HomeMy WebLinkAbout20015 67th Ave NE_PWD136_2026
!"#$ !%&'()#''* +,-../
01 2 3 4#56(44(7 )8''9:( "#'
01 20;;<< =4!>?(:@#)&#-AB
01 2CDCECF +4()7"9)-GHBB
D 2 < 2 I#44(3 4#
J 2 5KK5K BK
L1 ,#44(MN 4#>(44(7 )O:9>
E PQ R -:!
S1T 2 KU O
B U "N@#)&#V
W D ; /V
W<<T;
LX< HBBB
ET< VY*V
0<<Z2; . &) %4 :,
* +:#4A [[+#''.#7 4#':+(?"(9)=$)#+ ># =$)#+*N9)# \9)()7
U KBB U ]3^VV !"#$ !%&'()#'' BKB_ $>(44'8
* +,-../ *4 )()76(44'
D 2 <
/9)"+ :"9+*+(> +!/9)" :"*N9)#[[+#''/9)"+ :"9+]!?#.(:#)'# .(:#)'#A
`_^V]-/ /N+('(:N94'KBU5 5UUU
H %&"4#+/9)'"+&:"(9)/9)"+ :"9+. a9+8)[&'"+(#'`_^V].bHK%
9 [
36V)7()##+()7I#44(3 4# 5KK5K BK =4!>?(: VG 'N()7"9)_" "# K
@#)&#-AB
G3+4()7"9)-../%+#)"(:N94'9)B 55 H c&N+> ) =$)#+
@#)&#-AB
W2< 2<
"# )'?#:"(9)]!?##':+(?"(9)_:N#[&4#[ "#/9>?4#"#[ "#)'?#:"9+ _" "&'
BBBBG OG]V
_*V/]=_
B B B
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
Community & Economic Development
City of Arlington • 18204 59th Avenue NE • Arlington, WA 98223 • Phone (360) 403-3551
CIVIL (TYPE I) ï² GRADING/PAVING/DRAINAGE (TYPE II) ï² RIGHT OF WAY (TYPE III) ï²
TYPE I & II ONLY NEW DEVELOPMENT ï² REDEVELOPMENT ï²
Project Name: GAYTEWAY BUSINESS PARK
Snohomish County Tax Parcel I.D. #: 31051400200700
Project Address / Location: 20015 67th AVENUE NE
Description of Project: site grading with imported fill material from Broadway Street apartmen project in Everett WA
OWNER
Name: GAYTEWAY BUSINESS PARK LLC, ATTN: Chris Gayte
Address: PO BOX 1727
City: BELLEVUE State: WA Zip: 98004 Phone: 206 240 9739
Email: cjgayte@yahoo.com
APPLICANT
Name: Daniel B. Taylor, Architect
Address: 1639 Harbor Ave SW, #304
City: Seattle, WA 98126 State: Zip: Phone: 206 465 2491
Email: danielb719@comcast.net
ENGINEER
Name:
Address:
City: State: Zip: Phone:
Email: License #: Expiration:
CONTRACTOR
Name: CHRIS NICHOLS
Address:
City: State: Zip: Phone:
Email: License #: Expiration:
I, hereby certify that I have read and examined this application, City of Arlington Municipal Code, Standard Plan & Specifications. Performance of the
proposed work shall follow all applicable laws and regulations. The owner/applicant shall assume full and complete responsibility for said work and shall
be responsible for the acquisition and compliance of all applicable permits and/or authorizations which may include, but not limited to, Right of Way
Permit, WSDW Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), WSDOE Notice of Intent (NOI), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Army Corp. of
Engineers Permits, the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, and the Forest Practices Application (FPA).
Signature______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Print Name:_______________________________________________________________DANIEL B. TAYLOR ____________________________ Date:__________________FEBRUARY 28, 2019________________
Page 1 of 2 REV 11/2018
Complete package constitutes all items. Only complete submittals will be accepted.
Civil - Submittal Requirements, Type I:
ï² Complete Application;
ï² Construction Plans including cut / fill quantities;
 2 full size plan sets 22†x 34â€
 PDF file of the complete plan set
 2 full size set of landscape plans 22†x 34â€
ï² Marysville Utility plans, if applicable (2 sets);
ï² Drainage Analysis including calculations and downstream analysis (2 sets) and (PDF file); refer to Stormwater Drainage
Requirements;
ï² Geotechnical Report (2 sets) and (PDF file);
ï² SEPA is required if 500 or more cubic yards of cut / fill is proposed (not required if included with a Land Use Permit);
ï²X Grading cut / fill quantity: _______________________________;
ï² Design Vehicle – demonstrate turning radius include 45’ Fire truck, dual axle, 256 inch wheel base;
ï² Complete Streets Checklist
ï² Drafts of easement(s) dedication(s), and/or CAPE(s) for review;
ï² Flood Hazard Permit Application and required documentation if project is within 100 year flood plain; refer to Flood
Hazard guidance documents;
ï² Construction Calculation Worksheet;
ï² NPDES Permit (if required); See Storm Water Drainage Report, New or Redevelopment Flowcharts;
ï² Assurance Device will be required prior to Permit Issuance (Bond or Assignment of Funds);
ï² Permit Fee due at time of permit submittal.
Grading / Paving / Drainage Submittal Requirements, Type II:
ï² Complete Application;
ï² Construction Plans including import/export quantities;
 2 full size plan sets 22†x 34â€
 PDF file of the complete plan set
ï² Drainage Analysis including calculations and downstream analysis (2 sets) and (PDF file); refer to Stormwater Drainage
Requirements;
ï² Geotechnical Report (2 sets) and (PDF file);
ï² SEPA is required if 500 or more cubic yards of cut/fill is proposed (not required if included with a Land Use Permit);
ï² Grading cut / fill quantity: _______________________________;20,000 cu.yds.
ï² Construction Calculation Worksheet;
ï² NPDES Permit (if required); See Storm Water Drainage Report, New or Redevelopment Flowcharts;
ï² Permit fee due at time of permit submittal.
Right of Way Submittal Requirements, Type III:
ï² Complete Application;
ï² Construction Plans;
ï² Traffic Control Plan;
ï² Road Closure Request;
ï² Temporary Erosion & Sediment Control (TESC) Plan;
ï² Certificate of Insurance with the City of Arlington named as Additional Insured;
ï² Assurance Device will be required prior to Permit Issuance (Bond or Assignment of Funds);
ï² Engineers Estimated Cost of Construction; $______________________________________;
ï² Permit fee due at time of permit issuance.
Page 2 of 2
NWH ARLINGTON LLC
PARCEL #: 31051400200700
DRAINAGE
REPORT
September 16, 2013
DRAINAGE REPORT
HALE MILLIGAN
& ASSOCIATES LLC
A State of Washington Certified Women’s Business Enterprise (WBE)
A Federal Small Business Administration Certified Women Owned Small Business (WOSB)
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Minimum Requirement #1 Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans ............................................................... 5
Minimum Requirement #2 Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention ................................................ 5
The 12 BMP Elements ............................................................................................................................... 5
Element #1 – Mark Clearing Limits ....................................................................................................... 5
Element #2 – Establish Construction Access ........................................................................................ 5
Element #3 – Control Flow Rates .......................................................................................................... 6
Element #4 – Install Sediment Controls ................................................................................................ 6
Element #5 – Stabilize Soils................................................................................................................... 6
Element #6 – Protect Slopes ................................................................................................................. 6
Element #7 – Protect Drain Inlets ......................................................................................................... 6
Element #8 – Stabilize Channels and Outlets ....................................................................................... 6
Element #9 – Control Pollutants ........................................................................................................... 7
Element #10 – Control Dewatering ...................................................................................................... 7
Element #11 – Maintain BMPs .............................................................................................................. 7
Element #12 – Manage the Project ...................................................................................................... 7
Minimum Requirement #3 Source Control of Pollution ............................................................................. 10
Minimum Requirement #4 Preservation of Natural Drainage System and Outfalls .................................. 11
Existing Drainage ................................................................................................................................. 11
Soil ....................................................................................................................................................... 11
Downstream Analysis.......................................................................................................................... 12
Minimum Requirement #5 Onâ€Site Stormwater Management .................................................................. 13
Minimum Requirement #6 Runoff Treatment ............................................................................................ 13
Minimum Requirement #7 Flow Control .................................................................................................... 13
Temporary Drainage Calculations ....................................................................................................... 13
Minimum Requirement #8 – Wetlands Protection .................................................................................... 15
Minimum Requirement #9 – Basin Watershed Planning............................................................................ 15
Minimum Requirement #10 – Operations and Maintenance .................................................................... 15
APPENDIX A SOIL SURVEY
APPENDIX B DRAINAGE PLAN
APPENDIX C DRAINGE CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX D SWPP PLAN
APPENDIX E SWPP CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX G OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
Introduction
The project is generally located in the northwest quarter of Section 14, Township 31 North,
Range 5 East Willamette Meridian. More specifically the site is located at 20015 67th Ave NE.
The parcel number for the site is 31051400200700. The current use of the site is 242 Sawmills
and Planing Mills. The project will include grading the eastern thirteen acres of the site for
future construction of buildings and parking areas and removal of miscellaneous debris on the
remainder of the site. The size of the site is 54.00 acres however only a portion of the site will
be disturbed as part of this permit.
Page | 1
Page | 2
Page | 4
Minimum Requirement #1 Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans
Stormwater Site Plans are being prepared in accordance with Volume I of the Department of
Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington as part of this project. The
plans are prepared as part of the Grading Permit submittal for the City of Arlington.
Minimum Requirement #2 Construction Stormwater Pollution
Prevention
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been created for this project. This project does not
meet the requirements that warrant an NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit because it does
not discharge to waters of the state. All of the stormwater generated by the construction site
will be infiltrated on the site. The 12 BMP Elements have been addressed in this report and in
the SWPP plan.
The 12 BMP Elements
Element #1 – Mark Clearing Limits
To protect adjacent properties and to reduce the area of soil exposed to construction, the limits
of construction will be clearly marked before landâ€disturbing activities begin. Trees that are to
be preserved, as well as all sensitive areas and their buffers, shall be clearly delineated, both in
the field and on the plans. In general, natural vegetation and native topsoil shall be retained in
an undisturbed state to the maximum extent possible. The BMPs relevant to marking the
clearing limits that will be applied for this project include:
BMP C103: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence:
The clearing limits will be marked only by property boundary stakes. If entrances other
than the construction entrance are used and need to be limited, high visibility or
construction fencing will be used.
Element #2 – Establish Construction Access
Construction access or activities occurring on unpaved areas shall be minimized, yet where
necessary, access points shall be stabilized to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public
roads, and wheel washing, street sweeping, and street cleaning shall be employed to prevent
sediment from entering state waters. All wash wastewater shall be controlled on site. The
specific BMPs related to establishing construction access that will be used on this project
include:
BMP C105: Stabilize Construction Entrance
Page | 5
Element #3 – Control Flow Rates
Flow control will be achieved by infiltrating all stormwater on the site. There will be no runoff
leaving the site during storm events.
Element #4 – Install Sediment Controls
Stormwater runoff is not anticipated to leave the site. Sediment controls will be installed on
the site to protect the existing and proposed infiltration facilities. All stormwater runoff from
disturbed areas shall pass through an appropriate sediment removal BMP before leaving the
construction site or prior to being discharged to an infiltration facility. The specific BMPs to be
used for controlling sediment on this project include:
BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection
BMP C233: Silt Fence
Element #5 – Stabilize Soils
Exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized with the application of effective BMPs to
prevent erosion throughout the life of the project. The specific BMPs for soil stabilization that
shall be used on this project include:
BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding
BMP C121: Mulching
Element #6 – Protect Slopes
All cut and fill slopes will be designed, constructed, and protected in a manner than minimizes
erosion. The slopes on the site in the existing and proposed condition are minimal therefore
BMPs for slope protection are not necessary.
Element #7 – Protect Drain Inlets
All storm drain inlets and culverts made operable during construction shall be protected to
prevent unfiltered or untreated water from entering the drainage conveyance system.
However, the first priority is to keep all access roads clean of sediment and keep street wash
water separate from entering storm drains until treatment can be provided. Storm Drain Inlet
Protection (BMP C220) will be implemented for all drainage inlets and culverts that could
potentially be impacted by sedimentâ€laden runoff on and near the project site. The following
inlet protection measures will be applied on this project:
BMP C201: Grassâ€Lined Channels
BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Element #8 – Stabilize Channels and Outlets
The site will not produce runoff that will be conveyed in channels, or discharged to a stream or
some other natural drainage point.
Page | 6
Element #9 – Control Pollutants
All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur onsite shall be
handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. Good
housekeeping and preventative measures will be taken to ensure that the site will be kept
clean, wellâ€organized, and free of debris. If required, BMPs to be implemented to control
specific sources of pollutants are discussed below.
The facility does not require a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan under
the Federal regulations of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Element #10 – Control Dewatering
There will be no dewatering as part of this construction project.
Element #11 – Maintain BMPs
All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and
repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance
and repair shall be conducted in accordance with each particular BMPs specifications
(attached). Visual monitoring of the BMPs will be conducted at least once every calendar week
and within 24 hours of any stormwater or nonâ€stormwater discharge from the site. If the site
becomes inactive, and is temporarily stabilized, the inspection frequency will be reduced to
once every month.
All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after the
final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped
sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of BMPs
or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized.
Element #12 – Manage the Project
Erosion and sediment control BMPs for this project have been designed based on the following
principles:
 The site has been designed so that the project fits the existing topography,
soils, and drainage patterns.
 Erosion control is emphasized rather than sediment control.
 The project is being phased in order to minimize the extent and duration of
the area exposed.
 Runoff velocities are kept low due to the slope of the site. No runoff will
leave the site.
 Sediment will be retained on site.
 ESC measures will be thoroughly monitored throughout the duration of the
project.
 Most of the earthwork will be scheduled during the dry season however due
to the low erosive nature of the soils winter grading is not expected to create
an additional erosion problem.
Page | 7
In addition, project management will incorporate the key components listed below:
As this project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest, the project will be managed
according to the following key project components:
Phasing of Construction
 The construction project is being phased to the extent practicable in
order to prevent soil erosion, and, to the maximum extent possible, the
transport of sediment from the site during construction.
 Reâ€vegetation of exposed areas and maintenance of that vegetation shall
be an integral part of the clearing activities during each phase of
construction, per the Scheduling BMP (C 162).
Seasonal Work Limitations
 Since the site is expected to have 100 percent infiltration of surface water
runoff within the site in approved and installed erosion and sediment
control facilities. It is not necessary to limit the work to a seasonal
window.
Coordination with Utilities and Other Jurisdictions
 Care has been taken to coordinate with utilities, other construction
projects, and the local jurisdiction in preparing this SWPPP and
scheduling the construction work.
Inspection and Monitoring
 All BMPs shall be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to
assure continued performance of their intended function. Site
inspections shall be conducted by a person who is knowledgeable in the
principles and practices of erosion and sediment control. This person has
the necessary skills to:
ï‚· Assess the site conditions and construction activities that could impact
the quality of stormwater, and
ï‚· Assess the effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures used
to control the quality of stormwater discharges.
 A Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead shall be onâ€site or onâ€call
at all times.
 Whenever inspection and/or monitoring reveals that the BMPs identified
in this SWPPP are inadequate, due to the actual discharge of or potential
to discharge a significant amount of any pollutant, appropriate BMPs or
design changes shall be implemented as soon as possible.
Page | 8
Maintaining an Updated Construction SWPPP
 This SWPPP shall be retained onâ€site or within reasonable access to the
site.
 The SWPPP shall be modified whenever there is a change in the design,
construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has,
or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters
of the state.
 The SWPPP shall be modified if, during inspections or investigations
conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state
regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is ineffective in
eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater
discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall be modified as necessary to
include additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems
identified. Revisions to the SWPPP shall be completed within seven (7)
days following the inspection.
Page | 9
Minimum Requirement #3 Source Control of Pollution
All known, available and reasonable source control BMPs shall be applied to this project. BMPs
will be used to prevent stormwater from coming into contract with pollutants.
Owner will assign one individuals to be responsible for stormwater pollution control. Hold
regular meetings to review the overall operation of the BMPs. The owner will establish
responsibilities for inspections, operation and maintenance, and availability for emergency
situations.
Owner agrees to train all team members in the operation, maintenance and inspections of
BMPs, and reporting procedures.
Owner agrees to promptly contain and clean up solid and liquid pollutant leaks and spills
including oils, solvents, fuels, and dust from manufacturing operations on any exposed soil,
vegetation, or paved area.
Owner agrees to sweep paved material handling and storage areas regularly as needed, for the
collection and disposal of dust and debris that could contaminate stormwater. Owner agrees to
not hose down pollutants from any area to the ground, storm drain, conveyance ditch, or
receiving water unless necessary for dust control purposes to meet air quality regulations and
unless the pollutants are conveyed to a treatment system approved by the local jurisdiction.
Owner agrees to clean oils, debris, sludge, etc. from all BMP systems regularly, including catch
basins, settling/detention basins, oil/water separators, boomed areas, and conveyance
systems, to prevent the contamination of stormwater. If hazardous waste is ever encountered
on the site it will be handled in accordance with Chapter 173â€303 WAC.
Owner agrees to promptly repair or replace all substantially cracked or otherwise damaged
paved secondary containment, highâ€intensity parking and any other drainage areas, which are
subjected to pollutant material leaks or spills.
Owner agrees to promptly repair or replace all leaking connections, pipes, hoses, valves, etc.
which can contaminate stormwater.
Page | 10
Minimum Requirement #4 Preservation of Natural Drainage System and
Outfalls
The proposed grading project will not alter the existing drainage system or outfalls.
Existing Drainage
The existing 54.0 acre site has several existing buildings with associated parking, drive lanes and
paved entrances. All of the existing drainage infiltrates onsite. This project will preserve the
natural drainage system and outfalls by using infiltration for stormwater management.
Basin A
Basin A is the most eastern undeveloped portion of the site. This basin generally slopes to a
low point on the east side of the site. Basin A is vegetated with deciduous trees, brush and
grass. All stormwater runoff from this basin is infiltrated onâ€site and does not discharge to
waters of the state.
Basin B
Basin B is within the eastern undeveloped portion of the site. This basin generally slopes to a
low point near the middle of the site. Basin B is vegetated with deciduous trees, brush and
grass. All stormwater runoff from this basin is infiltrated onâ€site and does not discharge to
waters of the state.
Basin C
Basin C is the upper portion of the site between the undeveloped east side of the site and the
BNSF Railroad. This basin generally slopes to the North. Basin C is partially developed with
buildings, roads, parking areas, brush and some deciduous trees. All stormwater runoff from
this basin is infiltrated onâ€site and does not discharge to waters of the state.
Basin D
Basin D is the portion of the site between 67th Ave NE and the BNSF Railroad. This basin
generally slopes to the North. Basin D is mostly developed with buildings, roads, parking areas,
brush and some deciduous trees. All stormwater runoff from this basin is infiltrated onâ€site.
The stormwater runoff generated by the impervious surfaces is conveyed through a pipe and
catch basin network to underground infiltration systems and infiltration ponds. The runoff
from the site does not discharge to waters of the state.
Soil
The existing soils consist of Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam 0â€8 percent slopes per the National
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Snohomish County, see Appendix A.
Everett soils are classified in the USDA Soil Textural Classification as follows; the top layer of soil
from 0 to 6 inches is a dark brown gravelly sandy loam and has an infiltration rate of 2.0 – 6.0
inches per hour. The second layer of soil from 6 to 18 inches is classified as dark brown very
Page | 11
gravelly loamy sand and has an infiltration rate of 6.0 â€Â 20.0 inches per hour. The third layer of
soil from 6 to 18 inches is classified as dark brown very gravelly sand and has an infiltration rate
of 6.0 â€Â 20.0 inches per hour. The physical and chemical properties of the soil are listed in the
Soil Report in Appendix A.
Downstream Analysis
The existing site infiltrates onsite therefore a downstream analysis was not conducted for the
project.
Page | 12
Minimum Requirement #5 Onâ€Site Stormwater Management
Infiltration will be used on the proposed project site for flow control for both the temporary
and permanent solution. The existing soil onâ€site is very well drained and will not generate
much runoff prior to the placement of impervious surfaces.
Minimum Requirement #6 Runoff Treatment
No pollution generating impervious surfaces will be created as part of the grading permit
therefore runoff treatment is not required.
Minimum Requirement #7 Flow Control
All of the stormwater generated on the project site will be infiltrated onâ€site with no runoff.
The short term infiltration rate of the soil is estimated to be approximately 20 inches per hour
in Table 14 of the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington. The long term infiltration
rate for the site is estimated to be approximately 10 inches hour.
Temporary Drainage Calculations
The temporary drainage calculations for this site were performed using MGS Flood Version
4.12. All calculations and assumptions were based on the requirements outlined in the 2005
Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Per
Volume III Page 2â€2 MGS Flood software is approved by the Department of Ecology. The
calculations are included in Appendix E of this report. The temporary stormwater facility
calculations were conducted only for Basin A and Basin B. The impervious area in Basin C and D
will not be altered as part of this grading permit.
Basin A
Basin A will remain undeveloped as part of this permit however the site will be converted from
a sloped surface with trees, brush and grass to a flat grass area. The basin will slope to the
north with an open ditch conveyance system and sediment pond for stormwater runoff flow
control. The temporary stormwater facility will be sized to accommodate the 10â€year storm
event as this is a long duration project. According to the MGS Flood model this basin generates
very little runoff due to the highly porous nature of the soil and the lack of impervious area.
Basin B
Basin B will remain undeveloped as part of this permit however the site will be converted from
a sloped surface with trees, brush and grass to a flat grass area. The basin will slope to the
north with an open ditch conveyance system and sediment pond for stormwater runoff flow
Page | 13
control. The temporary stormwater facility will be sized to accommodate the 10â€year storm
event as this is a long duration project. According to the MGS Flood model this basin generates
very little runoff due to the highly porous nature of the soil and the lack of impervious area.
Basin C
The existing drainage system and impervious area will not be altered as part of this permit.
Basin D
The existing drainage system and impervious area will not be altered as part of this permit.
Page | 14
Minimum Requirement #8 – Wetlands Protection
This requirement does not apply because this project does not discharge stormwater
into a wetland.
Minimum Requirement #9 – Basin Watershed Planning
This site is not located in a Basin Watershed Protection Area.
Minimum Requirement #10 – Operations and Maintenance
An Operations and Maintenance Manual, consistent with the provisions of Volume V of
the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington is included in Appendix
G of this report.
Page | 15
APPENDIX A SOIL SURVEY
United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource
Department of Cooperative Soil Survey,
Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for
States Department of
Agriculture and other Snohomish County
Federal agencies, State
Natural agencies including the
Resources Agricultural Experiment Area, Washington
Conservation Stations, and local
Service participants
October 2, 2012
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They
highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about
the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many
different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,
community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,
conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,
and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance
the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties
that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information
is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on
various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying
with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.
Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/) and certain
conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact
your local USDA Service Center (http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?
agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://soils.usda.gov/contact/
state_offices/).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic
tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or
underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department
of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural
Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil
Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil
Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means
2
for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272
(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................7
Soil Map................................................................................................................8
Legend..................................................................................................................9
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................10
Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................10
Snohomish County Area, Washington............................................................12
7—Bellingham silty clay loam......................................................................12
17—Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes.............................13
34—Mukilteo muck......................................................................................13
39—Norma loam.........................................................................................14
51—Pits.......................................................................................................15
74—Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes......................................16
References............................................................................................................18
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas
in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and
their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations
affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of
the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and
the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is
the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the
surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the
surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other
living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas
(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share
common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,
soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically
consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is
related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.
Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of
landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous
areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the
landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,
during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable
degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the
landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by
an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify
predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to
identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of
soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have
similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique
combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of
the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes
the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and
landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of
resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is
needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and
experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-
landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific
locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of
measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These
measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to
bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of
sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from
one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret
the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics
and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different
uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils
in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are
modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet
local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,
production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop
yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from
field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such
variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long
periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil
scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have
a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a
high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,
roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
6
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil
map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
7
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
122° 8' 43''
122° 7' 35''
563600 563700 563800 563900 564000 564100 564200 564300 564400 564500
564600 564700 564800 564900
48° 10' 50''
48° 10' 50''
5336700
5336700
77th Ave
71st Ave
5336600 Stream
5336600
200th Pl
39
200th St
5336500
5336500
201st St
51
74th Ave
5336400
5336400
199th St 51
5336300 199th St
5336300
5336200 197th St
5336200
17
67th Ave
5336100
5336100
5336000
5336000
74
34 7
5335900 191st Pl
5335900
68th Dr
48° 10' 20''
48° 10' 19''
563600 563700 563800 563900 564000 564100 564200 564300 564400 564500
564600 564700 564800 564900
Map Scale: 1:6,680 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Meters
122° 8' 43'' 0 50 100 200 300
122° 7' 36''
± Feet
0 350 700 1,400 2,100
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI) Very Stony Spot Map Scale: 1:6,680 if printed on A size (8.5"
× 11") sheet.
Area of Interest (AOI)
Wet Spot
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped
at 1:24,000.
Soils
Other
Soil Map Units
Special Line Features Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Special Point Features
Gully
Blowout
Short Steep Slope Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping
can cause
Borrow Pit misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and
accuracy of soil line
Other placement. The maps do not show the small areas
of contrasting
Clay Spot soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Political Features
Closed Depression
Cities
Gravel Pit Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet
for accurate map
Water Features
measurements.
Gravelly Spot Streams and Canals
Landfill Transportation Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation
Service
Rails Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Lava Flow
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10N NAD83
Interstate Highways
Marsh or swamp
US Routes This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified
data as of
Mine or Quarry
the version date(s) listed below.
Major Roads
Miscellaneous Water
Local Roads Soil Survey Area: Snohomish County Area, Washington
Perennial Water
Survey Area Data: Version 7, Jun 29, 2012
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 7/24/2006
Sandy Spot
The orthophoto or other base map on which the
soil lines were
Severely Eroded Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the
background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result,
some minor shifting
Sinkhole
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Snohomish County Area, Washington (WA661)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
7 Bellingham silty clay loam 0.1 0.0%
17 Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent 131.1 86.1%
slopes
34 Mukilteo muck 0.3 0.2%
39 Norma loam 12.4 8.1%
51 Pits 6.1 4.0%
74 Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 2.4 1.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 152.3 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils
or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the
maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape,
however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability
of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend
beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic
class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic
classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas
for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes
other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally
are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified
by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the
contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with
some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially
where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations
to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness
or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments
on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If
intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to
define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each
description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties
and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons
that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,
degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such
differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the
detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly
indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The
pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all
areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or
anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical
or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and
relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-
Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that
could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of
the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be
made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up
of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material
and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
Snohomish County Area, Washington
7—Bellingham silty clay loam
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 210 days
Map Unit Composition
Bellingham and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 11 percent
Description of Bellingham
Setting
Landform: Depressions, drainageways
Parent material: Alluvium over lacustrine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Very high (about 12.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 5w
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Silty clay loam
9 to 60 inches: Silty clay
Minor Components
Kitsap
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
Norma
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
Bellingham
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
17—Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 45 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 180 days
Map Unit Composition
Everett and similar soils: 100 percent
Description of Everett
Setting
Landform: Terraces, plains
Parent material: Glacial outwash
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to strongly contrasting textural
stratification
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s
Typical profile
0 to 6 inches: Gravelly ashy sandy loam
6 to 18 inches: Very gravelly ashy sandy loam
18 to 60 inches: Extremely gravelly sand
34—Mukilteo muck
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 70 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 250 days
Map Unit Composition
Mukilteo and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 6 percent
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Mukilteo
Setting
Landform: Depressions
Parent material: Herbaceous organic material
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Very high (about 25.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2w
Typical profile
0 to 4 inches: Muck
4 to 35 inches: Mucky peat
35 to 54 inches: Mucky peat
54 to 60 inches: Fine sandy loam
Minor Components
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Orcas, peat
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
39—Norma loam
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 200 days
Map Unit Composition
Norma and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Norma
Setting
Landform: Depressions, drainageways
Parent material: Alluvium
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 9.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 3w
Typical profile
0 to 10 inches: Ashy loam
10 to 28 inches: Sandy loam
28 to 60 inches: Sandy loam
Minor Components
Bellingham
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Custer
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Alderwood
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
51—Pits
Map Unit Composition
Pits: 100 percent
Description of Pits
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 8
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
74—Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 45 to 70 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 degrees F
Frost-free period: 140 to 200 days
Map Unit Composition
Tokul and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 12 percent
Description of Tokul
Setting
Landform: Till plains
Parent material: Volcanic ash over basal till
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to densic material
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Low (about 5.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4e
Typical profile
0 to 4 inches: Gravelly medial loam
4 to 22 inches: Gravelly medial loam
22 to 31 inches: Gravelly medial fine sandy loam
31 to 60 inches: Gravelly sandy loam
Minor Components
Mckenna
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
Norma
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
16
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.
Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and
testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils
in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the
Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
http://soils.usda.gov/
18
Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210.
19
APPENDIX B DRAINAGE PLAN
APPENDIX C DRAINGE CALCULATIONS
—————————————————————————————————
MGS FLOOD
PROJECT REPORT
Program Version: MGSFlood 4.13
Program License Number: 201110003
Run Date: 09/13/2013 10:46 AM
—————————————————————————————————
Input File Name: NWH-Grading.fld
Project Name: NWH - Grading
Analysis Title: Basin A & Basin B
Comments:
———————————————— PRECIPITATION INPUT ————————————————
Computational Time Step (Minutes): 60
Extended Precipitation Timeseries Selected
Climatic Region Number: 14
Full Period of Record Available used for Routing
Precipitation Station : 96004405 Puget East 44 in_5min 10/01/1939-10/01/2097
Evaporation Station : 961044 Puget East 44 in MAP
Evaporation Scale Factor : 0.750
HSPF Parameter Region Number: 1
HSPF Parameter Region Name : USGS Default
********** Default HSPF Parameters Used (Not Modified by User) ***************
********************** WATERSHED DEFINITION ***********************
----------------------SCENARIO: PREDEVELOPED
Number of Subbasins: 1
---------- Subbasin : Subbasin 1 ----------
-------Area(Acres) --------
Till Forest 0.000
Till Pasture 0.000
Till Grass 0.000
Outwash Forest 13.900
Outwash Pasture 0.000
Outwash Grass 0.000
Wetland 0.000
Green Roof 0.000
User 0.000
Impervious 0.000
----------------------------------------------
Subbasin Total 13.900
----------------------SCENARIO: POSTDEVELOPED
Number of Subbasins: 1
---------- Subbasin : Subbasin 1 ----------
-------Area(Acres) --------
Till Forest 0.000
Till Pasture 0.000
Till Grass 0.000
Outwash Forest 0.000
Outwash Pasture 0.000
Outwash Grass 13.900
Wetland 0.000
Green Roof 0.000
User 0.000
Impervious 0.000
----------------------------------------------
Subbasin Total 13.900
************************* LINK DATA *******************************
----------------------SCENARIO: PREDEVELOPED
Number of Links: 0
************************* LINK DATA *******************************
----------------------SCENARIO: POSTDEVELOPED
Number of Links: 0
**********************FLOOD FREQUENCY AND DURATION STATISTICS*******************
----------------------SCENARIO: PREDEVELOPED
Number of Subbasins: 1
Number of Links: 0
----------------------SCENARIO: POSTDEVELOPED
Number of Subbasins: 1
Number of Links: 0
***********Water Quality Facility Data *************
----------------------SCENARIO: PREDEVELOPED
Number of Links: 0
----------------------SCENARIO: POSTDEVELOPED
Number of Links: 0
***********Compliance Point Results *************
Scenario Predeveloped Compliance Subbasin: Subbasin 1
Scenario Postdeveloped Compliance Subbasin: Subbasin 1
*** Point of Compliance Flow Frequency Data ***
Recurrence Interval Computed Using Gringorten Plotting Position
Predevelopment Runoff Postdevelopment Runoff
Tr (Years) Discharge (cfs) Tr (Years) Discharge (cfs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-Year 2.762E-03 2-Year 0.089
5-Year 2.800E-03 5-Year 0.334
10-Year 7.494E-03 10-Year 0.628
25-Year 0.029 25-Year 1.052
50-Year 0.068 50-Year 1.490
100-Year 0.077 100-Year 2.697
200-Year 0.147 200-Year 3.698
** Record too Short to Compute Peak Discharge for These Recurrence Intervals
**** Flow Duration Performance According to Dept. of Ecology Criteria ****
Excursion at Predeveloped ½Q2 (Must be Less Than 0%): 216.0% FAIL
Maximum Excursion from ½Q2 to Q2 (Must be Less Than 0%): 1812.7% FAIL
Maximum Excursion from Q2 to Q50 (Must be less than 10%): 99999.0% FAIL
Percent Excursion from Q2 to Q50 (Must be less than 50%): 100.0% FAIL
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POND FAILS ONE OR MORE DURATION DESIGN CRITERIA: FAIL
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX D SWPP PLAN
APPENDIX E SWPP CALCULATIONS
HALE MILLIGAN
SEDIMENT POND
& ASSOCIATES LLC
SIZING CALCULATIONS CIVILÂ ENGINEERINGÂ &Â PLANNING
Project Name: NWH Project No.: 2013026
Description: Sediment Pond Basin A & B Date: 9/13/2013
Calc. By: KSH
Storm Event 2 YR
Pond
Flow (Q) = 0.62 CFS
Surface Area (SA) = 1292 S.F.
Control Structure
Riser Height (h) = 3 FT.
Orifice Size = 1.4 IN.
Figure 4.27 – Riser Inflow Curves
4-108 Volume II – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention February 2005
APPENDIX G OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
OPERTATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CONTACT:
CONTACT: Brent Nicholson
ADDRESS: 3316 Furhman Ave E.
Seattle, WA 98102
PHONE: 206.979.9681
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
1. If ponding lasts more than 24 hours in the infiltration facilities after a storm event the
facility must be maintained as outlined in the Operations and Maintenance guidelines
attached.
No. 2 – Infiltration
Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Results Expected When
Component Needed Maintenance Is
Performed
General Trash & Debris See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
(No. 1).
Poisonous/Noxious See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
Vegetation (No. 1).
Contaminants and See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
Pollution (No. 1).
Rodent Holes See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
(No. 1)
Storage Area Sediment Water ponding in infiltration pond after Sediment is removed
rainfall ceases and appropriate time and/or facility is cleaned
allowed for infiltration. so that infiltration system
works according to
(A percolation test pit or test of facility design.
indicates facility is only working at 90% of
its designed capabilities. If two inches or
more sediment is present, remove).
Filter Bags (if Filled with Sediment and debris fill bag more than 1/2 Filter bag is replaced or
applicable) Sediment and full. system is redesigned.
Debris
Rock Filters Sediment and By visual inspection, little or no water flows Gravel in rock filter is
Debris through filter during heavy rain storms. replaced.
Side Slopes of Erosion See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
Pond (No. 1).
Emergency Tree Growth See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
Overflow Spillway (No. 1).
and Berms over 4
feet in height.
Piping See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
(No. 1).
Emergency Rock Missing See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
Overflow Spillway (No. 1).
Erosion See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds"
(No. 1).
Pre-settling Facility or sump 6" or designed sediment trap depth of Sediment is removed.
Ponds and Vaults filled with Sediment sediment.
and/or debris
February 2005 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs 4-33
No. 4 – Control Structure/Flow Restrictor
Maintenance Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected
Component When Maintenance
is Performed
General Trash and Debris Material exceeds 25% of sump depth or 1 Control structure
(Includes Sediment) foot below orifice plate. orifice is not blocked.
All trash and debris
removed.
Structural Damage Structure is not securely attached to Structure securely
manhole wall. attached to wall and
outlet pipe.
Structure is not in upright position (allow up Structure in correct
to 10% from plumb). position.
Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight Connections to outlet
and show signs of rust. pipe are water tight;
structure repaired or
replaced and works
as designed.
Any holes--other than designed holes--in the Structure has no
structure. holes other than
designed holes.
Cleanout Gate Damaged or Missing Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Gate is watertight
and works as
designed.
Gate cannot be moved up and down by one Gate moves up and
maintenance person. down easily and is
watertight.
Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or Chain is in place and
damaged. works as designed.
Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Gate is repaired or
replaced to meet
design standards.
Orifice Plate Damaged or Missing Control device is not working properly due to Plate is in place and
missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. works as designed.
Obstructions Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all
blocking the plate. obstructions and
works as designed.
Overflow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking (or having the Pipe is free of all
potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. obstructions and
works as designed.
Manhole See “Closed See “Closed Detention Systems†(No. 3). See “Closed
Detention Systems†Detention Systemsâ€
(No. 3). (No. 3).
Catch Basin See “Catch Basins†See “Catch Basins†(No. 5). See “Catch Basinsâ€
(No. 5). (No. 5).
February 2005 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs 4-35
No. 5 – Catch Basins
Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is
performed
General Trash & Trash or debris which is located immediately No Trash or debris located
Debris in front of the catch basin opening or is immediately in front of
blocking inletting capacity of the basin by catch basin or on grate
more than 10%. opening.
Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 60 No trash or debris in the
percent of the sump depth as measured from catch basin.
the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest
pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case
less than a minimum of six inches clearance
from the debris surface to the invert of the
lowest pipe.
Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe Inlet and outlet pipes free
blocking more than 1/3 of its height. of trash or debris.
Dead animals or vegetation that could No dead animals or
generate odors that could cause complaints vegetation present within
or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). the catch basin.
Sediment Sediment (in the basin) that exceeds 60 No sediment in the catch
percent of the sump depth as measured from basin
the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest
pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case
less than a minimum of 6 inches clearance
from the sediment surface to the invert of the
lowest pipe.
Structure Top slab has holes larger than 2 square Top slab is free of holes
Damage to inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch and cracks.
Frame and/or
Top Slab (Intent is to make sure no material is running
into basin).
Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on
separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame the riser rings or top slab
from the top slab. Frame not securely and firmly attached.
attached
Fractures or Maintenance person judges that structure is Basin replaced or repaired
Cracks in unsound. to design standards.
Basin Walls/
Bottom
Grout fillet has separated or cracked wider Pipe is regrouted and
than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the secure at basin wall.
joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of
soil particles entering catch basin through
cracks.
Settlement/ If failure of basin has created a safety, Basin replaced or repaired
Misalignment function, or design problem. to design standards.
Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking more No vegetation blocking
than 10% of the basin opening. opening to basin.
Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints No vegetation or root
that is more than six inches tall and less than growth present.
six inches apart.
4-36 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs February 2005
No. 5 – Catch Basins
Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is
performed
Contamination See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). No pollution present.
and Pollution
Catch Basin Cover Not in Cover is missing or only partially in place. Catch basin cover is
Cover Place Any open catch basin requires maintenance. closed
Locking Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with
Mechanism maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts proper tools.
Not Working into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread.
Cover Difficult One maintenance person cannot remove lid Cover can be removed by
to Remove after applying normal lifting pressure. one maintenance person.
(Intent is keep cover from sealing off access
to maintenance.)
Ladder Ladder Rungs Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, not Ladder meets design
Unsafe securely attached to basin wall, standards and allows
misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. maintenance person safe
access.
Metal Grates Grate opening Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Grate opening meets
(If Applicable) Unsafe design standards.
Trash and Trash and debris that is blocking more than Grate free of trash and
Debris 20% of grate surface inletting capacity. debris.
Damaged or Grate missing or broken member(s) of the Grate is in place and
Missing. grate. meets design standards.
No. 6 – Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Racks)
Maintenance Defect Condition When Maintenance is Results Expected When
Components Needed Maintenance is Performed
General Trash and Trash or debris that is plugging more Barrier cleared to design flow
Debris than 20% of the openings in the barrier. capacity.
Metal Damaged/ Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 Bars in place with no bends more
Missing inches. than 3/4 inch.
Bars.
Bars are missing or entire barrier Bars in place according to design.
missing.
Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% Barrier replaced or repaired to
deterioration to any part of barrier. design standards.
Inlet/Outlet Debris barrier missing or not attached to Barrier firmly attached to pipe
Pipe pipe
February 2005 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs 4-37
No. 7 – Energy Dissipaters
Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Results Expected When
Components Needed Maintenance is Performed
External:
Rock Pad Missing or Only one layer of rock exists above Rock pad replaced to design
Moved Rock native soil in area five square feet or standards.
larger, or any exposure of native soil.
Erosion Soil erosion in or adjacent to rock pad. Rock pad replaced to design
standards.
Dispersion Trench Pipe Accumulated sediment that exceeds Pipe cleaned/flushed so that it
Plugged with 20% of the design depth. matches design.
Sediment
Not Visual evidence of water discharging at Trench redesigned or rebuilt to
Discharging concentrated points along trench (normal standards.
Water condition is a “sheet flow†of water along
Properly trench). Intent is to prevent erosion
damage.
Perforations Over 1/2 of perforations in pipe are Perforated pipe cleaned or
Plugged. plugged with debris and sediment. replaced.
Water Flows Maintenance person observes or Facility rebuilt or redesigned to
Out Top of receives credible report of water flowing standards.
“Distributor†out during any storm less than the design
Catch Basin. storm or its causing or appears likely to
cause damage.
Receiving Water in receiving area is causing or has No danger of landslides.
Area Over- potential of causing landslide problems.
Saturated
Internal:
Manhole/Chamber Worn or Structure dissipating flow deteriorates to Structure replaced to design
Damaged 1/2 of original size or any concentrated standards.
Post, worn spot exceeding one square foot
Baffles, Side which would make structure unsound.
of Chamber
Other See “Catch Basins†(No. 5). See “Catch Basins†(No. 5).
Defects
4-38 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs February 2005
No. 10 – Filter Strips
Maintenance Defect or Condition When Recommended Maintenance to Correct
Component Problem Maintenance is Needed Problem
General Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 2 Remove sediment deposits, re-level so
Accumulation on inches. slope is even and flows pass evenly through
Grass strip.
Vegetation When the grass becomes Mow grass, control nuisance vegetation,
excessively tall (greater such that flow not impeded. Grass should be
than 10-inches); when mowed to a height between 3-4 inches.
nuisance weeds and other
vegetation starts to take
over.
Trash and Debris Trash and debris Remove trash and Debris from filter.
Accumulation accumulated on the filter
strip.
Erosion/Scouring Eroded or scoured areas For ruts or bare areas less than 12 inches
due to flow channelization, wide, repair the damaged area by filling with
or higher flows. crushed gravel. The grass will creep in over
the rock in time. If bare areas are large,
generally greater than 12 inches wide, the
filter strip should be re-graded and re-
seeded. For smaller bare areas, overseed
when bare spots are evident.
Flow spreader Flow spreader uneven or Level the spreader and clean so that flows
clogged so that flows are are spread evenly over entire filter width.
not uniformly distributed
through entire filter width.
February 2005 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs 4-41
NWH BINDING SITE PLAN
20015 67TH AVE NE
3/3/2015
BINDING SITE PLAN
DRAINAGE REPORT
Applicant
NWH Arlington, LLC
3316 Furhman Ave E.
Seattle, WA 98102
Engineer
Hale Milligan & Associates LLC
307 N Olympic Ave Suite 209
Arlington, WA 98223
Phone: 360.474.4624
Fax: 425.968.1245
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Minimum Requirement #1 Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans ............................................................... 5
Minimum Requirement #2 Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention ................................................ 5
The 12 BMP Elements ............................................................................................................................... 5
Element #1 – Mark Clearing Limits ....................................................................................................... 5
Element #2 – Establish Construction Access ........................................................................................ 5
Element #3 – Control Flow Rates .......................................................................................................... 6
Element #4 – Install Sediment Controls ................................................................................................ 6
Element #5 – Stabilize Soils................................................................................................................... 6
Element #6 – Protect Slopes ................................................................................................................. 6
Element #7 – Protect Drain Inlets ......................................................................................................... 6
Element #8 – Stabilize Channels and Outlets ....................................................................................... 7
Element #9 – Control Pollutants ........................................................................................................... 7
Element #10 – Control Dewatering ...................................................................................................... 7
Element #11 – Maintain BMPs.............................................................................................................. 7
Element #12 – Manage the Project ...................................................................................................... 7
Minimum Requirement #3 Source Control of Pollution ............................................................................. 10
Minimum Requirement #4 Preservation of Natural Drainage System and Outfalls .................................. 11
Existing Drainage ................................................................................................................................. 11
Soil ....................................................................................................................................................... 17
Downstream Analysis.......................................................................................................................... 17
Minimum Requirement #5 On-Site Stormwater Management .................................................................. 17
Minimum Requirement #6 Runoff Treatment ............................................................................................ 17
Minimum Requirement #7 Flow Control .................................................................................................... 17
Minimum Requirement #8 – Wetlands Protection .................................................................................... 18
Minimum Requirement #9 – Basin Watershed Planning............................................................................ 18
Minimum Requirement #10 – Operations and Maintenance .................................................................... 18
APPENDIX A SOIL SURVEY
APPENDIX B SITE PLAN
APPENDIX C DRAINAGE PLAN
APPENDIX D TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX E SWPP PLAN
APPENDIX F OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
Introduction
The project is generally located in the northwest quarter of Section 14, Township 31 North,
Range 5 East Willamette Meridian. More specifically the site is located at 20015 67th Ave NE,
just south of downtown Arlington. The parcel number for the site is 31051400200700.
Currently the site consists of several commercial buildings with a single railroad line running
through the middle of the property, splitting it into east and west portions. The proposed
project comprises of demolition, clearing/grading, and sub-dividing the 54 acre site into 11
commercial lots with associated utilities for future development.
Drainage for the lots are to continue along their established and natural drainage paths, which
consists of on-site infiltration which is provided through existing vegetation and three
infiltration ponds. All existing drainage facilities are remain on-site until future development
occurs with the exception of the sediment/debris trap, which will be replaced by a sediment
pond located on Lot 7. Once future development occurs permanent drainage facilities will be
installed.
The main entrance to the site is to remain and sits along 67th Ave NE near the southwest corner
of the site. The eastern lots (6-10) will be provided access by two 30-foot wide access
easements that are along the southern boundary of Lots 5-6, and 9 and the eastern boundaries
of Lots 6-7. A 30-foot wide access easement is to be placed along the northern boundary of Lot
3 and the southwest boundary of Lot 1 for the benefit of Lot 1 & 2. Lot 11 is to obtain access
from the west side of 74th Ave NE. The breakdown of each lot can be observed in Appendix B of
this report.
Utilities for the western lots are to be provided by stub outs from the existing water and sewer
mains located in the R/W of 67th Avenue NE. Utilities for the eastern lots (6-10) are to be
provided through the existing water main and a new sewer main that is to extend from parcel
31051400202300 to the northern boundary of Lot 10 with stub outs extending to each lot.
Utilities for Lot 11 are to be provided by stub outs from the existing water and sewer mains
located in the R/W of 74th Avenue NE. Refer to Appendix B for all water and sewer service.
Page | 1
Page | 2
Page | 4
Minimum Requirement #1 Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans
Stormwater Site Plans are being prepared in accordance with Volume I of the Department of
Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington as part of this project. The
plans are prepared as part of the Binding Site Plan (BSP) submittal for the City of Arlington.
Minimum Requirement #2 Construction Stormwater Pollution
Prevention
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been created for this project. This project does not
meet the requirements that warrant an NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit because it does
not discharge to waters of the state. All of the stormwater generated by the construction site
will infiltrated on the site. The 12 BMP Elements have been addressed in this report and in the
SWPP plan.
The 12 BMP Elements
Element #1 – Mark Clearing Limits
To protect adjacent properties and to reduce the area of soil exposed to construction, the limits
of construction will be clearly marked before land-disturbing activities begin. Trees that are to
be preserved, as well as all sensitive areas and their buffers, shall be clearly delineated, both in
the field and on the plans. In general, natural vegetation and native topsoil shall be retained in
an undisturbed state to the maximum extent possible. The BMPs relevant to marking the
clearing limits that will be applied for this project include:
BMP C103: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence:
The clearing limits will be marked only by property boundary stakes. If entrances other
than the construction entrance are used and need to be limited, high visibility or
construction fencing will be used.
Element #2 – Establish Construction Access
Construction access or activities occurring on unpaved areas shall be minimized, yet where
necessary, access points shall be stabilized to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public
roads, and wheel washing, street sweeping, and street cleaning shall be employed to prevent
sediment from entering state waters. All wash wastewater shall be controlled on site. The
specific BMPs related to establishing construction access that will be used on this project
include:
BMP C105: Stabilize Construction Entrance
Page | 5
Element #3 – Control Flow Rates
Flow control will be achieved by infiltrating all stormwater on the site. There will be no runoff
leaving the site during storm events.
Element #4 – Install Sediment Controls
Stormwater runoff is not anticipated to leave the site. Sediment controls will be installed on
the site to protect the existing and proposed infiltration facilities. All stormwater runoff from
disturbed areas shall pass through an appropriate sediment removal BMP before leaving the
construction site or prior to being discharged to an infiltration facility. The specific BMPs to be
used for controlling sediment on this project include:
BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection
BMP C233: Silt Fence
BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond
Element #5 – Stabilize Soils
Exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized with the application of effective BMPs to
prevent erosion throughout the life of the project. The specific BMPs for soil stabilization that
shall be used on this project include:
BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding
BMP C121: Mulching
Element #6 – Protect Slopes
All cut and fill slopes will be designed, constructed, and protected in a manner than minimizes
erosion. The slopes on the site in the existing and proposed condition are minimal therefore
BMPs for slope protection are not necessary.
Element #7 – Protect Drain Inlets
All storm drain inlets and culverts made operable during construction shall be protected to
prevent unfiltered or untreated water from entering the drainage conveyance system.
However, the first priority is to keep all access roads clean of sediment and keep street wash
water separate from entering storm drains until treatment can be provided. Storm Drain Inlet
Protection (BMP C220) will be implemented for all drainage inlets and culverts that could
potentially be impacted by sediment-laden runoff on and near the project site. The following
inlet protection measures will be applied on this project:
BMP C201: Grass-Lined Channels
BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Page | 6
Element #8 – Stabilize Channels and Outlets
The site will not produce runoff that will be conveyed in channels, or discharged to a stream or
some other natural drainage point.
Element #9 – Control Pollutants
All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur onsite shall be
handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. Good
housekeeping and preventative measures will be taken to ensure that the site will be kept
clean, well-organized, and free of debris. If required, BMPs to be implemented to control
specific sources of pollutants are discussed below.
The facility does not require a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan under
the Federal regulations of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Element #10 – Control Dewatering
There will be no dewatering as part of this construction project.
Element #11 – Maintain BMPs
All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and
repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance
and repair shall be conducted in accordance with each particular BMPs specifications
(attached). Visual monitoring of the BMPs will be conducted at least once every calendar week
and within 24 hours of any stormwater or non-stormwater discharge from the site. If the site
becomes inactive, and is temporarily stabilized, the inspection frequency will be reduced to
once every month.
All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after the
final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped
sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of BMPs
or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized.
Element #12 – Manage the Project
Erosion and sediment control BMPs for this project have been designed based on the following
principles:
 The site has been designed so that the project fits the existing topography,
soils, and drainage patterns.
 Erosion control is emphasized rather than sediment control.
 The project is being phased in order to minimize the extent and duration of
the area exposed.
 Runoff velocities are kept low due to the slope of the site. No runoff will
leave the site.
 Sediment will be retained on site.
 ESC measures will be thoroughly monitored throughout the duration of the
project.
Page | 7
 Most of the earthwork will be scheduled during the dry season however due
to the low erosive nature of the soils winter grading is not expected to create
an additional erosion problem.
In addition, project management will incorporate the key components listed below:
As this project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest, the project will be managed
according to the following key project components:
Phasing of Construction
 The construction project is being phased to the extent practicable in
order to prevent soil erosion, and, to the maximum extent possible, the
transport of sediment from the site during construction.
 Re-vegetation of exposed areas and maintenance of that vegetation shall
be an integral part of the clearing activities during each phase of
construction, per the Scheduling BMP (C 162).
Seasonal Work Limitations
 Since the site is expected to have 100 percent infiltration of surface water
runoff on- site, in addition to approved and installed erosion and
sediment control facilities it is not necessary to limit the work to a
seasonal window.
Coordination with Utilities and Other Jurisdictions
 Care has been taken to coordinate with utilities, other construction
projects, and the local jurisdiction in preparing this SWPPP and
scheduling the construction work.
Inspection and Monitoring
 All BMPs shall be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to
assure continued performance of their intended function. Site
inspections shall be conducted by a person who is knowledgeable in the
principles and practices of erosion and sediment control. This person has
the necessary skills to:
• Assess the site conditions and construction activities that could impact
the quality of stormwater, and
• Assess the effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures used
to control the quality of stormwater discharges.
 A Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead shall be on-site or on-call
at all times.
 Whenever inspection and/or monitoring reveals that the BMPs identified
in this SWPPP are inadequate, due to the actual discharge of or potential
Page | 8
to discharge a significant amount of any pollutant, appropriate BMPs or
design changes shall be implemented as soon as possible.
Maintaining an Updated Construction SWPPP
 This SWPPP shall be retained on-site or within reasonable access to the
site.
 The SWPPP shall be modified whenever there is a change in the design,
construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has,
or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters
of the state.
 The SWPPP shall be modified if, during inspections or investigations
conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state
regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is ineffective in
eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater
discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall be modified as necessary to
include additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems
identified. Revisions to the SWPPP shall be completed within seven (7)
days following the inspection.
Page | 9
Minimum Requirement #3 Source Control of Pollution
All known, available and reasonable source control BMPs shall be applied to this project. BMPs
will be used to prevent stormwater from coming into contract with pollutants.
Owner will assign one individuals to be responsible for stormwater pollution control. Hold
regular meetings to review the overall operation of the BMPs. The owner will establish
responsibilities for inspections, operation and maintenance, and availability for emergency
situations.
Owner agrees to train all team members in the operation, maintenance and inspections of
BMPs, and reporting procedures.
Owner agrees to promptly contain and clean up solid and liquid pollutant leaks and spills
including oils, solvents, fuels, and dust from manufacturing operations on any exposed soil,
vegetation, or paved area.
Owner agrees to sweep paved material handling and storage areas regularly as needed, for the
collection and disposal of dust and debris that could contaminate stormwater. Owner agrees to
not hose down pollutants from any area to the ground, storm drain, conveyance ditch, or
receiving water unless necessary for dust control purposes to meet air quality regulations and
unless the pollutants are conveyed to a treatment system approved by the local jurisdiction.
Owner agrees to clean oils, debris, sludge, etc. from all BMP systems regularly, including catch
basins, settling/detention basins, oil/water separators, boomed areas, and conveyance
systems, to prevent the contamination of stormwater. If hazardous waste is ever encountered
on the site it will be handled in accordance with Chapter 173-303 WAC.
Owner agrees to promptly repair or replace all substantially cracked or otherwise damaged
paved secondary containment, high-intensity parking and any other drainage areas, which are
subjected to pollutant material leaks or spills.
Owner agrees to promptly repair or replace all leaking connections, pipes, hoses, valves, etc.
which can contaminate stormwater.
Page | 10
Minimum Requirement #4 Preservation of Natural Drainage System and
Outfalls
The proposed project will not alter the existing drainage system or outfalls.
Existing Drainage
The existing 54.0 acre site has several existing buildings with associated parking, drive lanes and
paved entrances. During site visits (Nov. 2014) and drainage inspections of the existing ponds
no outlet structures were found, nor was there any evidence of downstream catch basins,
manholes, piping, etc. to indicate that the runoff leaves the site. Based on this information it
was determined that all ponds infiltrate on-site. Additionally, it should be noted that there
have been no known flooding events on-site, indicating that the existing drainage system is
functional. Note that due to the age of the site and vacancy duration there may be
maintenance/repair issues that may arise after significant precipitation.
Lot 1
Consists of a single building with surrounding asphalt areas. Roof runoff from the building is
collected and discharged into an infiltration pond located along its eastern boundary. The
paved areas are graded so that the runoff sheet flows around the building and discharges into
the infiltration pond, refer to Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Infiltration Pond NE Edge of Lot 1 (Looking South)
Page | 11
Lot 2
Consists of a single building with surrounding asphalt areas. The northwest roof runoff from the
building is collected and discharged directly into the infiltration pond. The remaining roof runoff
is directed onto the pavement combining with the pavement runoff, which sheet flows into a
grate drain and directed into a nearby catch basin. From here the drainage is ultimately
directed into the infiltration pond locate along the east boundary of Lot 1. The remaining
pavement runoff sheet flows northwest into Lots 3 & 4 and is collected by catch basins that
direct the runoff into the same infiltration pond.
Figure 2-3: Lot 2 Roof Gutter and Grate Runoff Collection
Lot 3
Consists of two buildings with surrounding asphalt areas. Roof runoff from the buildings are
directed onto the pavement combining with pavement runoff. The combined runoff sheet flows
northwest into two catch basins and is directed east, eventually discharging into the infiltration
pond located along the eastern boundary of Lot 1.
Lot 4
Consists entirely of asphalt, which sheet flows northwest towards a raised asphalt edge that
discharges into an existing catch basin that flows northeast into Lot 3. As noted previously that
the drainage from Lot 3 discharges into the infiltration pond located along the eastern
boundary of Lot 1.
Page | 12
Lot 5
Consists of a single building with surrounding asphalt areas. Roof runoff from the building is
directed onto the pavement combining with the pavement runoff. The combined runoff sheet
flows northwest towards a raised asphalt edge located along the western boundary of the site.
The raised edged then directs the runoff towards the storm water conveyance system on Lot 4,
which ultimately directs the runoff into the infiltration pond located along the eastern
boundary of Lot 1.
Lot 6
Consists of a single building with surrounding asphalt areas. Roof runoff from the building is
directed onto the pavement and combines with the pavement runoff. Due to the building
sitting on a ridge the combined runoff is directed into two directions, east and west. The
eastern runoff sheet flows across the pavement and discharges into an open sediment/debris
vault. From here runoff is then directed via piping into an infiltration pond located along the
eastern boundary of Lot 8. Refer to Figures 4-5 for images of the open sediment/debris vault.
The combined runoff from the west sheet flows westward into the drainage ditch along the
east side of the railroad tracks. From here the drainage flows north until reaching the
northwest corner of Lot 7 where it then turns east and flows into the infiltration trench located
along the eastern boundary of Lot 8. Figures 6-7 show the drainage ditch along the west side of
Lots 6-7.
Figure 4: Open Sediment/Debris Vault (Looking Northwest)
Page | 13
Figure 5: Open Sediment/Debris Pond Baffles (Looking North)
Looking Looking
North South
Figure 6-7: Drainage Ditch Along East Side of Lots 6-7.
Page | 14
Lot 7
Consists mostly of asphalt and sheet flows to the northwest into an eastern drainage ditch
along the railroad combining with the runoff from Lot 6 and ultimately discharges into the
infiltration pond located along the eastern boundary of Lot 8.
Figure 8: Infiltration Pond along Lot 8 (Looking North)
Lot 8
Consists of a mixture of gravel, asphalt, and vegetative areas. The vegetative areas were
determined to fully infiltrate into the sandy/gravelly soils. Due to the topography of Lot 8 the
remaining runoff sheet flows radially to the north, south, and east into the drainage systems
located around its boundaries and ultimately discharges into the infiltration pond to the east.
Lot 9
Consists of a mixture of gravel/asphalt/vegetative areas. The vegetative areas were determined
to fully infiltrate into the sandy/gravelly soils. The remaining runoff sheet flows north into a
depression that feeds directly into the sediment/debris vault located along its northern
boundary. From here the drainage is directed east via piping and discharged into the infiltration
pond located along the eastern boundary of Lot 8.
Page | 15
Lot 10
Lot 11 contains two buildings with the surrounding areas consisting of a mixture of gravel and
asphalt. Based on the topography of the site and site visits the lot has two sub-basins, north
and south. The northern portion of the gravel/asphalt area sheet flows north in a depression
through Lot 9 and discharges into the open sediment/debris vault.
Runoff from the southern portion of the gravel/asphalt area sheet flows southwest into
infiltration ponds located in the southwest corner of the lot. Note that the scale station roof
runoff is directed onto the pavement and combines with runoff from the southern
gravel/asphalt area. Roof runoff from the shop is collected via drainage grates and discharged
directly into the infiltration pond.
Lot 11
Due to the lot consisting entirely of overgrown vegetation and sandy/gravelly soils it was
determined that drainage from Lot 11 infiltrates fully on-site, refer to Figure 9.
Figure 9: Lot 11 Vegetation
Page | 16
Soil
The existing soils consist of Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam 0-8 percent slopes per the National
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Snohomish County, see Appendix A.
Everett soils are classified in the USDA Soil Textural Classification as follows; the top layer of soil
from 0 to 6 inches is a dark brown gravelly sandy loam and has an infiltration rate of 2.0 – 6.0
inches per hour. The second layer of soil from 6 to 18 inches is classified as dark brown very
gravelly loamy sand and has an infiltration rate of 6.0 - 20.0 inches per hour. The third layer of
soil from 6 to 18 inches is classified as dark brown very gravelly sand and has an infiltration rate
of 6.0 - 20.0 inches per hour. The physical and chemical properties of the soil are listed in the
Soil Report in Appendix A.
Downstream Analysis
As noted earlier, during site visits (Nov. 2014) and drainage inspections of the existing ponds no
outlet structures were found, nor was there any evidence of downstream catch basins,
manholes, piping, etc. to indicate that the runoff leaves the site. Based on this information it
was determined that all ponds infiltrate on-site, therefore a downstream analysis was not
performed.
Minimum Requirement #5 On-Site Stormwater Management
All existing on-site stormwater facilities outlined above are to be retained, with the exception
of the open sediment/debris vault, until future development occurs. Note that future
development will likely consist entirely of on-site infiltration. Due to the proposed grading of
Lots 6-10 the open sediment/debris vault will be removed and replaced by a temporary
sediment pond until development occurs.
Minimum Requirement #6 Runoff Treatment
Less than 5,000 sf. of new pollution generating impervious area is proposed for the site,
therefore runoff treatment is not required.
As noted earlier the existing open sediment/debris vault is to be removed and temporarily
replaced by a sediment pond until development occurs. Area and drainage calculations can be
seen in Appendix D.
Minimum Requirement #7 Flow Control
Less than 5,000 sf. of new pollution generating impervious area is proposed for the site,
therefore flow control is not required.
Page | 17
Minimum Requirement #8 – Wetlands Protection
This requirement does not apply because this project does not discharge stormwater
into a wetland.
Minimum Requirement #9 – Basin Watershed Planning
This site is not located in a Basin Watershed Protection Area.
Minimum Requirement #10 – Operations and Maintenance
An Operations and Maintenance Manual, consistent with the provisions of Volume V of
the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington is included in Appendix
G of this report.
Page | 18
APPENDIX A
SOIL SURVEY
184 Soil survey
TABLE 111.--PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS--Continued
Soil name and I lDepthlClay I <2mml I Permeabi 11 ty Available I Soil ; I Shrink-swell factors rosion I I Organic
map symbol : : ; water capacity I reaction I potential l matter
I I I I I I
I I In I I Pct I I In/hr In/in I I pH I I K T , I I Pct-
I I I I I
I I I I I I
16*: I I I I I I
Olomount--------1 0-2 : 0.6-2.0 0.13-0.16 1 15.1-5.5 1 ILow------------10.241 I I 2 2-5
: 2-18: 0.6-2.0 0.11-0.14 !5.6-6.o ILow------------10.281
f 18-321 0.6-2.0 0.08-0.10 ,5.6-6.5 ILow------------f0.281
32 I I 1---------------1----1 I I
I I I
I I I I
Rock outcrop. : I I
: : I I I I !
I I I
17, 18, 19-------1 0-6 I 5-10 2.0-6.0 0.08-0.12 15.6-6.5 !Low------------10.171 10-15
Everett 6-18: 5-10 6.0-20 0.05-0.08 15.6-6.5 ILow------------10.101
18-60: 0-5 6.0-20 0.02-0.05 I 5.6-6.5 ILow------------10.101
I I I
I I I
20*. I I I
I I I
Fluvaquents I I I
I I I
I I
I : I I I
21--------------- 0-2 I 0.6-2.0 0.19-0.21 I 3 .6-5:o ILow------------10.371 2 10-15
Getchell 2-361 0.6-2.0 0. 19-0 .21 fll.5-5.5 ILow------------10.431
36 : I I :---------------f----1
I
I I
I I I
2211: I I I
I I I I
Getchell-------- 0-2 : 0.6-2.0 0. 19-0. 21 3.6-5.0 ILow------------10.371 2 10-15
2-361 0.6-2.0 0.19-0.21 4.5-5.5 ILow------------10.431
36 : :---------------t----;
I
I I I I I I I
Oso------------- 0-5 I 0.6-2.0 0.12-0.16 3.6-5.0 lLow------------10.321 2 5-10
5-29l 0.6-2.0 0. 13-0. 17 4.5-5.5 lLow------------10.371
29 : :---------------t----:
I I I I
I I I I
231: I I I I
I I I I
Getchell-------- 0-2 : 0.6-2.0 0.19-0.21 3.6-5.0 ILow------------10.371 2 10-15
2-361 0.6-2.0 0. 19-0. 21 ll.5-5.5 lLow------------10.431
36 : i---------------:----;
I I I I
I I I I
Oso-------------1 0-5 : 0.6-2.0 0.12-0.16 3.6-5.0 lLow------------10.321 2 5-10
I 5-29:
I 0.6-2.0 0. 13-0. 17 4.5-5.5 ILow------------10.371
I 29
I :---------------:----:
: I I I
I I I
Rock outcrop. ; I
I . I ' I ' I
I I I I
I I I I I
24---------------1 0-9 0-5 6.0-20 0.06-0.08 15.6-6.5 !Low------------10.171 5 .5-1
Greenwater ; 9-21 0-5 6.0-20 0.06-0.0f\ 15.6-6.5 lLow------------:0.11:
:21-60 0-5 6.0-20 0.05-0.07 15.6-6.5 lLow------------f0.101
I I I
I I I
25•: : I I
I I I I
Hartnit---------1 0-4 0.6-2.0 0.18-0.21 13.6-6.0 lLow------------10.241 2 10-15
: 11-27 0.6-2.0 o. 17-0 .20 14.5-6.0 lLow------------10.371
: 27 I I I I
I
I I I .---------------,----· I I
I I I I I
Potchub---------: 0-7 , 0.6-2.0 0.21-0.23 13.6-5.0 ILow------------:o.241 2 15-25
: 1-10: 0.6-2.0 0.19-0.21 14.5-5.0 ILow------------10.371
:10-311: 0.6-2.0 0.18-0.20 14.5-6.o I Low-.-----------: 0. 37 I
I 311 : I I I I
I .---------------,----,
I I I I I I
I I I I I
Rock outcrop. : : I I I
I I I
I I
I I I
26---------------: I 0-11 : I 0-5 2.0-6.0 0.08-0.11 5.1-7.3 I ILow------------f I 0.241 I 5 1-5
Indianola I 4-241 0-5 6.0-20 0.07-0.10 5.1-7.3 ILow------------10.241
:24-601 0-5 6.0-20 0.04-0.07 5.1-7. 3 ILow------------10.20:
I I I I I
27, 28, 29-------: I 0-6 I I 5-15 0.6-2.0 0.19-0.21 5.6-7.3 I lLow------------:0.32; I I 5 3-10
Kitsap : 6-331 20-35 0.6-2.0 0.18-0.20 5.6-7.3 lHoderate-------10.371
l33-601 20-35 0.06-0.2 0.17-0.20 15.6-7.3 lHoderate-------t0.371
I I
See footnote at end of table.
United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource
Department of Cooperative Soil Survey,
Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for
States Department of
Agriculture and other Snohomish County
Federal agencies, State
Natural agencies including the
Resources Agricultural Experiment Area, Washington
Conservation Stations, and local
Service participants
October 2, 2012
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They
highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about
the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many
different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,
community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,
conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,
and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance
the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties
that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information
is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on
various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying
with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.
Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/) and certain
conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact
your local USDA Service Center (http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?
agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://soils.usda.gov/contact/
state_offices/).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic
tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or
underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department
of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural
Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil
Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil
Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means
2
for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272
(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................7
Soil Map................................................................................................................8
Legend..................................................................................................................9
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................10
Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................10
Snohomish County Area, Washington............................................................12
7—Bellingham silty clay loam......................................................................12
17—Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes.............................13
34—Mukilteo muck......................................................................................13
39—Norma loam.........................................................................................14
51—Pits.......................................................................................................15
74—Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes......................................16
References............................................................................................................18
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas
in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and
their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations
affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of
the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and
the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is
the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the
surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the
surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other
living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas
(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share
common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,
soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically
consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is
related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.
Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of
landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous
areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the
landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,
during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable
degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the
landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by
an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify
predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to
identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of
soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have
similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique
combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of
the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes
the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and
landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of
resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is
needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and
experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-
landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific
locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of
measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These
measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to
bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of
sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from
one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret
the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics
and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different
uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils
in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are
modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet
local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,
production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop
yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from
field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such
variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long
periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil
scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have
a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a
high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,
roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
6
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil
map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
7
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
122° 8' 43''
122° 7' 35''
563600 563700 563800 563900 564000 564100 564200 564300 564400 564500
564600 564700 564800 564900
48° 10' 50''
48° 10' 50''
5336700
5336700
77th Ave
71st Ave
5336600 Stream
5336600
200th Pl
39
200th St
5336500
5336500
201st St
51
74th Ave
5336400
5336400
199th St 51
5336300 199th St
5336300
5336200 197th St
5336200
17
67th Ave
5336100
5336100
5336000
5336000
74
34 7
5335900 191st Pl
5335900
68th Dr
48° 10' 20''
48° 10' 19''
563600 563700 563800 563900 564000 564100 564200 564300 564400 564500
564600 564700 564800 564900
Map Scale: 1:6,680 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Meters
122° 8' 43'' 0 50 100 200 300
122° 7' 36''
± Feet
0 350 700 1,400 2,100
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI) Very Stony Spot Map Scale: 1:6,680 if printed on A size (8.5"
× 11") sheet.
Area of Interest (AOI)
Wet Spot
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped
at 1:24,000.
Soils
Other
Soil Map Units
Special Line Features Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Special Point Features
Gully
Blowout
Short Steep Slope Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping
can cause
Borrow Pit misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and
accuracy of soil line
Other placement. The maps do not show the small areas
of contrasting
Clay Spot soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Political Features
Closed Depression
Cities
Gravel Pit Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet
for accurate map
Water Features
measurements.
Gravelly Spot Streams and Canals
Landfill Transportation Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation
Service
Rails Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Lava Flow
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10N NAD83
Interstate Highways
Marsh or swamp
US Routes This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified
data as of
Mine or Quarry
the version date(s) listed below.
Major Roads
Miscellaneous Water
Local Roads Soil Survey Area: Snohomish County Area, Washington
Perennial Water
Survey Area Data: Version 7, Jun 29, 2012
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 7/24/2006
Sandy Spot
The orthophoto or other base map on which the
soil lines were
Severely Eroded Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the
background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result,
some minor shifting
Sinkhole
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Snohomish County Area, Washington (WA661)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
7 Bellingham silty clay loam 0.1 0.0%
17 Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent 131.1 86.1%
slopes
34 Mukilteo muck 0.3 0.2%
39 Norma loam 12.4 8.1%
51 Pits 6.1 4.0%
74 Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 2.4 1.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 152.3 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils
or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the
maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape,
however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability
of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend
beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic
class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic
classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas
for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes
other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally
are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified
by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the
contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with
some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially
where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations
to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness
or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments
on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If
intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to
define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each
description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties
and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons
that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,
degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such
differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the
detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly
indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The
pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all
areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or
anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical
or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and
relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-
Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that
could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of
the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be
made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up
of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material
and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
Snohomish County Area, Washington
7—Bellingham silty clay loam
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 210 days
Map Unit Composition
Bellingham and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 11 percent
Description of Bellingham
Setting
Landform: Depressions, drainageways
Parent material: Alluvium over lacustrine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Very high (about 12.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 5w
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Silty clay loam
9 to 60 inches: Silty clay
Minor Components
Kitsap
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
Norma
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
Bellingham
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
17—Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 45 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 180 days
Map Unit Composition
Everett and similar soils: 100 percent
Description of Everett
Setting
Landform: Terraces, plains
Parent material: Glacial outwash
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to strongly contrasting textural
stratification
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s
Typical profile
0 to 6 inches: Gravelly ashy sandy loam
6 to 18 inches: Very gravelly ashy sandy loam
18 to 60 inches: Extremely gravelly sand
34—Mukilteo muck
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 70 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 250 days
Map Unit Composition
Mukilteo and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 6 percent
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Mukilteo
Setting
Landform: Depressions
Parent material: Herbaceous organic material
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Very high (about 25.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2w
Typical profile
0 to 4 inches: Muck
4 to 35 inches: Mucky peat
35 to 54 inches: Mucky peat
54 to 60 inches: Fine sandy loam
Minor Components
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Orcas, peat
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
39—Norma loam
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 150 to 200 days
Map Unit Composition
Norma and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Norma
Setting
Landform: Depressions, drainageways
Parent material: Alluvium
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 9.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 3w
Typical profile
0 to 10 inches: Ashy loam
10 to 28 inches: Sandy loam
28 to 60 inches: Sandy loam
Minor Components
Bellingham
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Custer
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Alderwood
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
51—Pits
Map Unit Composition
Pits: 100 percent
Description of Pits
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 8
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
74—Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Mean annual precipitation: 45 to 70 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 degrees F
Frost-free period: 140 to 200 days
Map Unit Composition
Tokul and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 12 percent
Description of Tokul
Setting
Landform: Till plains
Parent material: Volcanic ash over basal till
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to densic material
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Low (about 5.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4e
Typical profile
0 to 4 inches: Gravelly medial loam
4 to 22 inches: Gravelly medial loam
22 to 31 inches: Gravelly medial fine sandy loam
31 to 60 inches: Gravelly sandy loam
Minor Components
Mckenna
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
Norma
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
Terric medisaprists
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
16
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.
Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and
testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils
in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the
Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
http://soils.usda.gov/
18
Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210.
19
APPENDIX B
SITE PLAN
APPENDIX C
DRAINAGE PLAN
APPENDIX D
SEDIMENT POND CALCULATIONS
Existing Collection Area
Roof Area 0.23 Ac.
*Remaining Surfaces 11.44 Ac.
Total 11.67 Ac.
*Remaining Surfaces consist of pavement, gravel, and vegetation areas. Based on site
visits the vegetation areas are the smallest of the three.
Proposed Collection Area
Roof Area 0.23 Ac.
Asphalt/Gravel Flat 1.87 Ac.
Asphalt/Gravel Mod. 2.27 Ac.
*A/B Lawn Flat 7.30 Ac.
Total 11.67 Ac.
*Once lots 7â€9 are raised they will be hydro seeded and remain bare until future development
occurs.
WWHM2012 2â€Year Flow, Q2 = 2.7379 cfs.
WWHM2012 100â€Year Flow, Q100 = 6.9774 cfs.
Required Pond Surface Area (BMP C241) = 2*Q2 / 0.00096 = 5,704 sf.
Pond Surface Area Provided = 40’ X 143’ = 5,720 sf.
Pond Length to Width Ratio = ~ 3.6/1
Riser Depth, h = 3.5’
Riser Head, hr = 1.0’
Principal Spillway Riser Diameter = 18†(Max Capacity 8 cfs.)
Dewatering Orifice Diameter = 3 â€Â 1/8â€
Equation 1â€2: Dewatering Orifice Equations (2005 DOE Volume2 BMP C241)
Figure 4.27 – Riser Inflow Curves
4-108 Volume II – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention February 2005
WWHM2012
PROJECT REPORT
___________________________________________________________________
Project Name: NWH BSP
Site Name: NWH
Site Address: 20015 67th Ave NE
City : Arlington
Report Date: 2/28/2015
Gage : Everett
Data Start : 1948/10/01
Data End : 2009/09/30
Precip Scale: 1.20
Version : 2014/10/28
___________________________________________________________________
Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year
___________________________________________________________________
High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year
___________________________________________________________________
PREDEVELOPED LAND USE
Name : Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
Pervious Land Use Acres
Pervious Total 0
Impervious Land Use Acres
PARKING MOD 11.67
Impervious Total 11.67
Basin Total 11.67
___________________________________________________________________
Element Flows To:
Surface Interflow Groundwater
___________________________________________________________________
MITIGATED LAND USE
Name : Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
Pervious Land Use Acres
A B, Lawn, Flat 7.3
Pervious Total 7.3
Impervious Land Use Acres
ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.23
PARKING FLAT 1.87
PARKING MOD 2.27
Impervious Total 4.37
Basin Total 11.67
___________________________________________________________________
Element Flows To:
Surface Interflow Groundwater
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
ANALYSIS RESULTS
Stream Protection Duration
___________________________________________________________________
Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1
Total Pervious Area:0
Total Impervious Area:11.67
___________________________________________________________________
Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1
Total Pervious Area:7.3
Total Impervious Area:4.37
___________________________________________________________________
Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1
Return Period Flow(cfs)
2 year 7.497054
5 year 10.066988
10 year 11.935333
25 year 14.492972
50 year 16.546039
100 year 18.729831
Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1
Return Period Flow(cfs)
2 year 2.737925
5 year 3.751907
10 year 4.469928
25 year 5.431133
50 year 6.186955
100 year 6.977355
APPENDIX E
SWPP PLAN
APPENDIX F
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
OPERTATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CONTACT:
CONTACT: Brent Nicholson
ADDRESS: 3316 Furhman Ave E.
Seattle, WA 98102
PHONE: 206.979.9681
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
1. If ponding lasts more than 24 hours in the infiltration facilities after a storm event the
facility must be maintained as outlined in the Operations and Maintenance guidelines
attached.
2. Sediment shall be removed from the temporary sediment pond when it reach 1-foot in
depth.
3. Any damage to the temporary sediment pond embankments or slopes shall be repaired.
Northwest Hardwoods Binding Site Plan
Project Narrative
The proposed project is an 11-Lot Binding Site Plan, located at 20016 67th
Avenue NE, in Section 14, Township 31 North, Range 5 East. Tax account
number 310514 002 007 00.
The Binding Site Plan consists of 11-Lots with lot sizes ranging from
approximately 1 acre to 18 acres. The proposed uses are Office,
Warehouse/Storage and Manufacturing. The lots will be served by internal
alley/access roads. Utilities are provided by the City of Arlington.
Currently, there are existing buildings on site with some outbuilding/sheds. It is
proposed that all buildings currently on site will remain and future buildings will
be constructed following the approval of the binding site plan. There is minimal
existing landscaping and trees located on this site which is anticipated to remain.
As the remaining vacant lots are developed, all lots will acquire the necessary
land use permits and meet any additional parking, lighting and landscaping
requirements.
A traffic summary has been prepared for this site. In summary, the developers of
the Binding Site Plan would like each lot to be credited for the established trips or
just those lots that contain the existing structures to be credited for those trips
that were generated by the site while it was under prior ownership and uses.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Department of Community Development
City of Arlington ï‚· 238 N Olympic Ave ï‚· Arlington, WA 98223 ï‚· Phone (360) 403 3551 ï‚· FAX (360) 403 3418
Project Name: Northwest Hardwoods Binding Site Plan
Purpose of the checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 RCW, requires all governmental
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An
environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probability of
significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to
provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts on the quality of the
environment. The purpose of the checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency
identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposals, if it can
be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for the applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of
your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with
the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most
cases, you should be able to answer the question from your own observation or project plans
without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or a question does not
apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the
questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline and landward
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental
agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help
describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of The Checklist For Non-Project Proposals:
Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered
"does not apply". In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Non-Project Actions (part D).
For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project", "applicant", and
"property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proposer", and "affected geographic area",
respectively.
8/2010
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Northwest Hardwoods Binding Site Plan
2. Name of applicant:
Brent Nicholson
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Brent Nicholson HMA Engineering
3316 Fuhrman Ave E 307 N Olympic Ave, Ste 213
Seattle, WA 98102 Arlington, WA 98223
(206) 979-9681 (206) 909-2567
4. Date checklist prepared:
March 18, 2015
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Arlington
6. Proposed project timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Binding Site Plan approval May 2015 and site civil approval.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
Yes, following the Binding Site Plan the applicant and/or future owners may expand
or upgrade the existing structures and/or construct new buildings on the vacant lots.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly, related to the proposal.
A Wetland Evaluation was prepared by Wetland Resources dated September 12,
2013 (submitted as part of the grading permit)
9. Do you know of pending applications for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain.
None
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposals, if known.
3-15 2
City of Arlington SEPA Determination and Land Use Permits.
11. Give a complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not
need to repeat those answers on this page.
The site is located at 20016 67th Avenue NE, Arlington Washington. The tax
Identification number of the property is 310514 002 007 00. The entire site is
approximately 52.21 Acres.
The Binding Site Plan consists of 11 Lots. There are existing buildings on this site.
The proposed uses are Office, Warehouse/Storage and Manufacturing. Lot sizes
for the Binding Site Plan range from approximately 1 acre to 18 acres. The lots will
be served by internal alley/access roads. Utilities are provided by the City of
Arlington.
12. Location of the proposal. Please give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street
address, if any. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, please provide
the range or boundaries of the site(s). Please provide a legal description, site
plan, vicinity map, and topographic map if possible. While you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or
detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
(Indicate if maps or plans have been submitted as part of a permit application.)
The project is located in Section 14, Township 31 N, Range 5 East Willamette
Meridian. More specifically the project is located at 20016 67th Avenue NE. The
property is bordered by 67th Avenue on the west and by 74th Avenue NE on the east.
The site is accessible off of 67th Avenue NE.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth:
a. General description of the site (underline one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep
slopes, mountainous, other.
The site is rolling with some steep slopes.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate % slope)?
The steepest slope on the site is approximately 45%.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils,
please specify and note any prime farmland.
3-15 3
The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps the soils as Everett
Gravelly loam 0-8 percent slopes.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
No
e. Describe the purposes, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
The applicant is proposing to grade approximately 15,500 cubic yards of cut and
approximately 16,500 cubic yards of fill.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so,
generally describe.
No, all stormwater will infiltrate on site.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces
after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Approximately 90% of the site is currently covered by impervious surface.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any:
No erosion control measures are proposed.
2. Air:
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.,
dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction, and
when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities known.
Possible dust during project construction and normal vehicle emissions during
and after construction. All typical of manufacturing related activities.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
None known.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts, if any:
During site construction, dust control measures will be employed during all
grading operations.
3-15 4
3. Water:
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,
associated wetlands)? If yes, describe type, provide names, and if
known, state what stream or river it flows into.
None.
2) Will the project require any work over or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
No
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in
or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the
site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
None.
4) Will surface water withdrawals or diversions be required by the
proposal? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities if known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? Note location on the
site plan, if any.
No.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of
discharge.
No.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn or recharged? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities of known.
Infiltration of ground water.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
3-15 5
industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural, etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems,
the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of
animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
None.
c. Water runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff and storm water and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water
flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, please describe.
Stormwater runoff generated by the proposed structures will directed to
underground infiltrations trenches.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally
describe.
Yes, vehicle fluids can mix with surface water runoff. Amounts would be
normal for any manufacturing/office activities and will be addressed through
the water quality treatment best management practices (BMPs).
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Infiltration treatment and BMPs.
4. Plants:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X shrubs
Xgrass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
The site contains sloped trees, brush and grass that will be converted to a flat
grass area.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
There are no known threatened or endangered species know to be on or near
the site.
3-15 6
d. List proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
No landscaping is proposed at this time. As development occurs landscaping will
be provided in accordance with the Cities Land Use Code.
5. Animals:
a. Underline any birds and animals that have been observed on or known to
be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
There are no known threatened or endangered species know to be on or near
the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Those required by law and that which are permitted by the FAA.
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be
used to meet the completed projects energy needs? Describe whether it
will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
This is approval for a binding site plan, all future construction and existing
buildings will use electric, natural gas for manufacturing, storage and office
needs.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe.
No.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of
this proposal?
N/A
d. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if
any?
3-15 7
None.
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, exposure to toxic chemicals,
including risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that occur as
a result of this proposal? If so describe.
No health hazards will be associated with the proposed Binding Site Plan. If
expansion or new construction of the existing site occurs following the Binding
Site Plan the environmental health hazards generally associated with heavy
construction may be present during the project construction phase. Limited risk
associated with construction of the buildings and parking area.
b. Describe special emergency services that might be required.
City of Arlington Medical and Fire protection should be adequate.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any:
No unusual or special measures other than normal safety techniques are
proposed.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The site is not currently being utilized. The site does contain storage and
manufacturing building and a portion of the site was used in the past as a lumber
mill. The site is surrounded by industrial uses.
b. Has the site been used for agricultural purposes? If so, describe.
No.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The site has existing structures and some associated shed/outbuildings
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
GI-General Industrial
3-15 8
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
GI-General Industrial
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program environment
designation of the site?
N/A
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive
area� If so, specify.
No.
i. What are proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
This request is for a binding site plan. All future development of the lots will
comply with all Federal, State, and City Zoning Codes and Comprehensive Plans
regulations and policies.
j. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
None as part of the Binding Site Plan. Future development may employ workers.
k. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None.
l. What are proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement of other
impacts, if any:
None are proposed.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing.
N/A
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low-income.
N/A
c. What are proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
3-15 9
None.
10. Noise
a. What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
None
b. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with
the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come
from the site.
Short term noise increases associated with any construction activities that may
occur during the construction/redevelopment phase of the project. Construction
will occur during the normal business hours as permitted. Long term noise is
expected to be normal for that of a General Industrial zone.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if
any:
Those as required by law.
11. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
There are existing buildings and any future proposed building will be in
compliance with the City land use code.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if
any?
None. As development occurs on the lots measures will be proposed to control
aesthetic impacts.
12. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
All lighting will be down-shielded as required by the Arlington Zoning Code.
3-15 10
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views?
No.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
None.
d. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare
impacts, if any:
None.
13. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
There is a City park and Boys and Girls Club with associated ball fields located
on the Arlington Municipal Airport located on the west side of 59th Avenue .
There is also a soccer dome located on 74th Avenue NE and Gleneagle Golf
Course is located off 67th Avenue NE.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe.
No.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project
or applicant, if any:
None.
14. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state,
or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so,
generally describe.
No.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on the site.
None.
c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
3-15 11
None.
15. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The site is served by 67th Avenue NE and 74th Avenue NE.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
A Community Transit stop is located near the site along 67th Avenue NE.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
It is anticipated that the project will have sufficient parking to accommodate each
lot. See attached plan.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to any
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
Internal access/alley ways will serve the internal Binding Site Plan.
e. Will the project use or occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Yes. The project will occur in the vicinity of the Arlington Municipal Airport and
there is a railroad located west of the site along 67th Avenue.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
No trips will be generated as part of the Binding Site Plan. However, because
there were existing building on this property a traffic mitigation summary is being
submitted as part of the site civil review process that will cover credits for the
existing prior uses.
g. What are proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts,
if any:
None as part of the Binding Site Plan.
3-15 12
16. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for
example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If
so, generally describe.
No.
b. What are proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public
services, if any.
No measures are proposed.
17. Utilities
a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,
water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing
the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the
immediate vicinity that might be needed.
The project will require the use of electric, water, sewer utilities services.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is
relying on them to make its decision.
Signature: ___________________________________________________________________
Date Submitted: ______________________________________________________________
3-15 13
3-15 14
AFFIDAVIT AND INDEMNITY BY OWNER- Extended Coverage Policies
WHEREAS the undersigned is the owner (“Ownerâ€) of the land (the Land) described in that certain
Commitment for Title Insurance issued by CHICAGO TITLECOMPANY (the Company) under No.
___500025803______________ (the Commitment), for an ALTA loan policy of title insurance (the “Policyâ€),
AND WHEREAS, the Proposed Insured(s) under said Commitment is/are requesting the Company to issue its
Policy with Extended Coverage, and to delete therefrom the General Exceptions relating to matters not
disclosed by a search of the Public Records such as rights or claims of parties in possession, statutory lien rights
for labor or materials, special assessments and utility charges,
AND WHEREAS Owner acknowledges that the Company would refrain from issuing said Policy without
showing said General Exceptions in the absence of the representations, agreements and undertakings contained
herein.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to obligate the Company to issue said Policy without showing
said General Exceptions. However, should the Company do so, it will do so in part in reliance upon the
undertakings of the undersigned Owner. The issuance of the Policy shall be the consideration for the
undertakings contained herein.
AFFIDAVIT
NOW THEREFORE, Owner certifies that:
1. Said Land is owned by Owner, and the ownership thereof has been peaceable and undisturbed.
2. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has not entered into any oral or written leases, tenancies or other
occupancies with commercial tenants; or has entered into any oral or written leases with residential tenants
with a rental period of longer than 12 months.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Or, if necessary, please attach the rent roll and copies of any written agreements)
3. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has granted no rights of first refusal or options to purchase all or any
portion of said land contained within any leases or other documents.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Or, if necessary, please attach copies of any written agreements)
4. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has not entered into any contracts for the making of repairs or for new
construction on said Land or for the services of architects, engineers or surveyors, nor are there any unpaid
bills or claims for labor or services performed or material furnished or delivered during the last six (6)
months at Owner’s request for alterations, repair work or new construction on said Land, including site
preparation, soil tests, site surveys, demolition, etc. that will not be paid by Owner.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Please attach an explanation with a copy of the most current construction cost breakdown)
5. Neither Owner nor any principal of Owner has filed a petition for bankruptcy, which action is pending, nor
is Owner a party to any pending action, nor has Owner been served with a summons and complaint nor
received any notice of any action which is pending against Owner.
6. There are no outstanding service, installation, connection, tap, capacity or construction charges for sewer,
water, electricity, natural gas or other utilities, or garbage collection and disposal. Any such charges which
may arise prior to the effective date of the Policy of Policies will be paid in full by Owner.
7. There are no unpaid special assessments for sewer, water, road or other local improvement districts, or
taxes, except as shown in said Commitment for Title Insurance.
8. Owner has received no notice and has no knowledge of any proceedings which would result in an
assessment against the Land.
Owner hereby agrees to indemnify, protect, defend and save harmless the Company at Owner’s own costs and
charges from and against loss suffered by it (including reasonable attorneys fees) under said Policy (but without
prejudice to the right of the Company to defend at the expense of Owner if it so elects) arising out of the failure
of any of Owner’s statements set forth above to be true and correct when made.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this agreement this ______ day of
________________________, 20______.
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
STATE OF ____________________)
ss.
COUNTY OF __________________)
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _____________________________ is the person who appeared before
me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the
instrument and acknowledged it as the _________________________________ of
___________________________________________ to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: _________________________
______________________________________
Notary Public
Printed Name: __________________________
Residing at: ____________________________
My appointment expires: __________________
AFFIDAVIT AND INDEMNITY BY OWNER- Extended Coverage Policies
WHEREAS the undersigned is the owner (“Ownerâ€) of the land (the Land) described in that certain
Commitment for Title Insurance issued by CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY (the Company) under No.
___500025803______________ (the Commitment), for an ALTA loan policy of title insurance (the “Policyâ€),
AND WHEREAS, the Proposed Insured(s) under said Commitment is/are requesting the Company to issue its
Policy with Extended Coverage, and to delete therefrom the General Exceptions relating to matters not
disclosed by a search of the Public Records such as rights or claims of parties in possession, statutory lien rights
for labor or materials, special assessments and utility charges,
AND WHEREAS Owner acknowledges that the Company would refrain from issuing said Policy without
showing said General Exceptions in the absence of the representations, agreements and undertakings contained
herein.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to obligate the Company to issue said Policy without showing
said General Exceptions. However, should the Company do so, it will do so in part in reliance upon the
undertakings of the undersigned Owner. The issuance of the Policy shall be the consideration for the
undertakings contained herein.
AFFIDAVIT
NOW THEREFORE, Owner certifies that:
1. Said Land is owned by Owner, and the ownership thereof has been peaceable and undisturbed.
2. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has not entered into any oral or written leases, tenancies or other
occupancies with commercial tenants; or has entered into any oral or written leases with residential tenants
with a rental period of longer than 12 months.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Or, if necessary, please attach the rent roll and copies of any written agreements)
3. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has granted no rights of first refusal or options to purchase all or any
portion of said land contained within any leases or other documents.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Or, if necessary, please attach copies of any written agreements)
4. Unless otherwise stated, Owner has not entered into any contracts for the making of repairs or for new
construction on said Land or for the services of architects, engineers or surveyors, nor are there any unpaid
bills or claims for labor or services performed or material furnished or delivered during the last six (6)
months at Owner’s request for alterations, repair work or new construction on said Land, including site
preparation, soil tests, site surveys, demolition, etc. that will not be paid by Owner.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________.
(Please attach an explanation with a copy of the most current construction cost breakdown)
5. Neither Owner nor any principal of Owner has filed a petition for bankruptcy, which action is pending, nor
is Owner a party to any pending action, nor has Owner been served with a summons and complaint nor
received any notice of any action which is pending against Owner.
6. There are no outstanding service, installation, connection, tap, capacity or construction charges for sewer,
water, electricity, natural gas or other utilities, or garbage collection and disposal. Any such charges which
may arise prior to the effective date of the Policy of Policies will be paid in full by Owner.
7. There are no unpaid special assessments for sewer, water, road or other local improvement districts, or
taxes, except as shown in said Commitment for Title Insurance.
8. Owner has received no notice and has no knowledge of any proceedings which would result in an
assessment against the Land.
Owner hereby agrees to indemnify, protect, defend and save harmless the Company at Owner’s own costs and
charges from and against loss suffered by it (including reasonable attorneys fees) under said Policy (but without
prejudice to the right of the Company to defend at the expense of Owner if it so elects) arising out of the failure
of any of Owner’s statements set forth above to be true and correct when made.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this agreement this ______ day of
________________________, 20______.
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
STATE OF ____________________)
ss.
COUNTY OF __________________)
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _____________________________ is the person who appeared before
me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the
instrument and acknowledged it as the _________________________________ of
___________________________________________ to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: _________________________
______________________________________
Notary Public
Printed Name: __________________________
Residing at: ____________________________
My appointment expires: __________________
June 5, 2015
Marc Hayes
City of Arlington
18204 59th Ave Ne
Arlington, WA 98223
RE: Traffic Study Summary and Traffic Mitigation Credits – NWH Arlington
Manufacturing Park
Dear Mr. Hayes,
The following is a traffic mitigation offer for the NWH Arlington Manufacturing Park.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is generally located in Section 14, Township 31 North, Range 5 East Willamette
Meridian. More specifically the project is located at 20015 67th Ave NE, Arlington, WA 98223.
Type and Size of Development
The 54 acre project had 20 existing manufacturing and office buildings with associated
infrastructure improvements. The existing site has 1,830 S.F of Office Space and 135,950 S.F. of
Manufacturing. The use of each lot is listed in Exhibit A.
Weekday and PM Peak Hour Trips
The trips generated by the NWH Arlington Manufacturing Park were calculated using the ITE
Trip Generation Manual Land Use Code (130) Industrial Park.
TRAFFIC MITIGATION OFFER
The developers of the NWH Arlington Manufacturing Park project would like the site to be
credited for the established trips that were generated by the site while it was under ownership
of Northwest Hardwoods and at full occupancy. The attached Exhibit A outlines the credits for
the site.
City of Arlington
Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual the existing site generated 461 PM Peak Hour trips. The
current traffic mitigation impact fee is based on the number of PM Peak Hour trips generated
by the site. The current rate of the traffic mitigation impact fee is $3355 per PM Peak Hour
Trip. The developer would like credit for the traffic that was generated by the existing site prior
to vacancy.
Snohomish County
Traffic mitigation impact fees for Snohomish County are based on Weekday trips (ADT). The
existing NWH Arlington Manufacturing Park generated 3,303 Weekday Trips prior to being
vacated. Calculations for the Weekday Trips are included in Exhibit A.
WSDOT
Traffic mitigation impact fees for WSDOT are based on Weekday trips (ADT). The existing NWH
Arlington Manufacturing Park generated 3,303 Weekday Trips prior to being vacated.
Calculations for the Weekday Trips are included in Exhibit A.
Thank you for the consideration of this traffic mitigation offer. If you have any questions or
concerns please contact me by phone at (360)474â€4624 or by email at kelli@halemilligan.com.
Thanks,
Kelli Hale, PE
NWH Arlington Manufacturing Park â€Â Traffic Mitigation Credits
CODE LAND USE RATE ACRES TOTAL
130 Industrial Park (PM Peak) 8.53 54 461
130 Industrial Park (ADT) 61.17 54 3303
Exhibit A 1
14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 • (425) 883-3881
February 20, 2019
Ted Sykes
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
1805 136th Place NE, Suite #201
Bellevue, WA 98005
Re: Analytical Data for Project ES-0599.09
Laboratory Reference No. 1902-104
Dear Ted:
Enclosed are the analytical results and associated quality control data for samples submitted on February 19, 2019.
The standard policy of OnSite Environmental, Inc. is to store your samples for 30 days from the date of receipt. If you
require longer storage, please contact the laboratory.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the data,
or need additional information, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
David Baumeister
Project Manager
Enclosures
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
2
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
Case Narrative
Samples were collected on February 19, 2019 and received by the laboratory on February 19, 2019. They were
maintained at the laboratory at a temperature of 2oC to 6oC.
Please note that any and all soil sample results are reported on a dry-weight basis, unless otherwise noted below.
General QA/QC issues associated with the analytical data enclosed in this laboratory report will be indicated with a
reference to a comment or explanation on the Data Qualifier page. More complex and involved QA/QC issues will be
discussed in detail below.
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
3
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS/BTEX
NWTPH-Gx/EPA 8021B
Matrix: Soil
Units: mg/kg (ppm)
Date Date
Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags
Client ID: WSW
Laboratory ID: 02-104-01
Benzene ND 0.020 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Toluene ND 0.097 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Ethyl Benzene ND 0.097 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
m,p-Xylene 0.17 0.097 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
o-Xylene ND 0.097 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Gasoline ND 9.7 NWTPH-Gx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
Fluorobenzene 94 57-129
Client ID: B
Laboratory ID: 02-104-02
Benzene ND 0.020 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Toluene ND 0.090 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Ethyl Benzene ND 0.090 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
m,p-Xylene 0.092 0.090 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
o-Xylene ND 0.090 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Gasoline ND 9.0 NWTPH-Gx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
Fluorobenzene 98 57-129
Client ID: SP-1
Laboratory ID: 02-104-03
Benzene ND 0.024 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Toluene ND 0.12 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Ethyl Benzene ND 0.12 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
m,p-Xylene ND 0.12 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
o-Xylene ND 0.12 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Gasoline ND 12 NWTPH-Gx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
Fluorobenzene 96 57-129
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
4
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS/BTEX
NWTPH-Gx/EPA 8021B
Matrix: Soil
Units: mg/kg (ppm)
Date Date
Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags
Client ID: SP-2
Laboratory ID: 02-104-04
Benzene ND 0.020 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Toluene ND 0.052 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Ethyl Benzene ND 0.052 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
m,p-Xylene ND 0.052 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
o-Xylene ND 0.052 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Gasoline ND 5.2 NWTPH-Gx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
Fluorobenzene 98 57-129
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
5
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS/BTEX
NWTPH-Gx/EPA 8021B
QUALITY CONTROL
Matrix: Soil
Units: mg/kg (ppm)
Date Date
Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags
METHOD BLANK
Laboratory ID: MB0219S1
Benzene ND 0.020 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Toluene ND 0.050 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Ethyl Benzene ND 0.050 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
m,p-Xylene ND 0.050 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
o-Xylene ND 0.050 EPA 8021B 2-19-19 2-19-19
Gasoline ND 5.0 NWTPH-Gx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
Fluorobenzene 97 57-129
Source Percent Recovery RPD
Analyte Result Spike Level Result Recovery Limits RPD Limit Flags
DUPLICATE
Laboratory ID: 02-104-04
ORIG DUP
Benzene ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
Toluene ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
Ethyl Benzene ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
m,p-Xylene ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
o-Xylene ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
Gasoline ND ND NA NA NA NA NA 30
Surrogate:
Fluorobenzene 98 94 57-129
SPIKE BLANKS
Laboratory ID: SB0219S1
SB SBD SB SBD SB SBD
Benzene 0.753 0.751 1.00 1.00 75 75 69-111 0 10
Toluene 0.751 0.756 1.00 1.00 75 76 70-114 1 11
Ethyl Benzene 0.764 0.768 1.00 1.00 76 77 70-115 1 10
m,p-Xylene 0.745 0.752 1.00 1.00 75 75 72-115 1 10
o-Xylene 0.751 0.758 1.00 1.00 75 76 71-115 1 11
Surrogate:
Fluorobenzene 92 94 57-129
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
6
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
DIESEL AND HEAVY OIL RANGE ORGANICS
NWTPH-Dx
Matrix: Soil
Units: mg/Kg (ppm)
Date Date
Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags
Client ID: WSW
Laboratory ID: 02-104-01
Diesel Fuel #2 1800 28 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Lube Oil Range Organics ND 170 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19 U1
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
o-Terphenyl 87 50-150
Client ID: B
Laboratory ID: 02-104-02
Diesel Fuel #2 1300 28 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Lube Oil Range Organics ND 120 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19 U1
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
o-Terphenyl 96 50-150
Client ID: SP-1
Laboratory ID: 02-104-03
Diesel Fuel #2 160 27 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Lube Oil Range Organics ND 55 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
o-Terphenyl 84 50-150
Client ID: SP-2
Laboratory ID: 02-104-04
Diesel Range Organics ND 28 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Lube Oil Range Organics ND 56 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
o-Terphenyl 93 50-150
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
7
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
DIESEL AND HEAVY OIL RANGE ORGANICS
NWTPH-Dx
QUALITY CONTROL
Matrix: Soil
Units: mg/Kg (ppm)
Date Date
Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags
METHOD BLANK
Laboratory ID: MB0219S1
Diesel Range Organics ND 25 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Lube Oil Range Organics ND 50 NWTPH-Dx 2-19-19 2-19-19
Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits
o-Terphenyl 92 50-150
Source Percent Recovery RPD
Analyte Result Spike Level Result Recovery Limits RPD Limit Flags
DUPLICATE
Laboratory ID: SB0219S1
ORIG DUP
Diesel Fuel #2 99.5 97.3 NA NA NA NA 2 NA
Lube Oil Range ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA
Surrogate:
o-Terphenyl 99 101 50-150
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
8
Date of Report: February 20, 2019
Samples Submitted: February 19, 2019
Laboratory Reference: 1902-104
Project: ES-0599.09
% MOISTURE
Date Analyzed: 2-19-19
Client ID Lab ID % Moisture
WSW 02-104-01 11
B 02-104-02 10
SP-1 02-104-03 9
SP-2 02-104-04 11
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
9
Data Qualifiers and Abbreviations
A - Due to a high sample concentration, the amount spiked is insufficient for meaningful MS/MSD recovery data.
B - The analyte indicated was also found in the blank sample.
C - The duplicate RPD is outside control limits due to high result variability when analyte concentrations are
within five times the quantitation limit.
E - The value reported exceeds the quantitation range and is an estimate.
F - Surrogate recovery data is not available due to the high concentration of coeluting target compounds.
H - The analyte indicated is a common laboratory solvent and may have been introduced during sample
preparation, and be impacting the sample result.
I - Compound recovery is outside of the control limits.
J - The value reported was below the practical quantitation limit. The value is an estimate.
K - Sample duplicate RPD is outside control limits due to sample inhomogeneity. The sample was
re-extracted and re-analyzed with similar results.
L - The RPD is outside of the control limits.
M - Hydrocarbons in the gasoline range are impacting the diesel range result.
M1 - Hydrocarbons in the gasoline range (toluene-naphthalene) are present in the sample.
N - Hydrocarbons in the lube oil range are impacting the diesel range result.
N1 - Hydrocarbons in diesel range are impacting lube oil range results.
O - Hydrocarbons indicative of heavier fuels are present in the sample and are impacting the gasoline result.
P - The RPD of the detected concentrations between the two columns is greater than 40.
Q - Surrogate recovery is outside of the control limits.
S - Surrogate recovery data is not available due to the necessary dilution of the sample.
T - The sample chromatogram is not similar to a typical ____________.
U - The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit.
U1 - The practical quantitation limit is elevated due to interferences present in the sample.
V - Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate recoveries are outside control limits due to matrix effects.
W - Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate RPD are outside control limits due to matrix effects.
X - Sample extract treated with a mercury cleanup procedure.
X1- Sample extract treated with a sulfuric acid/silica gel cleanup procedure.
Y - The calibration verification for this analyte exceeded the 20% drift specified in method 8260C, and therefore the
reported result should be considered an estimate. The overall performance of the calibration verification standard
met the acceptance criteria of the method.
Z -
ND - Not Detected at PQL
PQL - Practical Quantitation Limit
RPD - Relative Percent Difference
OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881
This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody,
and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed.
18101 BUTlER ROAD, SNOHOMISH, WA 98290
USVETL"'894RB
V425-319-5595
chrisdnicholls@gmail.com
City Of Arlington WA.
Kevin Olander
Here is the test report for soil coming from 519 State Route 9NE Lake Stevens, A 98 58. There is
about 100 CY from the new TJ Max store loading dock. That will go to the Gaytewa 10 er rfill site.
The soil type is gray till with some gravel
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Matt Miller if have any question about the test 425-827 7701
Thank You
Chris Nicholls
USVET, LLC
SERVICE DISABLED VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS
DAFT
Date ofReport: 04/09119
Date Received: 04108/19
Project: Gateway Import Source 190158,F&BI 904154
I Date Extracted: 04/09/19
Date Analyzed: 04/09/19
RESULTS FROM THE ALYSIS OF SOIL SAM LES
FOR TOTAL PETRO UM HYDROCARBONS S
DIESEL D MOTOR OIL
USING ME HOD NWTPH-Dx
Results Reporte on a Dry Weight Basis
Results Repo ed as mg/kg (ppm)
Surrogate
Sample ID Motor Oil Range (% Recovery)
Laboratory ID (C25-C36) (Limit 56-165)
SP-1 <50 <250 98
904154-01
SP-2 <50 <250 95
904154-02
SP-3 <50 <250 89
904154-03
Method Blank <50 <250 91
09-752 MB
1
'10£'{ I~-Lf SAMPLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY HE CX(iq·g-:/J 1
,. I I .±-
f SAMPLERS (sienaturei ~ /A'. ~ . s i
CReport To no.if 11;/ler ~,u/y~
PROJECT NAME I /' '''PO#
Company~ESI.. G:..+e~ ::l:Mpor-r
====~~------------- S;ow ~e..
Address~,----"S::.-·~~A-..:.v...:::::E:.,-- _ I'1DISB
REMARKS INVOICE TO SAMPLE DISPOSAL
City, State, ZIP I~rKh~\ I wtA ~8'D33 1{Dispose after 30days
f o ArchiveSamples
Phone 9?..,=,·- ~"7' 7/0\ Email MM:ller @.~Sl?;~ .ceNli I 110 . I
Other
ANALYSESREQUESTED
Ql ~....• Q 00 ~
t:! 0 t- OO
Q) .5 C'I <D
•..... (J) 0 C\l C'I
(.) ..Q)..• '0Cl 00 ct:) ct:) 0
Date Time Sample #of :r: t':l >- >- 0t-
Sample ID LabID 0 ..0 E ..0 C\l Notes
Sampled Sampled Type Jars ~ ~ 0 Cll ct:)
P-. rJl o
...• E-< ~ p~.. ><:r.::1 Q 0 lI:rJl
~P:'lrr E-< E-< g;
~ ~
~
, I I
Sp- \ OJ A~c 'i/5/IOf 5: 00PM SOl c !>- X ;.
Sp- z... ~-
~J /
./..-.;>r ------,J U)~ / .::,J.- L- I /-./ i-
f ~
~
Sarnpl s rEceived st ~ oC
,
SIGNATURE / PRINT NAME COMPANY DATE TIME
..-
Relinquished b~ ~/~~
....-:::~::; ...••../.7 l3~Jvn Y'C().I\Cl, AESJ:. 1/3//1 ILJqt.fJ
Received by: fr'I tv( I~ K)~t\V\ p~t\V\'-I :r-~tl ~/g f)tq MIS
Relinquished by: ! --
Received by: