463
SIDE to,
t
488
4gl
1,911 + 4 = 411:15' EL. AVE.
OTHER
HEIGHT V - �Z
y
23"
h.
u"
'S4' W 33150'
�
'54° E 3315I'
g I .
GARAGE - 415'
415'
1 .
I
MA@IFLOOR , 416' I)" Q
AVE + 411.15' QtA^Qlj"
o g
- �
MK+E .AN /i
503
415'
-
I
¢i N
Ram
o
im _
a
=}Yt474" R=149bP
2i t�
of ie View Drive
+mnl
bm31, =zuon
t-;
.
azt3�B` g11.yV33 y
C
'� •-
benchmark: TOP OF C `,,--RETE MONUMENT
EC>r>Iv��+
�,PPftUVEf� t3Y PLANNING
U) OF 86th PL. lU
JUL 19 toot
500,00 F.T.
PERMIT COUNTER
APPRGVc{ BY PLi'\NP ING
snohomish County Park
+; 2h" ��Q� •,^
isAlnlla� �tmimop#r i�` .:s !� c,� A'" l— '
:,.��,• �; , ✓ i � — _,,r�,r
�c`n�e��Oth Stre�W-{�ort,�r� ;,;
rim
fu
SO
r_ '''�.�'•
� -
--...
g, rlet ... a IA
� Y� ��� ..
So Ill
~
407. orgher
8
nth Pi e�
40. p 44
8Q
{U1 -i 3
��\7�f� .
o
i .inch = 40
VV E mo"" ' Al am "Mciiiiiiiiii"
4R
«�• n..... �.
DEVELOP ED BASINS
GREENLEAF-EVANS W4MtE
.msos
ry '� BEK ENgNEERING do
EDt1NDSeWA'
—.
DRAINAGE STUDY
,
GREENLEAF-EVAPIS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
p
K
8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
-�
m
p
EEEa��
[
rn
k
�
r
Owner:
rn
rn rn
Lori Greenleaf -Evans
p
c Z
kd
19917 89th Place West
Edmonds, WA 98026
r
1 `
(425) 775-3763
T
3
mm
#
-
+
M 6
r
F,
iv�$q
ISSUE DATE: 03/23/01
rn
p
RECEIVED
O
� m
APR 17 2001
PERMIT COUNTER
ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
2733 Colby Avenue
id
Everett, WA 98201
(425)258-2059 (800)835-4971
Fax (425) 258-5046
Bi
DRAINAGE PLAN ,
GREENLEAF-EVANS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS,WASMNGTON
O
Owner:
1-n
Lori Greenleaf -Evans
p r,.
19917 89th Place West
m o
Edmonds, WA 99026
1 n
t
(425)775=3763
0 3
mm
ISSUE DATE:,03/23/01 '
m m
(-
9 ca
my
zK
i " t
Thoma E, nnett, P.., Principal
Civ 1 Engineer
Vi
t WAs o
m
lvti an fer,
aua
Emma DULY 02 2tY12
i ;
TABLE'OF CONTENTS
1
TAB#
SECTION
PAGE #
1.,
DRAINAGE INFORMATION SUMMARY
1
'
r.
2:
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
2
EEC
3.
DEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS
4
-'
4.
UPSTREAM -DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS
501
m.
5.
DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
6
�"
V5
V
Im
I
6.
EROSION CONTROL RISK ASSESSMENT
9
vo
7.
FIGURES
is
mm
f
S.
DESIGN IDATA
p
3F
9.
CALCULATIONS
r
{
ai
� Fri!
Li
TI T
� E
I'
m m'
..
1
�O
t'
i
j
1
,March 23, 2001
Report - Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
1. DRAINAGE INFORMATION SUMMARY '
4 - Project Name: Greenleaf -Evans Residence
Project Engineer: BEK Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
ca
Project Applicant: Lori Greenleaf -Evans
Project Total Area: 0.89 Acres
` Project Development Area: 0.3 Acres Number of Lots: I '
Ira '
The site is located on a terrace in the 8600 block of Olympia View Drive on the south edge of Snohomish
County Park. The project introduces approximately 7,300 square feet of impervious area in the form of
r� roof and paved driveway or 18.9 percent of the lot area: The proposed stormwater management approach
is to treat all runoff from the driveway and parking area to water quality standards, and detain the excess
runoff from the roofs and driveway in an underground detention pipe. Release will be through a single= '
orifice flow restrictor to an infiltration trench. The attenuated discharge will leave the property at pre -
development rates along a historical drainage line.
Summary Table
Drains ` e Basin Information Individual Basin Designation
House &
Driveway'
On -site Area (acres).
0.29
Type of Storage Proposed
Un d. Pipe
Approximate Storage Volume c
450 -
Soil types .
Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 8 to 15 % slopes
Pre-develo ed Runo Rate
Peak cfs 2 ear
009
10 year
.027
100 ear
a073
Post-develdped Runoff Rate
Before atercontrollin
Peak cfs 2 year .0551.012
10 year .0821.015
100 year .1391.064
Type of water quality measure(s) proposed:. '
1. Construction erosion control BMPs at the building stage such as limited work areas, mulch/seed of
M disturbed areas, silt fencing, staked hay bale dams for sediment control, and TESC entrance to control
construction runoff.
2. Catch basin filter insert to serve t$e.concrete driveway and garage apron.
BEK ENOINEERINO & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. t PROJECT: $200649
O
m
'49
c m,
In p,
On
c
m m
-4
c z-
I �_
to
n U
mm
0�
r
C N
�1 r
M
z
i
to
z i
0
t)
m
E March 23, 2001 '
Report — Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence), _
t•�
2. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
as The site is nominally a 0.9 acre parcel located at 8615 Olympic View Drive. The parcel lies on the north
side of the road between Olympic View Drive and the Snohomish County Park in the City of Edmonds.
The location is shown on the Vicinity Map of Figure J.
t An existing driveway begins at the southeast corner of the property and extends approximately 110 feet ,
into the parcel. The driveway was recently used by Wilder Construction as an equipment park -for a City
retaining wall project on the south side of Olympic View Drive. Approximately "50 feet of the driveway
to "remains covered with construction entrance quarry spalls and the remainder is covered with straw mulch.
I TOPOGRAPHY & SOILS
The property, is part of a steep terrace that slopes north to Browns Bay.. Ground slopes in the project area .
range between 25 and 30. percent while the slope of the road embankment immediatelybelow Olympic
View Drive ranges between 35 and 40 percent. The steepest slopes appear to be oversteepened fills
tv associated with the construction or; improvement of Olympic View Drive and lie within 30 feet of the
anorth sidewalk. A steep fill slope also encroaches on the site along the eastern property line with adjacent "
Lot 2. Figure 2 shows "existing lot contours and surface features.. '
s The SCS Soil Survey of Snohomish County identifies the site soils as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam,
r 8 to 15% Slopes. The slope qualifier is probably appropriate as an area average, but the project area is
better described as 15 to 25% 'Slopes. The soil is further described as being moderately deep with a
weakly cemented hardpan. layer at a depth of about 35 inches. The soil is characterized as having
moderate permeability above the hardpan layer and moderate available water capacity. The typical soil
profile is 20 to 40 inches of gravelly loam over a layer of unweathered glacial till. The underlying glacial
till limits the downward percolation of infiltrating rainfall runoff which may produce a perched water
table condition during the wet winter months. On,the steeper, slopes, runoff is rapid and the hazard of
water erosion is high if the vegetative cover is disturbed.
VEGETATION r
The eastern one-third of the property is cleared to the edge of the vacated 180" Street right-of-way and
covered with native grasses. A single red cedar remains below the driveway in the southeast corner of
the lot.. The, western two-thirds of the' lot remains covered with immature second growth alder with a
moderate understory of Oregon grape; swordfem and bracken fern. Isolated red cedar and Douglas fie
occur among the alder, and the ground is covered with forest duff. Stumps and snags of wind thrown
trees appear occasionally on the steeper sections of the lot. Continuous tree cover starts in the recently
vacated 180' Street right-of-way and extends northward through Snohomish"County Park.
DRAINAGE
The property forms its own drainage basin. Drainage from upgradient properties is intercepted by the
storm drain system installed :in Olympic View Drive. A shallow swale along the west property line
intercepts runoff from adjacent Lot 4. The flattened fill on adjacent Lot 2 minimizes the runoff crossing
the "east property line. A shallow swale aligns' with 86ih Place West and continues north across the center
of the property and into Snohomish County Pdrk (Figure 2). The current ground covers are as follows:
Second -Growth Forest = 0.551 Acres
F Grass & Shrubs = 0,301 Acres "
Existing Gravel Access = 0.038 Acres
Total Lot Area — 0.890 Acres
.BE•K ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 2 PROJECT: S200649 -
Z
O
n.
m
�m
Cm
mo
On
im
m
a
y Z'
r=:
n
rnm
v vJ
0m.
3MO
to
A
Z.
to
Z
0
A
In
"
match 23,2001
k
Report— Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
.
CRITICAL AREAS
Erosion Hazard
(+
3
Slopes along most areas of the road embankment fall in the 30% to 45% range. In a limited area below
r `
the intersection with 86" Place West, the slopes at the 'head of the central drainage Swale are locally as
SO
high as 57%. The area with slopes above 401/6 is identified on Figure 2; "
The slopes are heavily, vegetated and show. no sign of failure or sliding. The existing trees are not
FM
leaning downslope and do not exhibit the curbed trunks characteristic of soil creep areas. These limited
Z
i s
observations suggest that the soil is shallow in the steeper areas and the underlying glacial till is
O
maintaining the slopes currently in evidence below Olympic View Drive.
The steepest section of the toad embankment appears to lie within an extension of the curb lines on either
i
side of 86" Place West. Prior to the installation of the catch basins at the foot of the street, runoff from
n
w
wq
86" Place may have crossed Olympic View Drive and contributed to the headward erosion of the Swale.
>
Since the installation of the storm drain and sidewalk -improvements, the existing vegetative' cover
C t7
t
appears to have stabilized the soil in the central drainage.
O
;
O C
mM
f ova
CZ
O n
Li
6d
m
m
O yr
{{j
rm
m
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 3 - 'PROJECT: S200649
March 23, 2001 '
Report - Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence) .
3. , -DEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS ,
F't
CLEARING & GRADING
The eastern third o f the lot has already been cleared of trees and understory'and revegetated with native
grasses. Clearing will be confined to the western two thirds of the lot. Trees and'understory will be
i
removed from the toe of the road embankment to the north property line to clear the construction area.
Trees will, be removed from the steep slopes along Olympic View Drive, but the understory"will be
retained to hold the shallow soils. The extent of tree removal and clearing is shown in the attached TESC
t v
Plan.
z
µa
-
Areas _above" and below the house will be flattened for foot traffic. The existing driveway will be
p
n'
extended down to a parking area on the east end of the House. A series of low rockeries will be
m
constructed above, the driveway and parking. area to match.existing grade. Excavated material will be, "
't n
spread in areas below the parking area and the house to create a ground floor walk out area. The fill
V' m
below the house area will be used to provide cover for the stormwater detention pipe.
cm
m o,
DRAINAGE
0'
Figure 3 shows the impervious surfaces added by the proposed development. Surface and subsurface
m
drainage from the steep slope above the house will be intercepted by a low rockery at the toe of the slope
m m
and diverted to the west end of the house by a curtain drain in the front yard. Clean runoff from the
z
I _
house and garage roofs will be, piped to an underground detention pipe located in the fill below the
rr-
parking area. Runoff from the paved driveway and 'parking area will be collected in a slot drain in front
basin filter
0
of the garage and treated to water quality standards in a catch basin filter. The catch will
discharge to the detention pipe as well. A single orifice flow restrictor will control the release of excess
n
M
runoff to an infiltration trench located on the north property line. For the 2 and 10 year storm events, the
infiltration french will completely disperse the excess runoff. For the 100 ,year storm event, the
o ro
E ; j
infiltration trench will act as a level spreader and release the historical peak flow as surface runoff.
n Fn
As shown in the following table, the impervious areas introduced by development represent 32 percent of
m
r 3
the property area.
m
Second -Growth Forest = 0.261 Acres'
Retained Understory = 0.131 Acres
Grass &Shrubs = . 0.330 Acres
z
Driveway & Parking = .0.072 Acres
Roofs, Walks & Decks = 0.096 Acres
in
Total Lot Area = 0.890 Acres
z
m.
4
EEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 4 ' - PROJECT: S200649
,
!'-
March 23, 2001
Report — Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
�14
4. UPSTREAM —DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES
1
UPSTREAM CONDITIONS
As discussed under existing site conditions, the drainage from properties upstream of the site is largely
intercepted by the curb and storm drain system along Olympic View Drive. Inlet catch basin 5-105 is
b-t "
visible in the middle distance. The proposed development will not change the runoff quantities from
upstream properties nor will it add to the conveyance requirements of the existing storm drain.
z
i 4
-
m
�a
=lit
cm
mo
—
88 C
r ',ate
a
d
In
A
ch
I¢
O m
i
„k_ :.
no m
00 r-
DOWNSTREAM CONDITIONS
r
All runoff from the site is discharged at the northern property line into the second growth forest covering
In
the Snohomish County Pack. The project will maintain this routing and attenuate the peak flows to
z 0
historical values.
1
2
z
p
m
t
i
� I
nEK ENGINEERING @ ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 5 PROJECT: S200649
March 23, 2001
. ' Report —.Drainage Study (Greenleaf Evans Residence)
5. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
The approach taken for this'project uses underground pipe detention to attenuate the increased runoff
from the new impervious areas. The analysis concentrates on treating, detaining, and redistributing,the
t,a runoff from the small impervious areas introduced by residential development, and ignores the pervious
I areas of the lot that remain unchanged by the construction of the residence. The lot basin includes ail of
the impervious areas converted to paved driveway and house roof. Runoff quantities and hydrograph
t routing routines are performed using the. Waterworks 4.13 software by Engenious, Inc. Computer output
summaries are provided in Section 9 of this report.
Design Data
t� Rainfall and soils information for the site are taken from Soil Conservation Service publications. A copy.
6 of the 6infall isopluvals and area soil map are included in Section 8: In addition, this Section contains a
description of the properties of the Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam that underlies the site. Alderwood
soils are designated as hydrologic group C soils in the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget
j ., Sound Basin. A table of runoff curve numbers is also provided.
Basin Delineation ,
The small lot is analyzed as a single basin. In all of the drainage calculations, the pre -development
condition is taken as second growth forest without any drainage credit for the cleared areas of the
property or the, immaturity of the existing forest cover. As shown in Figure 3, the impervious areas of the
project include roofs, walks and decks totaling 0.096 acres, and the driveway and parking area totaling
0.072 acres. The road embatilanent above the residence. will be hydraulically isolated from the project
area by the front yard rockery and curtain drain, but the road embanlanent above the driveway will drain
to the driveway drainage Swale.
Pre -Developed Condition " Second Growth Forest 0.288 acres CN = 8 t
3 °w Developed Condition Roofs, walks & decks 0.096 acres CN = 98
Paved surfaces 0.072 acres CN = 98
Landscaping 0.120 acres CN =86 .
4
Collection
The runoff from the house and garage roof is collected in the gutters land downspouts and tightlinedto the
manhole on the western end of the detention pipe. The driveway and parking areas runoff is collected in.
a slot.drain in the parking.area, The slot drain discharges to a catch basin equipped with a'filter insert.
The filter removes silt as well as oil and grease pollutants likely tc arise from vehicle transit and parking.
The catch basin discharges to the manhole on the western end of the detention pipe.
EEK ENGINEERING& ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 6 PROJECT: S200649
March 23, 2001
Report — Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
ouo
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY TABLE
t
!"
HYD PEAK TIME VOLUME CONTRIBUTING
i3.
# RUNOFF OF OF, AREA
RATE PEAK HYDRO (acres)
rn
(cfs) (min.) (ef)
1 0.009 490 329• 0.288 2 year undeveloped
2 0,027 480 632 0.288 10 year undeveloped
3- 0.073 480 1373 0.288 100 year undeveloped
4 0.014 470• 335 0.192* 6.0 month WQ storm
480
z
O
5 0.055 946 0.288 . , 2 year developed
6 _ 0.082 480 1385 0.288 10 year developed
m
7 0.139 480 2318 0.28$ 100 year developed
1"n
10 0.014 - 680 946 0.288 2 year orifice release
m
11 0.020 610 1385 6.288 10 year orifice release
c In t
12 0.139 480 2318 0.288 too year orifice release
m 0
_
�0
15 0.012 1210 946 0.288 2 year trench release
g'
16 0.015 1340 1385 0.288 10 year trench'release -
m In
17 0.064 530 2319 0.288 . 100 year trench release
c j
aZ
* only the 0.072 acres of pavement actually require water quality treatment01
'
1
Driveway Drainage Swale Conveyance
Because the proposed paved driveway will retain the 16% to 20,%" grade of the ekistmg access, the
m In
drainage Swale ;adjacent, to the driveway will be rock lined for erosion protection. The driveway and
O V5
„upgradient road embankment cover 0.192 acres, so the peak flow generated by the 100 year event is
c y;
'
approximately:
Y'
0.192/0.'288 x 0.139 cfs = 0.092 cfs.
i0
Conveyance calculations in Section 9 show that peak velocity during the. 100 year event will be 2.6 fps
with. a flowing depth of 1.3 inches. At this low flow depth, the rock liner will provide sufficient
sz
roughness to continuously redistribute the flow. Permanent rock check dams are not required for erosion
control in the swale and the slot drain will intercept the runoff as it disperses across the parking apron. "A
"
detail of the driveway and Swale construction is provided in the accompanying drawings.
z
Water Quality Treatment
m
The runoff from the paved driveway and parking area will be treated to water quality standards by '
filtration: A slot drain will be used to intercept the runoff from the upper driveway and parking pad and
the drain will discharge to a filter installed in a catch basin. A StreamGuard #3021 Catch Basin Insert
With an oil absorbent filter pack can treat a maximum flow of approximately 120 gpm of runoff. A single
insert is more than- adequate to treat the 6.3 gallon per minute runoff from the driveway during the 6 •'
month water quality storm. The insert will filter the 0:092 cfs (42 gpm) peak now of the 100 year event
without bypass flow. The catch basin will drain to the detention pipe manhole.
" ...
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. _ 7 PROJECT-. S200649
March 23; 2001
Report —Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
Detention Pipe
ww
The lot has no room for a. detention pond so an underground pipe is proposed for live storage of the,
runoff from both the paved areas and the roof. A 36 inch diameter pipe will be buried in the area north of
Pit the'parking apron. As shown in .the accompanying drawings, the western end of the pipe will be
a anchored by a 54 inch diameter Type II manhole which houses the flow restrictor orifice and riser pipe.
The eastern manhole will, be formed from a 36 inch pipe tee with end caps and a manhole access for
I; inspection and cieanout. Both access covers will be the locking type. One foot of cover is adequate for
this area since there is no vehicular access to the lower yard.
The required,storage volume is determined by the level pool routing routine during the design of the flow
restriction device. Starting with.alrial length of 50 feet, Waterworks. shortens the pipe until the peak
stage of the 100-year event remains below the maximum elevation used in the problem setup. In this
case, the minimum pipe length is 45 feet. Additional detention volume is provided by lengthening the
pipe. An additional 24% storage, capacity is provided to meet DOE requirements by lengthening the pipe
to 60 feet'plus manholes. The stage -storage listing for the minimum length detention pipe is provided'in
Section 9:
,tea
Control Structure '
A simple orifice and riser pipe control structure is mounted in the "stem manhole. For simplicity,•a '
single orifice design is proposed for this residential application. A. 5/8 inch diameter orifice is the
minimum size permitted by the City of Edmonds. This size provides a reasonable match with the pre-
developed 2 year storm peak. The peak releases for the 10 year and 100 year storm events overflow the
top of the riser pipe but are attenuated In the void volume of the infiltration trench. The top of the riser,
pipe also provides a 6 inch diameter overflow orifice for emergency situations. The details of the single
orifice flow'restrictor are shown in the accompanying drawings.
• Infiltration Trench/Level Spreader
i ` 7 From the flow restrictor manhole, the attenuated runoff will be piped to an infiltration trench near the
• north property line. The trench is sized to infiltrate most of'the site discharge and further reduce, the
I
xcess flow from the 1Q year and 100 year storm, to match pre -developed peaks. The level -pool routing
calculation shows that the 2 year and 10 year peak flows are fully infiltrated by a 50 foot trench. There
will be some surface release during the 100 year storm event, but the flow will be less than the pre-'-
development'peak.
The house foundation will lie between`the infiltration trench and any subsurface water sources. With,
m, surface runoff intercepted by the rockeries and -curtain drain, the soil below the, house should be protected
from any perched groundwater problems during the wet winter months. .
a
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 8 PR03ECT: S200649 "
z0
i•`
1
m
cm
m O.
U
OO
C
In In
A_
>z
m
In
O to
C.) m
N
In0
4m�
Z
z
x
Co
O
-t
n
m
i
r
;=
March 23, 2001
Report — Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence) ,
FQ
j ;
6. EROSION CONTROL RISK ASSESSMENT -.
r
Slope: Typically 20% -30% in the project area with significantly higher values on the face of the road
v
embankment. ,
Critical areas: Steep slopes adjacent to Olympic View Drive are typically 400/. and locally reach 60%.
Soils: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes belonging to hydrologic 8TouP"C".
iy
x
Ground movement potential: Site appears geologically stable. No visual evidence of slope failure on
ZO p :
the heavily vegetated slopes below Olympic View Drive.
a
Sources of water for erosion: Rainfall xunff o.
0
m
Nearest downstream water body other than road ditches: PugetSound.
-
6i m
,
rn In
Nearest fish -bearing waters: Puget Sound.
� 't
In O
-
80
C
EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
i m. .
For the area immediately adjacent'to Olympic View. Drive, the potential for significant erosion or siltation
0
impact is high -due to the steep slopes, the shallow soils, and the potential for overtopping the street curb
e z
and sidewalk in low frequency storm events. For the proposed project area, the erosion potential is
moderate tiecause of lower slopes, and the interception and atienuariom of surface runoff by the benches
—
excavated for the proposed driveway, rockeries and curtain draini Risk cap be readily addressed by
•On -n
maintaining the understory vegetation on the steep slopes; by applying standard erosion control BMPs in
.
M
the' project area, and by limiting the area of ,disturbance through good construction sequencing.
in
N
wSpecifically:
to
During construction: The existing temporary donstruction entrance at Olympic View Drive will be
3
maintained through the construction period. Existing vegetative cover and understory will be maintained
be
TO
in the steep slope areas below the road and all danger trees. upslope from the project area will
1
removed. Silt fencing will be installed along the northern property line and the western edge of the
X
project area as tree removal progresses. The existing driveway will be brought to grade and covered with
a
gravel. 'A drainage swale will be formed in the gravel base course on the cut bank side of the driveway.
Multiple straw bale dams will be installed against the driveway cut bank to reduce the runoff velocity in
1
the. side ditch. Silt fencing will be faced with straw bales in the flow line of the central drainage swale.
x
65
After final grading: Pervious areas will be cultivated to restore permeability and mulched/seeded to.
p
establish the permanent vegetative cover. The mulch cover will be maintained in the upslope,clearings
and rockery benches until the natural groundcover is reestablished. TESC components will be removed
m
when the permanent vegetation is well established and the catch basin filter, insert and detention piping.no
longer require silt protection.
"
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 9 '.. PROJECT: S200649
t>f
March 23,2001
`
Report — Drainage Plan (Greenleaf Evans Residence)
7. FIGURES,
p`
N'
z0
E
-4
,q
x4:.i
i'il
y �
t
4'
cm
!
,k
Omm
C Z
ftti
Mra
0 -n
i
t_
3
O 00)
C r»
Li
t.m
Z
k
0
j
....
BEK ENGINEERING& ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
PROJECT: S200649
N
W E
S
2000
GRAPHIC
0
SCALE
2000 4000
1 INCH =
2000 FEET
WIRUM L' FDYONDS °°"°"a"°U tuA198"
i= I G lJ R E
�'®
VICINITY MAP
®s
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
8EK ENGI®IN& G
'" 08?6
pw .3��
EDMONDS,WA
ppp1O eora�aow.
ENVIRONMENYAL, INC.. '
a»-.em
Matt, 200I a i• • 2000' . WA
z
0
m
� m
m6
n a
Oc
mm
z
A —i
DZ_
to
O�
mrn_
ON
m
c
z
2
0
m
i
1 I
Snohomish County Park ,. .
. Irrr COVH• . _ f'PP COVf7' Ii„�...._ .�� .. _.....-i
Z,.g,
County Park
detention
freehppoYPr�'--._.--_..__-_.._._
_
COcaiedi 180th �tr et—SWArt_iSt�etY,
�-�
deck .—L ot
i
• nrlirntlontrend Snohomish
—478
47
e. 3
V
March 23, 2001
Report —Drainage;Study'(Greenleaf-Evans Residence)
y
8. DESIGN DATA
r1
a,
0 17
0.
R
+
0 i•J
�4
Z
C
iJ
RI Ill
�C
pN
� tn.
Z n'
7i
O
}} I
m
r
3, �{
} Bk ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
PROJECT: S200649
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WA r.
i;
n
I i
CITY OF EDMONDS DESIGN RAINFALL. AMOUNTS
Source:, CITY OF EDMONDS Community Development Code Chapter 18.30
z.
°
s .
f
f
m,
f
N
.1•,
2 YR - 24 HOUR 1.5 INCHES
m
v
C O
st
k,
10 YR — 24 HOUR 2.0 INCHES
m o
r`
p0
100 YR — 24 HOUR 3.0 INCHES ."
A m
mz
,
s
�I'
6 MONTH — 24 HOUR 1.0 INCHES
O
`
m m
Li
cam'
1
m Cnr1
i
p;
I
�
m
•
r
�
i
,' f
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL
N
w E
S
k
51
t
4
PerrnvilleNa-
1
GRAPHIC SCALE
1000 0 1000 2000
1 INCH = 1000 FEET
saccew
uwa cmrasrict
SOIL INFORMATION
A...
uvssep�iw"nam
8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
M tEe
BEK ENGINEERING &
�„ �;°
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
" - EVP4$0k
ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
z
o
l m -45
U1 a
�m
rn�
-qA
0c
m z
Ate_
Dz
ra:
N
n
m m
or
9 c
,-zi
z
S
ca
A
1
m"
i
j
2—Aiderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent
Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of
slopes. This moderately well drained soil is on till plains.
It is
forage. Use of proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, .
moderately deep over a hardpan. The soil formed in
till. Areas long They'are
and restricted grazing during wet periods helps to keep
glacial are and narrow. about
the pasture in good condition and to protect the soil from
125 acres in size. The native vegetation is mainly
erosion. Periodic mowing and clipping help to maintain
to
conifers and hardwoods. Elevation is 50 to 550 feet. The
uniform growth, discourage selective grazing, and reduce
average annual precipitation is about 40 inches, the
clumpy growth.
average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F,
and the average frost -free season is 170 to 190 days.
Proper grazing practices and,weed control are needed
for maximum quality of forage: In some years,
r-e
Typically, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown
supplemental irrigation is also needed. Fertilizer is
gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The upper part
needed for optimum growth of grasses and legumes.
Z
of the subsoil is dark yellowish brown and dark brown
The main limitations for homesites and septic tank.
-i
very gravelly sandy loam about 23 inches thick. The
absorption fields are the depth to the weakly cemented
m
z
lower part is olive brown very gravelly sandy loam about
hardpan and wetness because of the seasonal high
5 inches thick. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth
of about 35 inches. Depth to the hardpan ranges from
water table. Effluent from absorption fields flows laterally "
above the hardpan and may seep at the bottom of
{
r
20 to 40 inches.
included in this unit are small areas of Everett,
slopes. Drainage is needed if buildings with basements I
and crawl spaces are constructed. During construction,
_
o m
Indianola, and Kitsap soils on terraces and uplands. Also
included are small areas of Aiderwood gravelly sandy
disturbed areas need to be seeded and runoff controlled
m
loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes. Included areas make up
to protect the soil, from erosion. Temporary sediment
basins can be used in construction to reduce the
-t O
O 0
about'15 percent of the total acreage.
of this Aiderwood soft is moderately rapid
areas
amount of sediment in runoff water.
This is in
= mPermeability
m
above the hardpan and very slow through it. Available
map unit capability subclass IVe.
c
p
water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40
inches. Runoff is
e y
r
slow, and the hazard of water erosion
is slight. A seasonal perched water table is at a depth of
=
N
18 to 36 inches from January to March.
0n
This unit is used mainly as woodland. It is also used
for hay and pasture and for urban development.
.
M
Douglas -fir lathe main woodland species on this unit.m
m
On the basis of a 100-year site curve, the mean site
index is 142. On the basis of a 50-year site curve, the
.
mean site index is 108.1he mean annual increment at
om
w•
culmination (CMAI) for Douglas -fir at age 65 is 148 cubic
feet per acre. Among the trees of limited extent are
M o
western redcedar, western hemlock, and red alder.
,-Zt
Among the common forest understory plants are salai,
M
evergreen huckleberry, Oregon -grape, brackenfern, and
western swordfern.
_
This unit is well suited to year-round logging. logging
z"
Z
roads require suitable surfacing for year-round use. Rock .
for road construction is not readily available on this unit:
Brush competition is the main limitation for the
N
production of timber.
Z
Reforestation can be accomplished by planting
1
Douglas -fir seedlings. if seed trees are present, natural
n
reforestation of cutover areas by red alder occurs
m
periodically. When openings are made in the canopy,
invading brushy plants, if not controlled, can prevent the
establishment of seedlings. Because the rooting depth is
restricted by a cemented pan, trees are subject to
windthrow.
I
This unit is suited to hay and pasture. The main
limitations are slope and the weakly cemented hardpan,
which limits the use of the soil in this unit for deep-
rooted plants. Grazing when the soil is wet results in
compaction of the surface layer, poor tifth, and excessive
runoff.
Snohomish County Area, Washington
TiaLE i5• WATER FEATURES
..
1"Floodtng" and "water table" and terms such as "rare," "apparent,"
and "perched"
are'explained in the
i; text. She symbol < means lose
than; > means more than. ¢bsence of an entry
indicates that,the
feature to not a concern)
Flooding
8 wa er a
e
Soil name and IMydrolol{Set
- " map symbol ! group
t
t Frequency 1 Duration
t requ
t Months I
Depth I Kind
' Months-
i
,t1 2, 3^-------•••••••^-� O
(Nona --------- -_-1 ___
i. ___
i 1.5-3.0 ;Perched_
I Jan -Mar
Q.
.. �idorwood
Alderwsotl.............. C
lNoryi-----------` >--
{ ---
1 1.5 3.0 IPerched
! Jan -Mar
C)
1'1i
.. Everett----------------1 A
Nona_________-_-_
>6.0 _ _._
l
-___
A�darwood-------------- C
;None------------! ---
---
_ 1.5-3.0 .tPerched
l'Jan-Nor -
m
1
t
It
_
r
- Urban land, t
!
1.
t 1 . -
`Apparent-
! ,,
m 0,
,..,, 7---^--------^^--^-----'1 C
!None --- ! ---
I Oct -Jun
1 +1 t 0
I Oct -June
O.
,.i Bellinghami.,
...---1
'lFrequent--------!very
Oct
1
t. 1
! +t i 0 !Apparent
1 Oct -Jun.
m
m Z
8.......................t 0
lan6
t
-Jun
t
! i•
!
A "'t f'
Bellingham Variant I
l
. 9, 10, tl...............1 C
loons-----------_l
j.
l >6.0
Cathcart
'�
m m
•,� Cryohemista 1
• !
t - !
t I
,_
-
l.. 0-1.0 IApparent
..l 1.
I'Nov-Mar
�
�.: /3----------------- .....t C
(None ------------ l -'-
..i -�
!.
t.
m
PPP
-Custer
!
1
1
i I
- • .--j 1Elwell ....._- ....»...1 C
I -
--"-__-_
S __
I I
j 1.5-3.0 (Perched
t.Nov-Jun
�-
N '"
1
1
n.
;Hone
1
C
15a:
..^_^
Elwell ---.---^-- -^l C
"I ' __"
!Hone---------- 1
1 .-__
1 1
1 1.5-3.0 (Perched
i Nov -Jun
N
(�tt n
_^
'
-;-
! ---
! 7.5-3.5 Perched'
t Nov -May
-Zi
Oi omount-------�------1 C
!Hone.-------- `._
1.
l
1 Elwell ..-----1 C
loons
1 5-3.0 IPerched
t Nov -Jun
1
- C
;None----------=1 -
l ---
1 1 5-3.5 {Perched,
t Nov-MaY•
Olomount--------------^i
1
Rook outcrop.
_ 17, 18, 19--------------1 -A
1 l
;None ------------ i
i
{-
>6.0
Everett
1
200,
!
19
Fluvaquents, l -
!i:.
I
I
th
'
21----------------------I C
INone------------1 --"
1.---
1.1.5-3.0 IPerched
I Doc -May
•. Catchall I
1
I
1"
22e: I I-
- ' Geteheil--------------- I C
t i,.
;None--------�---! ---
i-
i ---
t t
i 1.5-3:0 IPerched
i
j' Dee -May
-
11
tj1.5-3.0
;Perched
I Nov -May
..,. Oso-------------------- 1 C
IHone------------�
- " 2Gotohel:l------r-------t C
tNone-----------! ---
1. ---
11.5-3.0 !Perched
1 Deo-May
_
N See footnote at end of table.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN
WTI -
'�y Table III-1.3 SC Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers
(Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural,
suburban and urban
¢zi land use font 1A rainfall distribution, 24-hourstorm duration.
se -
M1 {
lr
a:.
f :+
LAND USE DESCRIPTION ..
CURVE NUMBERS BY
- -
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP.
'
A B
C-
D -
Cultivated landil): winter condition-
86 91
94
95
Mountain open areas: `low growing brush,& grasslands
74. 82
89
92'..
Meadow or pasture:
65 78,
- 85
89
Wood or forest land: undisturbed - -
42 -'64
76
81
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush
55." 72
81
86'-
Orchard: ..with cover crop
81- 88
92 -
94
Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
_
landscaping.
Good condition:. grass cover. on L75% of the
68 80
86
90
area
Fair condition: grass'cover on 50-75% of
77 85
- 90
92
the area
'
Gravel roads & parking Iota:
76 85.
89
91
Dirt roads &p arkin� lot8:
72 82
87
99 �
Impervious surfaces,, pavement, roofs etc.
98 98
98 _
98
open water bodies: - lakes, wetlands, ponds etc.
160 100
100-
100
Single family resident'ial(2):,
Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3)-
Separate
curve
number
1.0 DU/GA 15 -
shall be
selected for
1.5DU/GA 20
pervious.&
impervious.
2.0 DU/GA 25
portions
of the site.
2.5, DU/GA - 30
or basin
'3.0 DU/GA 34
- 3.5 DU/GA 38:
4.0 DU GA - - 42..
.. -
.
4.5 DU/GA . - 46 '.
DU/GA -48 _
5.5 DU/GA ' 50
6.0 DU/GA 52 -
6.5 DU/GA - 54--
. 7.0 DU/GA 56
PUD+s, condos, -apartments,.. %impervious
commercial businesses & must be
industrial areas computed
{ r
(1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve'numbers refer
to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, chapter 9, August 1972.
(2) Assumes roof and driveway runoffie'directedinto street/storm system.'.
(3) The remaining pervious areas (Yawn) are considered to be in good
condition for these curve numbers..
111-1-12 FEBRUARY, NO 2
r
O
n
m
-1 i1
-i
Cm
M0
On
C
mm
A�
CZ
on
mM
pN
r
N
ZC
Z
S
N
Z
O
n
m
}
L
r
Snohomish County Area, Washington
1S3
TABLE 14.--PHYSICAL'AND
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
OF, SOILS
[The symbol < means less than;
> means more than.
Entries under "Erosion
factors--T" apply, to the entire
r'
profile. Entries under
"Organic
matter" apply
only to the .surface
layer. Absence of an entry indicates
-.
that -data were not available
or
were not estimated)
-
F�
rom on -
' •
(�
soil name and !Depth!Ciay <2mm! Permeability
Available •1
Soil 1 Shrink -swell .I factors SOrganic
map symbol :_I
1'
water capacity
!reaction! potential. T 1 matter
!
!
_
;
R I T
n
PH
t
5
.
!
i, 2, 3---------- 1 0 7
Alderwood ! 7 35
5-10 !
5-10 '
2 A-6.0 (!
2.0-6.0
0.07-0.1
1 0:07-Or. 71
15.1-6.5 ;Low----------- 0 20t 51
2 -10
l5.6-6.5.,l Low----------- 0 20 I
0
0
t 1
m
•t6
4ec
Alderwood-------i 0=7 1-
'
1
5-102.0-b
.0
0 6.0
r
0.07-0. tt
1 0.07-0.11
15.1-6.5 `Low ------------ 10.201 2 1 5-10
15.6-6.5 ',Low----------- 0 201 1
1
735
135
5-10 12
t
! ---
I '-- I--------------
2 -
.
_--
tt
t5.b-6.5 10.t71 1 70-15
0m li
t•i<
Everett--=-----1 0-6 i
5-10 t
2 0 6.0
; 0:08-0.12
'
lGow----------=
15.6-6.5 ;Low------------'0.101 {
0;
.,
t6-181
'118-601
5-10 1
0-5 1
6`.0-20
6.0-20
0.05-0.08
1 0.02-0.05.
.15..6-6.5 jLp----------- '-10.10. r
iCjy
-i �':
.
5e, '
.
{ a
e
5-,
Alderwood 1 0-T
5-10.
2 0-6.0
0.07-0 11
15.1-6.5 1Low 0 20, 2 5-10
'Lou-------- - 0 20 t
2 m
t 7-351
5-10 !
2'0-6.0
0.07-0 11
-15.6-6.5
rh ZZ
•
-- r
, 1 1
Z.
Urban land
{
!
1
i {
1 S i
;5 10-75 •
r 1;
0 9
t
IS-30 1
0.2-0.6
i.. 0.20-0 2LL
24
S6 1-7 3 (Nigh----__-__ 10.321{
24i
di
-
ae LLingham 9-601,
40-60
0.06 0.2
0.20-0
�tl
g _-___-- t 0-6 1
_
2T-35
0 2 0.6
! 0.19-0 21
15.1-5.5 !Moderate 10.321 5 , 10-15•
A
D
Bellingham t 6-421
35-45
0.06-0.2,
6.2-0.6
1 0.18-0 21
0. 74-0 16
__
{4.5-5.5 !High 10 32!
14.5-5.0 !Moderate. --- 10.32` i
-1
m �
r
~
Variant 142-601
1
9Cathcart -_t
12-30
0.6-2.0
0.18-0.20
14.5-6.0 !Low ------------ 10.371 5 t 5-10
O N
t
-�
8.35i
-- '
0.6-2.0•
0.6-2.0
O.i3-0 17
0.14-0 iT
15.1-6.5 !Low------------10.431.
!Low------------10.371 t
0 r
C 0)
t35 60,
-= 1,
:5.1-6.5
120. t
1 .. IMO
1
Cryohemista
13 --------i 0-9 1
10-15
o-10
2.0-6.0
0.2-0.6
0.,13-0 15
i 0.06-0 O8
15 6 6 0 !Low 0.281 5 1 5-10
15.1 5•5 1Lo------------- 10.241 1
.X
Custer i. 9-351
.. 601
t
0-10 1
,
>20
0.06-0.09
15 6 6 0 !Low--------- 10 101 1
I 1
-{
S
"
-135
!Elwell- 0 2 1
r
_ _ {
0.6-2.0
1 0.22-6.26
•13 $ 5.5 !Low--------- 0 3Z. 2 i 10-75
1 5.5 1Low--------- 0 1
Z
"
^"
Elwell. 1 2-231.
1227.
---- 1
0.6-2.0,
0,6-2.0
, 0.19-0.13
' 0.09-0.13
15
281
15. t-5.5 !Low------------,0.281 i
-1
t
, 15 e: 1 '
1
1
i 0.22-0.26
t
! ' - 10.371 2 1 10-15
13.6-5.5 !Lou ---- ---1
2
O
Elwell li----------1 0-2
---- t
0.6-2.0
0.6-2.0
! 0.19 0 23
l5. i-5.5 1Loa--------'0.43! i
t
_)
i 2-231
l23-271
_ _
-
--- 1.
0.6-2.0,
0.09 0.13
15.1-5.5 !Low ------------ ,0.281 1 _
rn..
27
--- `
-_-
1 -
1.
. -
Olomount-------- , 0-2 ,
--- I
0.6-2.0
t 0.13 0 16
15.1-5.5 !Low-- ---------- 10.241 2 1 2-5 ,
0.281 1
!.
1 2-181
0:6-2.0
1 0.11-0.14
15.6-6.0 !Low------------1
15.6 !
13-32i
1
0.6 2.0
` 0.08_0.10
_.
6.5 !Low-- ---'I----t.
_-
! - __------10.281
.
•""
.., 160: t 1
Elwell ---------- . 0-2 1
I.
--- 1
0.6-2.0
I 0.22-0.26
'
13.6-5.5 tLow------------t0.37( 2 t 10-15
'Low------------10.431 1
_
-
t 2-231
--- 1
0.6-2.0
0.19-0.23
i
15.1-5.5
1-5.5 !Low ------------ 10--- t
i23-271
1 0.6_2.0
0.09-0. t3
t5.
"
27 t
_._
t
I
t t i I 1
"
_..
See footnote at end of table.
March23,2001.
Report - Drainage Study (Greenleaf -Evans Residence)
i{
`C?
j
9. DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS
;
The following pages contain the -printed output of the Waterworks 4,13 Drainage Analysis software. The
z0
#7
detailed calculations are provided for each subbasin to support the summary calculations and discussion
�
t�
w
-ahead y presented in Section 4. ,The,computer output for each subbasin appears in the following order:
m
..
Basin Summary: Developed & Undeveloped.
-i'n
Va _
H dro a h Summary 2
X g p ary yr,10 yr, and 100 yr 24-hour events
o m
m o`
Stage Storage Table
-{ 0
O c
_ 1'
k
Stage DischargeTable(s)
m
10
1,
Level Pool Summary Report
`
1's
O
n La
m m
o to
,
r�
0 Fn
$ N
[.
{ i
-4
_
t
,
Z
}
m
}
BEK ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. - PROJECT.
3/19/01 1:56:9 pm Shareware Release paje
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE_
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
BASIN SUMMARt
BASIN ID: DEVIO NAME: DEVELOPED 10 YEAR STORM
SBUH METHODOLOGY
ie TOTAL AREA ....... '0.29 Acres., BASEFLOWS: - 0.60 cfs -
RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION....: 2.00 inches AREA..: , .0.12 Acres'. 0.17 Acres,
TIME INTERVAL....:, min CN .... 83.00 98.00
TC .... 8.96 min .5.00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
PEAK RATE: '0.08 cfs VOL: 0.03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: DEV100 NAME: DEVELOPED 100 YEAR,STORM
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA ....... 0.29 Acres BASEFLOWS:, 0.00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE....:' TYPE1A PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION....:. 3.00 inches AREA..: 0.12,Acres 0.17 Acres
TIME INTERVAL...'.: 10:00 min CN.. 83.00 98.00
TC ..... 8.96 min 5.00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
PEAK RATE: .0.14 cfs VOL: .0,05 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN IDDEV2NAME: DEVELOPED 2 YEAR STORM
: ,-
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA
0.29 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00'cfs.
........ :
RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION....: '1-50 inches AREA..: 0.12 Acres 0.1.7 Acres
'
TIME INTERVAL.... 10.00 min CN .... 83.00
PC....: m 8:96 in 00 min..
ABSTRACTION COEFF:. 0.20'
.
PEAK RATE: 0.06 cfs VOL,: 0.02 Ac-ftTIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: DEV6MO NAME:. DEVELOPED 6 MONTH STORM
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA...-..: _0.07 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs
RAINFALL'TYPE.... TYPE1A PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. .: 1.50 inches AREA..: 0.00 Acres 0.07 Acres
TIMEINTERVAL.... : 10.00 min CN...,.: 0.00 98.00
,
TC.... 0,00 min -<0.-,7_5m1n
ABSTRACTION COEFF:' 0.20
(impTcReach -Sheet. L: .15.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 1.50 s:0.0200
limpTcReach - Shallow L: 190.00 ks:27.00 s:0.1600
impTcRiBach --Channel*L: 25.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0200
PEAK RATE: 0.02 cfs VOL. 0.01 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min
<
VL=-r-,f01_73 Ib 1gfHAV ?-F-Al 9Wn-WpjV5
z
us
a
C
ma
0
On
m m
z
c: 2
>
C: -4
0,
mm
0
0 Fn
C ca
M 0
M.
z
z
9
0
m
-
t
3/1'9/01 1:56:9 pm Shareware Release
Page .2-
GREENLEAF-EVANS.RESIDENCE'
jy
ALL -IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
I;
BASIN SUMMARY
P'
•BASIN.ID: UNDEV10 NAME: UNDEVELOPED 10 YEAR STORM,
a
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA.......: 0.29 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs
ca+.
RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV"
IMP,
'0.00
Z"
PRECIPITATION.:..:. 2'.00 inches AREA..: 0.29 Acres
Acres
O i
TIME INTERVAL%-.: 10.00 min CN....:: 811.00
0.00
TC. .... 8.96 min
. 0.00' min
m_
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20'
PEAK'RATE: 0.03•cfs VOL:. 0-01 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
=ice-
BASIN'ID: UNDEV100 NAME: UNDEVELOPED 100 YEAR STORM
m
SBUH,METHODOLOGY
ma
TOTAL AREA.......: 0.29 Acres" BASEFLOWS": 0:00 cfs
'{0
'RAINFALL "TYPE. ..: TYPElA PERV•
IMP
= m C:
PRECIPITATION...:: 3.00 inches" AREA..: 0.29 Acres
0.00 Acres
rn a
,..
F.y
TIME INTERVAL..`..: 10.00 min' CN....: 81.00
0.00
TC...'.: " 8. 96' min
0 .00 min
> z y;
ABSTRACTION COEFF,-' .0.20
PEAK'RATE: '0.07 cfs VOL: 0.03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
m
orn
.BASIN ID: UNDEV2 NAME: UNDEVELOPED 2 YEAR STORM
I
SSUH METHODOLOGY:
'.
TOTAL AREA.'......: 0.29,Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs
p
RAINFALL TYPE .. TYPEIA ' PERV'
PRECIPITATION 1.50 inches 1 AREA..: 0.29 Acres
IMP
0.00 Acres
O
0 Fn
.TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN..,.,.:, 81.00
TC....: 8.96 min
0.00 .MO
0.00 min
N
z
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
"TcReach - Sheet LE 90.00 ns:0:4000 p2yri 1.50 s:0.4000
TcReach - "Shallow Lx 40.00 ks:5.00 s:0.2500
PEAK RATE:' 0.01 cfs VOL: 0.01 Ac-ft TIME:'490 min
z
9*kw "mV 6mr
m'
,
i
3f19101.
3:58:16 pm
Shareware Release page $'
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
E
DETENTION/'INFILTRATION
A`
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
I3
PEAK TIME
VOLUME
HYD
RUNOFF OF
OF
Contrib
vaa
NUM
RATE PEAK
HYDRO
Area
r"
R
cfs., min.
cf\AcFt
Acres
z.
==490
2Y4+4 A,¢E-oCKi�
0.0,09
329 cf
0.29
2.
01.027 480
632 cf]
0.29 to " ^
m
t
3
0.073 480-
',
1373 wcf
0.29 •}pr3
'0.190 6t,1t+Qy/ !
T�
4
0.014 470
264 cf"
¢ rfo 4,vj
5"
0.055 480
946 cf
0.29 .2 YR4,0- oavi-4a7a00
0m
6 -
0.082, 480
1385 cf
0.29 to
cc
Ir '
7
0.139 480
2318 cf
0..29 wo .k m
-4 0
10 .
0.614 680
946 cf
0.29 2 Y�q�p FWPW 7Pr�
0 C
11
0..029 610
1385 cf
0.29 /p.rrn
4.,
12
0.139 480
2318 cf_
- 0.29 "1&0 ' x „ h
m z
{
15.
0.012 1210
946 cf
0.29' Z Ygq)Q hY1=A4r-M�;
A _
c
16
0.015 1340.
'1385 cf
0.29 )0 n ;,
Z
;$
17
0.064 • 530
2319 cf"
0:29 toff a)
:4-
Kx�'
O T
s
M M
044<wAY $V664gy t ,
o
y
0
0.
i
D:_
r=p
i
0
m6.0
ti
Y�
i
3/19/01 1:56:9.pm Shareware Release page,
4
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
i
-ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
---------STAGE
STORAGE .TABLE.
cs .
i_
UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. P-1
x
DesZription.: UNDERGROUND DETENTION PIPE
Diameter: 3.00 ft. Length: 56.00 ft.
Slope... : 0^.0050 ft/ft upstr: dnstr:
Z,
p
+
o
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <- .STORAGE --->' STAGE --STORAGE --> STAGE STORAGE----
(ft) ___ct--_ --AC-Pt- (ft) .--- cf--- --AO-Ft- (ft) ___cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) __cf'___
.'. �.
........................................:..................... ......... ......................
N ..
ji...
100..00 "0.0000 "0.0000 100.90 72:794 0.0017 101.80 202.81 0.0047102.70 322.02 0.0074
C m
Cl
:i
300.30 0.7230' 0.0600 101.00 86.112 0.0020 ' 101.90 217.59 0.0050 102.80 331.75 0.0076
m
300.20 4.0476 0.0003 301.10 99.896 0.0023 ,102.00 232.17 0.0053 102.90: 340.09 0.0078
C '.
100.30 9.8393 •0.0002 101.20 114.06. 0.0026 102.10 246:49 0.005Y 103.00 346.40 0.0080
\
"
_ K
mZ-
:,�
100.40 17.,310 0.0004 101.30 128.52 0:0030 102.20 260.48 0.0060 103.10 351:45 6.0081
m
-
+- 100.50 '26.393 0.0006 143.210.0033 102.30 '274.04 0.0063 103.20. 353.31 0.0081
-1...
10
E
„1'01..40
2B7.09.. - 0.008'1
D 2
(;
1
-100.60 - 36.688„ 0.0008 101.50 158.05 0.0036 102.40 0:0066 .103.30 353:43
47.960 0.0011 101.60 172.98 0.0040 102.50 299.52 0.➢069
-
p
..- 1001.80 60.039 0.0014 101.70 187.92 0.0043 102.60 311.22 0.0071 +
(A
on
r
-
(+
J9
mm-
.Qt7 �i7o'11A1 YLtIJ�`� l�2 i `ls jjjDI_W ►'lieiS _*mP Aaes'
0
0 m
°0
c
IF f=26 .�9
uNi
mo
/
or AmPA: ' A0✓ )OC-0 /'.GlUs' VeLG�^!L°' O:� �(�9�1!ibL '
z
'41e
f
0
0
k
pj
i 1
�
t
9
r
c
=i 'n
m0
80,
m Z,
DZ
m m,
.
ON
C cl)
zZN
;i
D.
CO
O
F,
ii
3/19/01 1:56:10 pm Shareware Release
page +�
tom!`
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES "
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 0-1
)i
Description: FLOW RESTRICTOR ORIFICE
Outlet Elev: 100.00
5 It•r.
1001.00 ft Orifice Diameter:
gpvl.'4
�"
�n
Elev: •0.6250 -in.
O
n
STAGE —DISCHARGE --.->' STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE t--DISCHARGE---> STAGE
-DISCHARGE-
(ft) ---cfe-- (ft): cfe-- (ft) -cfe-- (ft)
--- cfe_ __--
t 3
.. .........................
$
.................................. ..................... ......
100 00 0.0000 300'.80 0.009E . lOL-60 0.0134 102.40
0.0164
N
=
G;
500.10 0.0034 100:90 0.0101. 101.70 0.0138 302.50
0:0168
160:20 0.0047 301.00 0.0106 101.89 0.0142 102.60
0.0171
n
100.30 0.0058 101.10'0.0111 101.90 0.0146 102.70
0.0174
O
1'00.40 0.0067 101.20D.0116 102.00 0.0150. 102.80
0.0177
SSSy M
'
', 100.50 0.007E 101,30 0,0121 102.10 0.0154 102.90
0.0181
•'1
100.60 0.0082 101.40 0.0125 102.20 0.0157 103.00.
0.0184
10
Z
-
tur
- 100.70 ',0.0069 SO1.50. 0.0130 102.30 0.0161
_
'nMM
ON
m�
1r
-
Z.
m-
3/19/01 1':56:10 pm Shareware. Release page- 70
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
1
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DET$NTION/INFILTRATION
•a
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
RISER DISCHARGE• ID No. R-1
r.
1,
4,
Description: FLOW RESTRICTOR RISER -PIPE,
Riser Diameter (in):, 6.001 elev. 103:00,ft.
-height:
Weir Coefficient 9.739 103.10 ft
Z
Orif 'Coefficient .. 3.782 intrem: 0.10 ft
o
m
�:.
STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->•,$TAGE <--DISCHARGE---> -,STAGE. <--DISCHARGE---> .STAGE --DISCHARGE
p;ya
cfe -(ft) cfe (ft) Cf.-_. -(ft) fe _
103.00 0.0000 103.00 0 0000 �103.10 0.2990 103.10 0.2990
m 0
V
0 n
C
d
m Z
10 -1
}r
s
�z,,
m
0 m
�r
t
0
.
r"
w!
a co
m
I
C4
3/19/01 1r56:10-Pm Shareware Release
page
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALh IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
4.
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
[
--------STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
COMBINATION DISCHARGE."- ID No. CBD-1
10,
Description: RISER,PIPE & ORIFICE
r
Structure: 0-1 Structure:
Z-
u
-
ca
p:
Structure: R-1 Structure:
Structure:
m
r.
STAGE <--DISCHARGE:--a STAGE -DISC HARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE.--a -STAGE
--DISCHARGE---.
am
>`
(ft) cfe ut) - fe (it) f --
(ft)
cEe
iCliQIZI
....:.. ...
Q
................................................................................
n
o
J
f+0
100.00, 0.0000 ,100.80 0.0095 101.60- 0.0134
102.40
0.0164
500.10 0.0034 100.90, 0.0101 - 101.70 0.0138
102.56
,0.0198
^=Y
m
- '.-Yd
100.20 0.0047 101.00 0.0106 101.80 0.0142
102.60
0.0171
1
100.30 ,0.0058 - 101.10-,. 0.0111 101.90 0.0146.
102.70
0.0174jO
C Z
100.40 0.0067 101.20 0.0116 102.00 0.0150
302.80
0.0177
9
100.50 0.0075 101.]0 0.0121• 102.10 0.0154
102'. 90
0.0181
�. p
100.60 0.0082 101.40 0.0125 102.20 0.0157
303.00.
0.0184
O T
i;
100.70 0.0089 101.50 0.0130 102.30 0.0161
103.10
0.3177
o�va�
mm
gi
•
r.
C(mp
m to
u
Z
Z
O
,.
m,
.
I
3/19/01. 1:56:9 pm Shareware.Release page
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE '
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
P''
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
IY
i
''TRAPEZOIDAL BASIN ID No. IT-1
P>
Description: INFILTRATION TRENCH'
Length: 50.00 ft." Width: 3.00 ft.
0,
SideSlope 1: -0 Side Slope 3: o
i
Side. Slope,2: 0 Side Slope t: 0
m
P,
infiltration Rate: 30.00,min/inch
ie
om
- STAGE< ---- STOWAGE--- -> STAGE <---- STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <-••-STORAGE---->
m O"
•
- ---
(ft) <f Ac FE (ft) -cf--- -Ac-Ft (ft) cf----Ac-PC-Ft([t) ---c E- - Ac Ft
-1
O
(•
..
............................................ ....................................................
95 00- 0.0000. 0.0000 95.60 90.000 0.0021 96:20 180.00 0.0041 96 SO 270.00 0.0062
m
#•
1C4
95.10 '15.000. 0.0003 - 95.70 105.00 0.0024 96.30 , 195.00 0.0045 96.90 285.00 0.0065
1`
r'
t
s' b,dz
95.20 30.000 0.0007' 95.80 120.000.002E 96,40' 210.00 0.0048 97.00 300.00 0.0069'
95.30 45.000 0.0010 95.90 135.00 0.003196.50 225.00 0.0052-- 97.00. 300.00 0.0069�.
:
;,.
95.40 60.000 0.0014 96.00 150.00 0.0034 96.60 240.00 0.0055
I.
i.7
95,50_ 75.000 0.0017 96.10I 165.00 0.003E 96..70 255.00 0.0059
0 -n
S•
_
m m
i
CN
z
z
m
4 -
)
3/19%01 1:56:9 pm Shareware Release
page
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
t'
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
a
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
fa
Infiltration Rating Curve :for Storage Struct IT-1
STAGE <-INFILTRATION-> STAGE,'4-INFILTRATION-> STAGE ,i-INFILTRATION-> STAGE
<-INFILTRATION-
O
t {mi
(Et) __ __ _ _ _ _ _______
-.-cfe -------- (a) cfa-- -(ft) cYa-- (ft)
__ cfa-- - -
•
'.
1Y
....................................... ....... ...... ......
..... .... w
f
..
95.00 0.0069 95.60 0.0099 96.20 0.0128 96.80
0.0150
t
95.30 0.0074 95.70 0.0104 96.30 0.0133 96.90
0.0163
ti
,may
95.20. 0.0079 95.80 0.0109 _ 96.40 0:0138 97.00
O.Q168
i
95.30 0.0084 95.90 0:0114 96.50 '0.0143 - 97.00
0.0168
S
95'.40 0.0089 96.00. 0.011.9 96.60 0.0148
m ®
m
rt
`
µ.
95.50 0.0094 96.10-0.0123 96.70 0.0153
O
=m
m
Z.
A
{
y
!
r
l i!
�.
mm_m
0y
0 Fnn
j
mN
z
O
m
5
g
(
}
I;
3/19/01 .'1e56:10 pm ,' Shareware Release
page
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
on
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
FED
OVERFLOW:WEIR ID No.'BCW-1'
b,
s
l4
Description: INFILTRATION TRENCH OVERFLOW !C)Jf;
R&tio (h:iv): 3.2i00 Weir length: 20.0000 ft.
qae
El: 97:00 ft. Weir Increm: 0;01
Z
O
d
rn
.STAGE < DISCHAEt E --- > " STAGE < DISCEARGE---> STA09 <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE
<--DISCHARGE-•->
fzw
8__------- (Et) --cfs--___;____ (ECY _-_cf--_.,____--_.. (Et)
---cfe .-'_______ I.
�_
-i 'n.
5 .
•S
)'a..........................
....... ............. .....
Y.
97,00 0.0000 - 97.06 0.9555 97.12 2.7232 97.18
�97.07
5.0406
2.. .
97.01 0.0646 1.2056" 97.13 3.0745 97.19
5.4733
mo
".
97.02 '0.1836,. 97.08 , 1.4749 97.14 3.4403 .97:20
5.9184
(
97.03 0,3365 97.091.7621 97.15 '3.8201
4.2137
q
97.04 0.5188 97.10 2.0664 97.16
m
m Z
A
!nr
97.05 0.7260 97.11� 2.3870 97'. 17 4..6207
fl 1
d
_
DZ.
O _n
'n;D
b
m
I
it
�
• �. �
mm
-
�
00 y
n�j_
jir
.
M0
z
-
s
fn
0
i
m'
i.
3/19/01 1,56:11 pm Shareware Release, .page 1�
`
GREENLEAF-EVANS RESIDENCE
ALL:IMPERVIOUS'SURFACE$
DETENTION/INFILTRATION
yFx
- ----- ----- LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW-STO--DIS- 4-PEAK-> 'OUTFLOW STORAGE
c-------- DESCRIPTION --------- (Cfe) (cfe) --id- --id- —STAGE, id (cf0). VOL (Cf)
S
2 YEAR RELEASE - 0.01 0.06 P 1 0 1 101.82 30 0.1 205 36 cf
-' 10 YEAR RELEASE 0.03 0.08 P' 1 CBD 1 103.00 it 0 03 346.50 of t`+�^'%rr�K.
Q
i
S(
100 YEAR RELEASE...............0.07 0.19 ' P-1CBD-1 103.05 12. 0.14 348.79 CL � ..
m..
m
2 YR INFILTRATION - .. 0.01 0.01 IT-1 9CW-1 195.97 15 0.01 145.64 cf
'
YO YR INFILTRATION .... 0.03 '0.03. IT-I'ECW-1 96.70 16 0.02 254.54 C£
100 YR INFILTRATION :......... 0.14 IT-1 ECW-1. 97-00I 17 '301.10 cf
0.07
m
o
s
0
nC-Z-ji YTY.Gr 73 INYe� 41-'''
rn
R
rn z
y z_
r_
—1W dr IN,-- IA-77C47
mm
M0
;
Z
m
�
Trapezoidal Channel Analysis• & Design
6
i?
Open Channel
-,Uniform flow
Worksheet Name: DRIVEWAY,
Comment: EVANS DRIVEWAY SWALE .CONVEYANCE.
C
S0
E
Solve For Depth
Given Input'Data:
z0
0
('
{
Bottom Width.....
0.00 ft
n
m
'
Left Side Slope,..
3.00:1 (H:V).
'
Ri4ht Side Slope.
3:06:1 (H:V)
i�
_! i
Manning's n.. i ...
0.035 -" �iip�'igt� - S"4,ec�J"r4a j
u,
,
Channel Slope.:..
0.2000 ft/ft
o m
a
�a
Discharge........
0.09 cfs
m
Computed Results.
OM
O0
Depth... ....
0.11 ft
Velocity..
2.61 f s.
c Z
;
p
'Flow Area ......
0.03 sf
9
r
"
Flow'Top Width...
0.64 ft �✓; $
WettedPerimeter.,
0.68;ft
Critical Depth...
0.14.ft
�m
1
Critical' Slope...'
0.0464 ft/ft
Froude Number.::.
1:98 (flow is Supercritical)
m m
a
•
p
•
R
�`. -
w�
MO
w
m
Open Channel Flow Module,Version
3.15 (c) 1990
�'
Haestad Methods, Inca * 3'7
kside Rd Waterbury, Ct�06708
Broo*."
RECEIVED
GREENLEAF EVANS RESIDENCE
$615 Olympic View Drive
APR 17 2001
I_
GRADING QUANTITIES
PERMIT COUNTER
d
BASIS
House & garage excavation volumes are separately stated
All volumes are in -place cubic yards.
O
QUANTITY CALCULATIONS
m
? .
Cut for Curtain Drain 80' x 2' x 4727 =
24 cy
=�
Cut for Rockeries 250' x 2' x 6727 =
111 cy
y
c
Cut for South Yard 1750 sf x 2' / 27 =
130 cy
o
2 Cut for Infiltration Trench 50' x Tx 2' /27 -
11 cy
M
Oc
r:
F Detention Pipe & MHs 68' x 7 sf /27 =
18 cy
m��
Gravel for Driveway 3136 sf x .5727
58 cy
—
Z
Gravel for Curtain Drain as above
24 cy
r
Gravel for Infiltration Trench as above -
11 cy
i Spells for Rockeries 300' x 1.5 x 47V -
67 cy
o m
i
i
Fill for North Yard 4275 sf x T / 27 =
475 cy
m
O0 y
,
C
�."
TOTAL QUANTITIES
m0
Cut (cy) = 24 + 133 + 130 + 11 =
298 cy
A
Fill (cy) = 18 + 93(Gravel) + 67 (Spalls)+ 475 =
653 cy
r..
Subtotal 653 - 298 =
355 cy (Fill);
"
O
Not included in above
rn'
2160 sf x 3.5' / 27 -
280 cy
I
V� a 1200 sf x 57 27 =
222 cy
T
80 - 222 =
58 cy (Cut)
r
Net Grading = Gravel & spalls & import =
297 cy (Fill)
34707
sroYac Imported Backfill =
167 cy (Fill)
E`�G�
" E%HREa JURY 02,
BEK Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
2006d9
"
BEK ENG & ENVIRON Fax:360-676-4625 May
4 2001 14:01 P.03
t,
GREENLEAF EVANS RESIDENCE
k:
'
8615 Olympic View Drive
l i r k
GRADING QUANTITIES
- ;` 20,11
t'
`MAY
fLM,:--,;AU OEPT,
n.
1 BASIS
Ail volumes are In -place cubic yards.
I`
is
�u
QUANTITY CALCULATIONS
Cut for Curtain Drain 80' x 2' x 4'127
- 24 cy
11 cy
m
Cut for Infiltration Trench 50' x 3' x 2' 127
250' x 2' x 6727
= III cy
Cut for Rockeries
? Cut for South Yard 1750 Sf x 2' t 27
- 130 cy
o rn
Subtotal Cut Quantities
- 276 cy
m o
a 0
OC
S<
I
Fill for North Yard 3700 sf x 2.5' ! 27
= 343 cy
p �
i
i Gravel for Driveway 3130 sf x .5'127
_ 58 cy
- 24 cy
CZ
'
Gravel for Curtain Drain as above
= 11 cy
din
x
j
Gravel for infiltration Trench as above
Spalis for Rockeries 220' x 1.5 x 4727
_ 49 cy
x
rnrn
Subtotal Fill Quantities
- 485 cy
0�7j',
lti
C CW
_i
Net Grading 485 (Fill) - 276 (Cut) = 209 cy {Import)
.
t . S�Sr
wA
-Z{
x
C
4 fy�
a
zO
�-�-
m
.
. eEK Engineefin9 &-wronmental, Inc.
- 200649
�'.
0
HEK EN6 & ENVIRON Fax:360-676-4625 May 4 2001 14:01 F.02
infiltration trench
detention pipe
free cover70.
15°
12,
deck dedt��
14' ~— ~
478 +/
rrain drain `
47 ------
7 --D
over po e $ inlet --
f -- _—�-o
nark asin
basin water valve 86th Pia e W
O
m
cm
m0
on
mm.
Aj_
�2
N
n T
mM
0 N
r
C
Z 0,
-,
M
a
m.
ADF Surveyors
?1177
fir•
.
May 3, 2001A
Meg Gruwell
City of Edmonds
zy
i
i
Planning Division
121 5"' Ave. N.
m,
Edmonds, WA 98020
re: Plan Check 01-140 for Lori Greenleaf -Evans
v m
iY
Dear Meg,
m o
O
,80
R',
Pursuant to our conversation this morning, it is evident that, based on the City's
i zi
aerial topography map and the indicated overall slope of the land from Olympic
a
'N
View Drive to Puget Sound, the average gradient of the slope is well under the
In fact, the
z
city's 40% criteria for classification as a critical area. average
AV
gradient, even in the worst case, is generally less than 20%, not considering
local variations that exist throughout the slope.
F
c
If I can be of further assistance in this matter, please call.
o
n�
f•
Reg ds,
_—
Gerald L. Painter PLS
i
�w
z
196,10�
5
E%PIAES
1521 Wetmore Ave., Everett, Washington 98261.2057 USA
phone (425) 258-4522 fax (4A 303-9313 `� 7�
i July 17, 2001 JUL 1 9 2001
tis;
PERMIT COUWER
Building Dept----Or----Building Dept. Director
�
i s
The architectural plans have been stamped and signed by the Architect. He advised me that plans
FV
with a total finished square footage of under 3500 feet don't need to be signed. However, he#K
complied with your request.
Z
0s
I have noticed that you have changed my unfinished/unheated basement that is only used for
c0i
structural support because of the hillside to a heated room thus increasing our square footage by
1072 sf.
'
Also, we followed your request to put an insulated door at the bottom of the stairway off the
laundry room to keep from having to finish or heat the upstairs above the garage. This 628 sq. ft.
a
m O;
-4 0
area is planned to be unfinished/unheated and we have no plans on finishing that off in the near
future.
m
fir.
Cz
The house was drawn and designed when we thought we needed more space. However, 2 of our
-
girls will be leaving in August for a Prep School in New York to play ice hockey at the National
-"
f
Sports Academy. They have already tried out for the Olympic Team and are awaiting the
response sometime before mid -August. Therefore, at this time we have only 2 children going to
m m.
be utilizing the upstairs bedrooms and don't need any additional square footage to heat and
o in
-
`o
maintain.
c �
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Hopefully with the plans stamped now, you'll
�
m
find everything n order.
GreenleafEvans.
Lon
425-775-3763
..
Or
F;
0....,.
i
_
m
C:�'
e
Z
O
n
m
cn
m
-I O,
O n'
C
mm
Z
yz
N
O-n
mm
o a'
cc
r
s
D
Z
-,1
S
N
Z
O
1
n
m
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
n
19730-64TH AVE. W., SUITE 200
LYNNWOOD, WA 98036-5957
TEL, 425-774-0106
May 18, 2001 FAX. 425-774-2714.,
;
HWA Project No. 2001082 '~"" h—geO5"e"Ce5•`°"'
t
Ms. Lori GreenleafEvans
19917 891i' Place West
1,
Edmonds, Washington 98026 _ RECEIVED
j
Attention: Ms. Lori GreenleatEvans JUN 0 4 2001
Z
0
I'
Subject: GEoTECIINICALREPORT_ PERMIT COUNTER
Fill
,
Proposed Residential Development
m
Fn,
8615 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington
c to
O
in o,
-1 0
Dear Ms. GreenleatEvans;
m
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for a proposed new residence
in
on the subject lot in the City of Edmonds, Washington (Figure 1). The tot is located within a
y z
}:
landslide hazard area as defined by the Edmonds Development Code Municipal Code
C �
1'
(ECDC). The purpose of this report is to investigate whether the proposed development can
rn
l
be safely undertaken on the lot, and to address City ofEdmonds requirements outlined in a
)
letter dated May 7, 2001, from City of Edmonds, Building Division.
m in
:r;
Our work included a site reconnaissance, review of previous work in the area, subsurface
o o'
explorations, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses to develop our results and
C N
conclusions.
in o
X
i
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
We understand that a 2-story timber -framed house over a partial walkout basement is
Z
planned for the location shown in Figure 2. As indicated, the house will occupy the west part
of the lot and the east portion will be traversed by an access driveway. Footprint dimensions
u>'
of the house and the adjoining garage will be approximately 50 feet by 90 feet. Basement
z
floor level is planned for elevation 470 feet, and the main floor is planned for elevation 479
feet. This will result in excavation of up to 6 feet below existing grade. A rockery retaining
m
wall will be constructed at the toe of a steep slope parallel to the south property line to
support cuts of up to 4 feet in height. The only feasible access to the property is a driveway
I
'-
located at the southeast corner. A sanitary sewer connecting into the municipal system will
j
be provided.
'
SITE DESCRIPTION AND OBSERVATIONS
t:
The lot is bordered by Olympic View Drive on the south, single family residences on the east
and west, and an undeveloped Snohomish County Park on the north. The lot is roughly
-
"
rectangular, with an irregularly shaped south property line of about 330 feet (east -west) in
e
- GEOLOGY
GEOENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
HYDROGEOLOGY
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
TESTING & INSPECTION
-
May 18, 2001
HWA Project No. 2001082
`=
length, and a width of between about 100 and 135 feet (north/south), for a total lot area of
38,597 square feet.
The ground slopes down from the southeast corner (about El. 506 feet) to the northwest
oil
comer (about El. 454 feet) giving an average ground slope of about 15%. The west portion
i x,
of the south property line is located along the toe of a steep slope (up to about 90%) of about
;.
10 to 15 feet height adjacent to Olympic View Drive. The east property line is situated along
04
the toe of another steep slope (up to about 80%). The proposed access driveway originating
Z
O
i
in the southeast corner of the lot will have a maximum slope of about 30%. No drainage
features such as streams or ravines were observed.
m
4
The lot's dense vegetation cover consists of shrubs, ferns, numerous old -growth cedar trees,
{ "
and deciduous trees (several of them multi-trunked). The trunks of the trees appear straight
p m
and show no evidence of bending which could be indicative of slope creep. No evidence of
m p
slope instability was observed,
t 0
O�
A granular fill terrace has been constructed in the past is the east part of the lot. We
m m
understand that the terrace was used as a lay -down area and parking for construction
p_
equipment. A quarry spall access road connects the terrace with Olympic View Drive.
a z
G .F
s
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
0
The site was explored by means of five hand -excavated explorations extending to a
m m
i
maximum depth of 4 feet below existing ground. The hand auger holes were located in the
p Vi
field by pacing and taping from existing features and are shown approximately on Figure 2.
The explorations were conducted on May 15, 2001.
K ca
mn
Pertinent information including soil description and engineering characteristics, stratigraphy,:
and ground water occurrence were recorded as the holes were advanced. A legend of the
terms and symbols used on the logs are included on Figure 4, and the logs are presented in
j
Figures 5 through 9.The stratigraphic contacts shown on the logs represent the approximate
boundaries between soil types. However, the actual transitions may be more gradual
�=
rn
The soil and ground water conditions depicted are only for the specific dates and locations
O
reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. It is
0
anticipated that water conditions will vary depending on seasonal precipitation, local
m"
subsurface conditions and other factors.
M
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our interpretation of subsurface conditions observed in the explorations was supplemented
by a review of readily available geotechnical and geological data for the project area. The
L
geological map by Smith, M (1975), "Preliminary Surficial Geological Map of the Edmonds
East and Edmonds West Quadrangles ", indicates that the site is located near the contact
_.
between Whidbey Formation (Pre -Fraser Glaciation) deposits and Esperance Sand (Vachon
Stade of Fraser Glaciation). A later geologic map by Minard, 7.P (1983), "Geologic Map of
2001082LR.doc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
"
May 18, 2001
HWA Project No.2001082
the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles" defines the contact deposits
as Transitional Beds (Fraser Glaciation to Pre -Fraser Glaciation beds and laminae of clay,
silt, and fine to very fine sand) and Advance Outwash (Vashon Stade mostly clean, pebbly
sand). Both maps are published by the Washington Department of Natural Resources,
t s
Division of Geology and Earth Resources.
Ev
The explorations encountered an 8- to 10-inch thick highly organic topsoil layer of loose,
z
dark brown, silty sand overlying medium dense, brown sand with a silt content decreasing,%"
with depth, and containing some fine to medium gravel. The bottom of this deposit was not
In
"
penetrated in any of the test holes.
L.J
Water was not observed in any of the test holes. Based on the absence of water in the holes
m s
or on the site in general, following a heavy rainfall, it is likely that the water table is deep.
c o
In
However, in wet periods, perching of water could occur on the less permeable silty topsoil
o
layer at the base of the fill.
C.
-
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
mm
10
GENERAL
r
t
.,
Based on the investigation, we conclude that the lot is suitable for the planned development
t)m
"
r�
and slope stability will not be detrimentally influenced by the development, provided the
m m
recommendations given in this report are followed. An important component of ensuring
16,
j
stability of the slopes is the provision of adequate surface and subsurface drainage to prevent
0
,,-
water buildup in the slope deposits. Footing drains should be installed around the perimeter
f
of all exterior walls, and retaining wails. Freely draining sand or sand and gravel should be
n
used as backfali adjacent to basement walls, which can be supported on conventional spread
footings bearing on the undisturbed native sand.
...a
Z
SLOPE STABILITY
According to the Edmonds Development Code Municipal Code (ECDC), Earth Subsidence
and Landslide Hazard Area means "any area of the city which, by reason of excessively steep
rnz
slopes, unsatisfactory foundation support, stability or topography has a risk of earth
O
subsidence and landslide hazard in excess of normal allowances", and includes areas with
0
slopes greater than 15 percent. Section 20.1513.060 of the Code defines Steep Slope Hazard
m
Area as any ground that rises at an inclination of 40 percent or more within a vertical
p, ;
elevation change of at least 20 feet (a vertical rise of 10 feet or more for every 25 feet of
w
horizontal distance)". A predominant part of the subject lot classifies as Earth Subsidence
and Landslide Hazard Area, with some steeper portions classified as Steep Slope Hazard
Areas.
We observed no evidence of slope instability in this area, and consider the potential for site
slope instability caused by the proposed development to be low, provided that the
development is constructed according to the recommendations given in this report. In our
"
200I082LR.doc 3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
May 18, 200t i
HWA Project No.2001082
l
judgement, the planned development will improve surface and subsurface drainage, thereby,
potentially increasing site stability and reducing the potential for slope instability influencing
the steep slopes adjacent to Olympic View Drive.o
;+
C
A
The southern face of the house will be setback a minimum distance of 20 feet from the
rockery wall at the toe of the steep slope adjacent to Olympic View Drive, where the
maximum slope height measured to the top of the wall is 18 feet. This setback satisfies the
requirements of Section 1806.5.2, Building Clearance from Ascending Slopes, of the 1997
Z
O
,y
Uniform Building Code. According to this section, the setback for the proposed structure
n
should be no less than 9 feet, which is provided at the southwest comer of the house where
m
w
She slope is more gentle. We consider the proposed setbacks to be sufficient to satisfy Code
requirements and acceptable for this site.
ai
c m
We have not checked the stability of the rockery wall, as this task was beyond our scope of
In o
services. However, we understand that the wall was designed by a structural engineer.
q
STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACTION _
C.
m
A Z
For the purposes of this report, material used to raise grades or placed under structures is
11
classified as structural fill. Imported structural fill should consist of clean, free -draining,
� y
granular soils that are free from organic matter or other deleterious materials. Such materials
should comprise particles of less than 4-inch maximum dimension, with less than 7% fines
(portion passing the U. S. Standard No. 200 sieve), as specified for "Gravel Borrow" in
m
Section 9-03.14(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2000). The fine-
p
grained portion of structural fill soils should be non -plastic.
c y
It is likely that portions of the existing fill within cut/over-excavation areas may be suitable
K v)
O
i
for use as structural fill if the earthwork is performed during dry weather and the contractor's
methods are conducive to proper compaction of the soil. However, these on -site materials
contain appreciable amounts of fines. The use of materials with fines content higher than 7
z
i
percent should be approved by HWA on an application -specific basis. The existing topsoil
and other organic -rich soils will not be suitable for use as structural fill, but may be used for
rn ,
landscaping purposes. Landscaping fill on the site should, however, be kept to an absolute
p
minimum for stability considerations.
..
=�
n.
In
Structural fill soils should be moisture conditioned, placed in loose horizontal lifts less than
—•
8-inches thick, and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined
using test method ASTM DI557 (Modified Proctor). Achievement of proper density of a
compacted fill depends on the size and type of compaction equipment, the number of passes,
thickness of the layer being compacted, and soil moisture -density properties. In areas where
limited space restricts the use of heavy equipment, smaller equipment can be used, but the
_
soil must be placed in thin enough layers to achieve the required relative compaction.
2001082LR.doc 4 HWA GEOSCIENCEs INC.
r
May 18, 2001
HWA Project No. 2001082
Generally, loosely compacted soils result from poor construction technique or improper
t :'
moisture content. Soils with high fines contents are particularly susceptible to becoming too
F•'
�N
wet, and coarse -grained materials easily become too dry, for proper compaction.
lm
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
The project site lies within Seismic Zone 3 as defined in the 1997 Uniform Building Code
O
1-4
(UBC). Zone 3 includes the western portion of Washington and represents an area of
n a;
relatively high seismic risk. Recommended seismic design parameters presented in Table 1
!!�
r,; a
include soil profile type, seismic coefficients, and control periods.
{
r e
Table 1
C v 1'
mt 0
k 9
Seismic Coefficients for 1997 UBC-Based Evaluations
-
-
Seisriic
Sod':;
Sais'mic
Seismic
Control Penod .
Control Period,
O
is
Zone;
Profile
Coefficient,..,iC
dent,,
To
Ts
m1
_
cz
s,q
3
Sc
0.33
0.45
0.11
0.55
r =
p
a
Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein loose, saturated, granular deposits temporarily
C:
k
lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to earthquake shaking. Based on our
' F=
observation of relatively medium dense to dense material at or close to the base of the testin
m! `
l a
holes, and the probable significant depth of the water table, we consider that the potential for
o ua
seismic liquefaction on the site is relatively low. Hence, seismically -induced liquefaction
c �
instability is not considered to be an issue for this site.
m n.
FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
i
Spread and strip footings should extend through the topsoil layers and any fill to undisturbed,
native sand. All exterior footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest
z
adjacent finished grade; interior footings should be founded a minimum of 12 inches below
"
the top of adjacent slabs or floors.
rn
z
0
The footings should designed for a maximum allowable pressure of 2,000 psf,
m
"bearing
subject to minimum footing widths of 18 and 24 inches for continuous strip and isolated
column footings, respectively. The recommended maximum allowable bearing pressure may
y
be increased by 1/3 for short-term transient conditions such as wind and seismic loading.
Provided construction is accomplished as recommended herein, and for the foundation loads
anticipated, we estimate differential settlements between adjacent load -bearing foundations
1 "
to be less than i inch.
"
200I082LR.doc 5 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
May 18, 2001
HWA Project No. 2001082
k,
f
FOOTING CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
'
C
All footing excavations should be trimmed neat and the excavation bottoms should be
�
v`
['
carefully prepared such that over -excavation of native soils is avoided. All loose or softened
i
soil should be removed from the footing excavation prior to placing reinforcing steel. We
fi
recommend that HWA should observe footing excavations prior to pouring concrete to verify
that the recommendations of this report have been followed and that an appropriate bearing
Z.
c>
stratum has been exposed.
O
4
If footing excavations are open during the winter, or periods of wet weather, we recommend
"'
that a lean concrete working mat or mud -slab, be placed to help preserve the subgrade until
=I a
the footings are poured.
w
y.
a
In
t .
. ,..
SUBGRADE WALLS AND RETAINING WALLS
-IOC....
r:
We understand that concrete retaining walls will be utilized to provide necessary grade
'
changes between proposed basement areas and adjacent exterior areas, and rockery walls will
p
be used for grade changes on the lot. Maximum anticipated height of these walls is about 6
y
feet. Conventional cast -in -place concrete cantilever walls will be feasible for this
application.
m
k ;
,..
We recommend that for areas of level backfill, design lateral earth pressures be determined
� m
using an at -rest equivalent fluid density of 50 pounds per cubic foot (pef). This value
m In
assumes that backfill behind the walls is horizontal and is placed and compacted in
0
t
j(
accordance with our recommendations. Fill within a distance of about 3 feet of the walls
should be compacted with lightweight equipment. Care must be taken to avoid over-
rn 0,
compaction near the walls, or excessive lateral pressures may develop.
�y
Positive drainage should be provided behind the base of all subgrade and retaining walls to
prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures as indicated on Figure 3.
Wind, earthquakes, and unbalanced earth loads will subject the walls to lateral forces, which
rn
z'
may be resisted by a combination of sliding resistance of the footing on the underlying soil
O
and passive earth pressure against permanently buried portions of the wall and footing. For
m`
design purposes, a coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be assumed between the base of the
footing and native foundation soils or compacted structural fill. An allowable passive earth
_
pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 260 pcf may be assumed for properly compacted fill
placed horizontally against the sides of the foundations. These recommended values assume
drained conditions that will prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure in the compacted fill.
The passive resistance provided by the upper 2 feet of soils should be neglected in design
computations unless protection against excavation is provided by pavement or a concrete
slab. The recommended allowable passive earth pressure values include factors of safety of
about 2.0 for static conditions.
2001082LR.doc 6 - HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
1
May 18,2001
4,
HWA Project No. 2001082
SITE DRAINAGE
Roof drains should carry all runoff via a tightline to a storm drain or other appropriate outlet,
and must not discharge on any part of the existing slope on or below the site. Perimeter
footing drains should be provided behind all subgrade and retaining walls as shown in Figure`
E'+
3. Roof downspouts and footing drains should not be connected to reduce the potential for
F:
clogging and back flooding of the perimeter drains.
z
l
EROSION CONSIDERATIONS
1P-
4
Erosion during construction can be minimized by careful grading practices, the appropriate
1 m
use of silt fences and/or straw bails and by implementing the recommendations in the Wet
5i -lx
Weather Earthwork section of this report. The site should be seeded and growth of vegetation
c o
+
should be encouraged as soon as possible after grading.oc
F`
6"
Surface runoff control during construction should be the responsibility of the contractor. All
i m
in
1'
i
collected water should be directed under control to a positive and permanent discharge
O
system. Permanent control of surface water should be incorporated in the final grading
'C 2
4 `
F;M
design. Water should not be allowed to pond immediately adjacent to foundations or paved
areas. Grading measures, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures
co
m m
should be employed as necessary to permit proper completion of the work.
;I
;
t
m m
WETWEATHEREARTHWORK - -
0
l
The on -site soils are moisture sensitive and may be difficult to handle or traverse with
in o
construction equipment during periods of wet weather. Consequently, construction during
F1 P
i
wet weather periods and/or conditions is not recommended on this site. However, general
recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet conditions are
presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into the contract
z
p,
specifications and should be required when earthwork is performed in wet conditions.:
1) Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize exposure to wet
z -
weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed
promptly by the placement and compaction of clean structural fill. The size and
01
in
type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil
disturbance.
2) Material used as structural fill should consist of clean granular soil with less than
5% passing the No. 200 sieve, based on wet sieving the fraction passing the %-
inch sieve. The fine-grained portion of the structural fill soils should be non -
plastic. These are additional restrictions on the structural fill materials described
above.
" -
20610%2LR.doc 7 H WA.GEOSCIENCES INC.
"
f a
May 18, 2001
HWA Project No. 200108294
k
3) The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-
off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water.
4) Excavation and placement of structural fill material should be monitored by
t
someone experienced in wet weather earthwork to determine that the work is
being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and the
recommendations contained herein.
z:
0
-4
r.
CONDITIONS AND LD4iTATIONS
m:
We have prepared this letter report for use by Ms. Lori GreenleafEvans for use in the design
Vi
of a single-family residence on the above lot. This report should be provided to prospective
o In,
contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but conclusions and interpretations
m o
F}
included in this letter report should not be construed as our warranty of the subsurface
p
conditions. Experience has shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary
inm
significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations
o
and may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface
C Z`
`
conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA
J
should be notified for review of the recommendations of this letter report, and revision of
Q
such if necessary.
-n
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure
m t"
o
j
that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of
the appropriate design team personnel and incorporated into the project plans and
C Cal
specifications. It is also the owner's responsibility to see that the necessary steps are taken to
m o
I
verify that the contractor and subcontractors cant' out these recommendations in the field. In
this regard, we recommend that HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications. We
also recommend that HWA be retained to monitor the geotechnical aspects of construction.
The scope of work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the
z
`
(.
"J
presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or ground
w
water at this site. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering,
o'
We do not direct the contractor's operations and we cannot be responsible for the safety of
n
personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the
to
contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions
—
presented herein are considered unsafe.
O.O
2001082LR.doc 8 HWA GEoSciENCEs INc.
t
.. _ ..
-100IH sI sW y }
r 1168TFj Pl SW a$
•fieaTEt'Pr$$w
1 1fTO }
f14 .ST SW I) ��• . Ht
OZ
q
t6541:SW -,"{
STH
187T PL STU
m
i
170T1 PAL SW
to S.
172ND
'S� • 1 173RD St
ST SW\�
W u 4-
N �- _ -�--
p
m O
C
IC4<, 17
ST SW"ml jt at
mm
PROJECT LOCAFTION
ISYJ''
'87
HF
Z.
THP1SW •1j� 4lENf°'
to,sZ.6
kt75T
SZf
S
((
gW ly
_
PL r�+w
'',y1 Wj_
10
182SW
)„,}
T SW 1816T PL Ste-
i
_ RD
�.
T�
O -N _
5w
S
1818
m m
ySjb5T
THTV11B5
H PL.$W
`F
0 �
1
TH ST W
I t .t
187 k:P SUtl...
g�TH 9T
am
\�+� •Y
SbbTH St
em vide
9 y
-�.D,.
9T L w i
`•--.may
8W
m
r
_ HL— ,,.%'5
91•S; P.I:Sw `1
'Y i 1-
Y
(
_.�
z
(p.cAL
•
192 i0 Pt,.
'PARK
Y
1047*H S .�
x
I
_D pL s�
ST
y
. 3�T _
L SwyE` S50Vi o T
I^
931��H S
f-[
'
..-
IELOO
1 8TH S
SW
107T ST SVgl
= I
p1
"
z
ElNlANO A.1=, •-.— .�
108
H PL W
r
- I �__L_
A
C
m
Z .
O
Q -K
IBROOKMER
�ro HST SW �•
l�.,99
,_
.
�
201ST ST'SW- .+
SLN � _F T
ORCHARD L i' '�—Z02Nb. ST 5W 202ND P� SW—p
% t� T 1 ( 203RD
I w GLE -2041H Si 5w 23RD F?l'S�WI
_ Tt
(__� 20 DST BW
ST SW
m
_.
D lEY1
NOT TO SCALE
PL
VICINITY MAP 1
®
GREENLEAF EVANS PROPERTY
n -ice_
8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
11MGEOSCIENCES INC
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
05.21.01 172001082
C:11PR01ECTS120011i0Si0SN0010E100/.OYIG
QOo�Q O:oOQ O.oOQO:opQ Q.o OQ
!
TOP OF CONCRETE
Ooo0O oCQO oOQOo�QO o�Q
°D::o
p,
SLAB OR PROPOSED
z,
.
oOoQ'oOo�o�:oQ°°O.oQoO:o
GRADE
-j
L'
op o oOp 0 aoQO:o Q O:ooQ
m
� ,n
EXCAVATION — 0�:0 �°O O o;g• oot� o
SLOPE o:0000o
55 -1
12' MIN.
c o
oc
ONE PIPE DIAMETER
m
s ..�
MINIMUM
$
PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE,
SLOPED TO DRAIN
N
l
Om.
r.
mm
NOT TO SCALE
,
c°�m
ME0
�a
LEGEND
BACKFILL: WELL GRADED SAND AND GRAVEL, MEETING THE
z
SPECIFICATIONS OF "GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR WALLS"
O
OR "GRAVEL BORROW" AS DESCRIBED IN THE
0
WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
m
PEA GRAVEL: WASHED 3/8" PEA GRAVEL
i
J
11
TYPICAL WALL DRAIN AND BACKFILL�—
�'
GREENLEAF EVANS PROPERTY
HMGEOSCIENCES INC
8615 OLYMPIG VIEW DRIVE
05.21.01
2001082
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
c iPR"C7S O(n aaloax Doioez00&DWG
P.a
17.
¢
Yww
1
I-d
is
w
1
1
,1
i
i
N7
COHESIONLESS SOILS
COHESIVE SOILS
AppmAmHe
APPt &A
O.'q
N(tNeaYdl)
RWINe Genai01%)
C .n.An
N( t#xela)
UMrWIul S..
5l m( M
Very Loots
0 A 4
0 - 15
Very S"
0 iO 2
<250
L..
4 to 10
15 - 35
Sod
2 lO 4
250 . SW
Me G.
10 10 W
35 55
Modk nSW
4 Io 5
500 - 1000
0."
3O to SO
55 55
SUIT
a lO 15
1000 - 2OW
Very 0..
ovnW
a5 100
Very Still
15 to 30
2000 - 4000
Had
over 30
a4000
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP DESCRIPTIONS
Coat.
G—,i"
CA. Gravel
•®
GW
WalkFaded GRAVEL
CWlad
G—ty SONG
(1N0e «no Mea)
O Q
GP
—
Poody-0roded GRAVEL
Sala
Maetl.
cro.el wA,
GM
SAY GRAVEL
50%dcorae
Frootlon Relai.d
iNlef (ap(aaGaOb
GC
Clayey GRAVEL
- NO. 4 SA.
amounts W3)
S"—
CA. Sa
••
SW
W451m0ed SAND
Mae tllM
S.YSaef
(NUa anoOma)
•:
SP
Po"-Q a d SAND
SW%R.Wb"
50%«Mote
SwgZ
'. �'$M
_•••
Say SANO
an NIL
dC—
2W SA.
Fraebn Pesakq
Fpl. (ePMedaOA
$C
CAYq SAND
SW
NO.4 Sieve
ema,md M.)
ML
SILT
FFe
SNt UquM Lanil
—'—
CL
L.n CLAY
$d0
DAY LMM. W%
OL
.-
Om. SILTIOMo CLAY
MH
EWWSILT
5a%«Moro
UgWd IJnN<
CH
Fat CLAY
50%«Mae
tft2WCA
NO.200 Si—
OH
Olga SILT/Owao Ct!
See
HIONY Ow,,k Sofia
=
PT
PEAT
a, t
z
-i.
O
1
om
t
m0
O
�
r
i�
m a
i
C
Dz
1 n;o
S`
mm
tl.
n�..
�01
m
Zy P.
=
f.
N_
n
� m
LEGEND OF TERMS AND
4 8615EOlympicS Residence SYMBOLS USED ON
' 8615 Olympic View Drive
HMISEMENCESINC. Edmonds, Washington EXPLORATION LOGS
PROJECTNO.: 2001082 FIGURE:
LEGEND 2WICU.GPJ SQ—
i
i
r.
i
ra
yn
F
t'd
r
!„3
s;
I
1
7
„_A
I
J
i
t
i
1
j
.
v..
i
_
PT
Laos., deck broom, silly, fine SAND with ocnaalonal gravel,
mol3L
Abundant organius and rook.
_ (TOPSOIL)
:.
SP
Medium dense, brown to maty brown. slightly silly, slightly fine
QMvesy, fine SAND, with sore organics (mots b rootlets),
moue
(ADVANCE OUTWASH) '.
Gmval besomes fine to m nflum bebw 2 % Caicf is lightx
brown.
Mom gm* helm 2.5 It. Color is yefowish brown.
�C
k,
k'F
5<
O
�{
P"
m:
ASd
.
749i
M
m�
O
C
k.
m M
M
m
F..,
Dz
K.
n E
—4
k'
m M,
O N
r
)�
C=
c
DZ
lA
Z
O
n
me
BORING:
�a GreenleafEvans Residence HA-1
8615 Olympic View Drive
HWAGEMENCESINC. Edmonds, Washington PAGE: 1 of 1
PROJECTNO.: 2001082 FIGURE: 5 !
BORING 2W1ae2.GPJ U21MI
—
—
PT
Loose, dark brown, sfhy fine SAND with soma gravel, moisL
Abundant organka and =W
(TOPSOIL)
:,
SM
Medium dense, brown to gray bmwn, efghtly. gravelly, sihy,
fine SAND, with some organ]= (roots and roodets), moist
Fine to medium gravel
(ADVANCE OUTWASN)
Medium dansa, Omfilh brain, slightly silty, siighty line to
SP
medium gravely, fine to medium SAND, with bate organ]=,
make
Slacontent dacreasee to tram b*m 2.S R
Send k g—.&frae between 3 and 4 it
GreenlealEvans Residence BORING:
I-IA-2
8615 Olympic View Drive
RmaosaMBINC Edmonds, Washington PAGE: , of ,
PROJECT NO.: 2001082 FIGURE: 6
+ SGRING 2WIOU.GPJ U21MI
i
F'y
OR
ai fi
r.
m o
!}
O
�.
m
A
Iz
t4
i'
On
M�
N.
z
0
M
f;
t:
—
—
PT
Loose, dark brain, silly, fine SAND, with occasional One to
medium gravel and abundant organics and mob, moist.
(TOPSOIL)
• .
SP
Medium dense, bmm to yallowtsh brvwo, slightly silly, slightly
One to medium gravelly, fine to medium SAND, with trace
ortl moist
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Medium dense, yeAowbh brown, dean, One to medium SAND
'
Sp
moist
T.. ff. gravel bekav 311,
y�"
its ,
C;
i{
Z
Vfi
^
m,
onil
m�
O
4
' .i
O C.
.0
I f
D Z
O -n
`n
ram
I„
o�
0
CC
,
N
m
ZA
L
y
O`
m>
BORING: i
GreenleafEvans Residence HA-3
i 8615 Olympic View Drive
HWAGEMENCES INC. Edmonds, Washington PAGE" of
PROJECT NO.: 2001082 FIGURE:
BORING 2WIM.GPJ WIMI
r
�
'
I
F?A
F
5,
z
s
t
a
Fve
Y
is
t�
:
r
:Ir
y
_
PT
Loose, dads brown, sidy, Sne SAND, adth c eionol grovel
and abundant olganin and root, moist
—
(TOPSOIL)
:.
SP
Medium dense, nasty bmwn to brown. Wghdy silty, fine to
medium gmvft fine to medium SAND, bane organl a,
moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
BORING:
+ GreenleafEvans Residence HA-4
6615 Olympic View Drive PACE. , ar ,
i HMGEOSCIENaS INC. Edmonds, Washington
i q'q PROJECT No., 2001082 FIGURE: 6
i
BORING 1WIMGPJ SMIMI
r
l;
Yi
f%
O
m
i'
M V
*}s
om,
C0
0
rbv
O
C
K:
s'
x m
m4
10 Cnz
L
)h>
M
a (n
N
mm
i�
i.:
Z
O
m
k
I
{
i
s
_e
rxa
i
irp
f
,t
t Y
>x4
i
t
�
hzR
r
e
t•fr
',
ttvf
_
PT
loose, dark i Why. slightly fine to medium gravely, fine
01
SAND, with abundant olgan n and =% molat
11
(TOPSOIL)
:.
SM
Medium dense, do* only, blown, Blighty fine to medium
gaudy, silly, One SAND, with some Organics, molat
(ADVANCE ODTWASH)
Medium do,-, rusty boon to i slightly sihy, firs+)
SP
medium gsv lly, f ms SAND, with haw oryanta, —[at
BORING:
a GreenleafEvans Residence HA-5
q, 9 8615 Olympic View Drive
HWAGE®SCIENCES INC Edmonds, Washington PAGE: + at +
1+ PROJECTNO.: 2001082 FIGURE:9
BORING 2001002.GPJ 512W
o.
i
t,i
in
vp
z
0:
0,
Ey
's 1F
- )
m;
� ITI,
rn _4
o m1?
m�
.
f.
OJn
i m,
m,
y
F4
A
k:
rA
'H n
mIT,lh
oy:
c c�"D
mN
Z
to
z'
O
n
m"
A
w
C
8
0
,
m
P
6 It
0
z
a M
x
>
S
long
III
k
� s
,i
4
j
i
�
co
-
o
mmm
y
9�zZm
CIO
Ov
ZZ>mm
Oz
0Z0
zz
cnTT
oboov
0
C� V A Z
D�-'t7 m ,
p z Z
ZwpC)
O
mp.Zm7
O
N
}
,
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
�
M.S.C.E., M.B.A. Geotechnicai/Civil Engineer
I
June 21,2002 BUILEIIP16
JUN 2 8 2002
I'
City of Edmonds
o
Building Department
121 Fifth Ave. N
m
Edmonds, WA 98020
'
Subject: Special Inspections i Evans Residence
v'
t
8615 Olympic View Dr.
m o
.
This engineering report presents the results of geotechnical special inspections
a
C
f'r
with regard to the Lori and Terry Evans new single-family residence at 8615 Olympic
m in
A
t
View Dr., Edmonds, Washington.
c y_
REFERENCES:
ern
o n
_n
€^
l
City of Edmonds approved Project Plans
Geotechnical Report by HWA Geosciences, Inc. dated May 18, 2001
M m
C.
Site photographs
o e'
o �n
INSPECTIONS:
m
This engineer has read, reviewed, understands and is in agreement with the
zn
recommendations of the May 18, 2001 HWA Geosciences, Inc. Report.
This engineer has provided on -site geotechnical inspections for the new Evans
Z
residence.
1) Erosion Control: The construction site has a siltation fence that is well
n
constructed and functioning (see photographs). Erosion control measures
0
approved to date.
rn
2) Excavation and Grading: The site has been cleared, trees fallen and
I
removed, grading occurred. Excavation for the residence footings has
occurred. Excavation and grading in accordance with approved Project Plans
and normal good practices.
3) Fill Placement: No significant fill (other than rock construction entrance).
-
SOILS • FOUNDATIONS • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRAINAGE • DESIGN A PERMIT • LEGAL
P.O. Box 55502 Shoreline, Washington 98155 (206) 546-9217 FAX 546.8442
City of Edmonds
Building Department'
June 21, 2002
Page 2*
rS
4) Soil Bearing: This engineer verified the dense, native, sub -grade soils
);
capable of providing a minimum of 2,000 p.s.f. bearing capacity.
5) Wet Weather Monitoring: Relatively dry, sunny summer conditions have
o
j prevailed.
0
m
s'.
fl:
li 6) Final Grading: Not yet.
7) Footing Steel Placement: Not yet.
om
'f
8) Foundation Wall Steel: Not yet:
m0
-r
o
N;
This engineer continues to provide on -site geotechnical inspections.
C
P>
SUMMARY:
CZ1
Cn
p
• All special geotechnical inspections properly completed and approved to date.
• Geotechnical special inspections ongoing.
m m
If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call,
0 N
c:
Ivy
�f
Zn
[[� wAIW,N���
PPPA{
z
who a c7
SA
z
O
f7(plg6f ?s v '
M. Bruce, P.E.
Dennis
I
1 Geotechnical 1 Civil Engineer
DMB:abj
Et
;
t.
cc: Ms. Lori Greenleaf Evans
i
r
i;
Height Calculation Worksheet
Address: 86 r.s pIFI
Date:
{'r
s
hispector(s):.
1. Datum Point:
a _
2. Datum Point Elevation: SOU , �
O.
-' *'
$r
i3.
Average Grade: 7. 7S S
m
=t n
t
4. Maximum Elevation Allowed: t �% 7 va erage grade) + 25'= S < <0 `
Vj
am
C: a
'
S. Reference Point Elevation Shot to House:
in
-i chi
OC
S o (datum elevation) + 3"S25 (grade to transit level line shot to house) _ c'
in
bl
6. Measurements from line shot onto house to roof ridge:
Z
z;
0-n
I
1
�'
mM
0 �
z
s
CO
Total
in
-
{
�
e
7. Actual Elevation: S (reference point elevation) + O (measurements
from #6) = S �? , Sr S
o
Conclusion:
(actual) is greater le ss"" than ? Il"` (allowed); therefore the house is/
i-
j
i
is not over the height requirement per ECDC 16.20.30 requirements
L:\TEMP\BUlLDING\MISCVieight Calculation Worksheet.doc
FINAL. PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE
D, 6 ( LAG _T ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE 5 Z CT 3
I
PLANNING DIVISION DATE
PROJECT_ G) 4Yt, P �UAiVt
SITE ADDRESS ran l S w Ci
PERMIT # P OO O� — 6 2,8 S ADB# DATE INSPECTED46 3
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED_El 0 At --
A field inspection was conducted to determine final compliance with approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
PERFORMANCEONDS and the granting of
GRANT FINAL PROJECT .APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
❑ Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
I.
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION OUTSTANDING ISSUES
❑ Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inspector
I
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Sign
ocaprvl.doc.l:temp:bldg:fonnsl0/Ol
z
rn
�m
cM
mo
On
c
mz
�-q_
vz
r=
C
n
mm
ON
r
mm
i
z
x
(.
z
O
m
'
FOUNDATION:
_
Footing ...
-
Wall ...........................
'
Pier/Porch ................. .
-" .Retaining Wall ....:......
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING
{y IJ cu J'�C
Underground ...........
iRough
-In ...................
- Commercial Final ......
HEATING:
`tV° Gas Test ...
c_o3
,�/�
Gas Piping
\r
�.=1-S�LY.-6.�
n
Equipment .................
"
Commercial Final .......
-
` EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING .......................
x0 -0
C —
,+��� FRAMING ........................
—
�0"'�+�
-7
FIRST FLOOR FOAMING...
b3.
Floor insulation
Wall insulation ...........
"
-' Ceiling Insulation .......
n /f__
S �'• °� V / — U3
SHEETROCK NAILING ...
ty
4--'
- -. SPECIAL INSPECTION ...
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
'r
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
n'l1 C
I " IJ
OCCUPANCY ..................
- —_..
�•�1CP1Coi
�4GR T}��'s."'t�. ((.O'Z.�
(Hi�f�J' f��i
�l�l'SEv11P=vvi' 6o-7z. 5f-)
$P�
mze N ve- v,,vt;i;t
I
W"4TC1 f"IT-5 dire AP-iMREP. bateLcsecd_0t_ 1__r .11^ T�
L t'l lAmo
MAP-7'x
An, Bunt rlL!d-