Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout17327 67th Ave NE_PWD2427_2026 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION Community & Economic Development City of Arlington • 18204 59th Avenue NE • Arlington, WA 98223 • Phone (360) 403-3551 CIVIL (TYPE I)  GRADING/PAVING/DRAINAGE (TYPE II)  RIGHT OF WAY (TYPE III)  TYPE I & II ONLY NEW DEVELOPMENT  REDEVELOPMENT  Project Name: Snohomish County Tax Parcel I.D. #: Project Address / Location: Description of Project: OWNER Name: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: APPLICANT Name: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: ENGINEER Name: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: License #: Expiration: CONTRACTOR Name: 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:_______________________________________________________________Date:____________________ Page | 1 REVISED 10/2013 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION Community & Economic Development City of Arlington • 18204 59th Avenue NE • Arlington, WA 98223 • Phone (360) 403-3551 Complete package constitutes all items. Only complete submittals will be accepted. Civil - Submittal Requirements, Type I:  Complete Application;  Construction Plans including cut / fill quantities;  3 full size plan sets 22” x 34”  PDF file of the complete plan set  1 full size set of landscape plans 22” x 34”  Marysville Utility plans if applicable (2 sets);  Drainage Analysis including calculations and downstream analysis (3 sets) and (PDF file);  Geotechnical Report (3 sets) and (PDF file);  SEPA is required if 500 or more cubic yards of cut / fill is proposed (not required if included with a Land Use Permit); Grading cut / fill quantity: _______________________________;  Drafts of easement(s) dedication(s), and/or CAPE(s) for review;  Construction Calculation Worksheet;  NPDES Permit (if required); See Storm Water Drainage Report, New or Redevelopment Flowcharts  Assurance Device will be required prior to Permit Issuance (Bond or Assignment of Funds);  Plan Check Fee due at time of permit submittal. Grading / Paving / Drainage Submittal Requirements, Type II:  Complete Application;  Construction Plans including import/export quantities;  3 full size plan sets 22” x 34”  PDF file of the complete plan set  Drainage Analysis including calculations and downstream analysis (3 sets) and (PDF file);  Geotechnical Report (3 sets) and (PDF file);  SEPA is required if 500 or more cubic yards of cut/fill is proposed (not required if included with a Land Use Permit); Grading cut / fill quantity: _______________________________;  Construction Calculation Worksheet;  NPDES Permit (if required); See Storm Water Drainage Report, New or Redevelopment Flowcharts  Plan Check Fee due at time of permit submittal. Right of Way Submittal Requirements, Type III:  Complete Application;  Construction Plans;  Traffic Control Plan;  Road Closure Request;  Temporary Erosion & Sediment Control (TESC) Plan;  Certificate of Insurance with the City of Arlington named as Additional Insured;  Assurance Device will be required prior to Permit Issuance (Bond or Assignment of Funds);  Engineers Estimated Cost of Construction; $______________________________________  Permit fee due at time of permit issuance. Page | 2 REVISED 10/2013 DRAINAGE REPORT Centennial Park-Phase II 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223 CG Project No.: 18386.20 09/16/2020 250 4th Ave S Ste 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone: (425) 778-8500 Fax: (425) 778-5536 Table of Contents Section I – Project Overview Section II – Minimum Requirements Section III – Off-Site Analysis Section IV – Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Section V – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Section VI – Special Reports and/or Studies Section VII – Other Permits Section VIII – Operation and Maintenance Manual Appendix A – WWHM Reports 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section I, Page 1 Section I – Project Overview Section I Summary Overview Existing Condition Developed Condition Vicinity Map Aerial Photograph Overview This project is the development of three buildings (mostly for apartments), along with associated driveways, parking, sidewalks, and common areas as part of the second phase of the Centennial Park project. The overall parcel is an 8.81-acre site at the northeast corner of the 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223 (TPN: 31052300300800). The existing site prior to Phase 1 was undeveloped, forested along its south and side. There is also a potentially regulated drainage channel on the south side of the site that cannot be altered until permanently declassified. In the developed condition, most of the site has cleared and regraded for the Phase 1 buildings, excluding the 150’ buffer area for the stream flowing through from east to west along the south property line. This report is prepared in tandem with ongoing permitting by others for the potentially regulated channel. For the purposes of this report we have assumed the buffer will be decreased to 75’ wide. The project will comply with the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (herein referred to as the SWMMWW). The project must address Minimum Requirements #1-9 of the SWMMWW and must also submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit to the Washington State Department of Ecology because overall land disturbance will be over an acre. The site is within the Mixed-Use NC-Neighborhood Commercial zone. Surrounding areas include RLMD- Low to Moderate Density Residential to the north and east, GI- General Industrial to the west, and GC- General Commercial to the southwest. The site is at the southern border of the City of Arlington. Existing Condition The site totals 8.81 ac and was undeveloped. It was forested along the south and east sides of the site and has a Category IV wetland is located at the northwest corner. There also is a drainage channel at the south side that will not be altered until permanently declassified. The rest of the site is cleared. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section I, Page 2 In general, the site slopes from east to west with slopes ranging from 2.5% at the west side of the site to 24% at the east side of the site. Per the geotechnical report, the underlying soil underneath 1.5 to 3 feet of fill on the western side of the site is Alluvium/Marysville Sand a medium dense, brown, gravelly sand. On the eastern side of the site it is Advance Outwash a medium dense, to very dense, gravely sand. The soils for the project correspond to hydrologic soil group “C.” Groundwater was visible in the test pits and borings done for the geotechnical report. In addition to the groundwater table, there is also several instances of perched groundwater nearer the surface. Developed Condition The majority of the site has been developed under Phase I of this project. During that Phase I the stream and buffer area of 73,096 sf (1.678 ac) was left untouched. This Phase II report has been written for the additional development planned for a portion of the area that was left untouched to the south of the project lot during the Phase I development. Most of the remaining site will be developed with 3 apartment buildings along with associated parking. Vegetation will be preserved along the buffer for the stream along the south property line. Water and sewer connections for the Phase II buildings will be tied into the Phase I utilities already in construction. Stormwater will be controlled on site and will overflow into Phase I infiltration trenches already in construction. The previous phase site total was approximately 6.214 ac in the proposed condition, without including the wetland onsite and the stream and their buffers. The proposed lot coverage is as follows: Total Phase I area under separate permit: 275,673 sf (6.329 ac) Total Phase II development area: 38,861 sf (0.892 ac) The areas listed below are added to the overall site drainage model for Phase I. Pervious Area Landscaping, Flat, C: 1,998 sf (0.046 ac) Total: 1,998 sf (0.046 ac) Impervious Areas Parking, Flat: 13,724 sf (0.315 ac) Roof, Flat: 16,969 sf (0.390 ac) Sidewalk, Flat: 8,168 sf (0.188 ac) Total: 38,861 sf (0.892 ac) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section I, Page 3 PROJECT SITE Figure I-1 Vicinity Map 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section I, Page 4 PROJECT SITE Figure I-2 Aerial Photograph 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section II, Page 1 Section II – Minimum Requirements Section II Summary Narrative Stormwater requirements were determined from the 2014 SWMMWW. This report is based on the steps recommended in Chapter 3 of Volume I in the SWMMWW. The project will comply with Minimum Requirements #1-9. Minimum Requirement #1: Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans: The stormwater site plan consists of this report and the civil drawings and is prepared in accordance with Chapter 3 of Volume 1 of the SWMMWW. Minimum Requirement #2: Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP): The SWPPP shall include a narrative and drawings. The SWPPP narrative shall include documentation that addresses the 13 elements of Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention. See Section V and the civil drawings. A Construction Stormwater General Permit must also be submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology because land disturbance will be over an acre. Minimum Requirement #3: Source Control of Pollution: Source control BMPs during construction are described in Section IV. For this site we have looked at the pool for compliance with 2014 SWMMWW S433. Minimum Requirement #4: Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls: Natural drainage patterns shall be maintained, and discharges from the project site shall occur at the natural location, to the maximum extent practicable. The manner by which runoff is discharged from the project site must not cause a significant adverse impact to downstream receiving waters and down-gradient properties. All projects shall submit an off-site qualitative analysis. A qualitative analysis of the upstream and downstream system entering the site is presented in Section III. Minimum Requirement #5: On-Site Stormwater Management: Per Table 2.5.1 from the SWMMWW, new development projects on any parcel inside the Urban Growth Area that trigger Minimum Requirements #1 through #9 must demonstrate compliance with the Low Impact Development Performance Standard and BMP T5.13; or use On-Site Stormwater Management BMPs from List #2. The project proposes to meet the Low Impact Development Standard using gravel infiltration trenches and BMP T5.13. See Section IV. Minimum Requirement #6: Runoff Treatment: This requirement applies to the new plus replaced hard surfaces and the converted vegetation areas. Runoff treatment is required because the project adds more than 5,000 sf of pollution-generating hard surface. Minimum Requirement #7: Flow Control: Projects must provide flow control to reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff from hard surfaces and land cover conversions. The project will meet the flow control duration standard using gravel infiltration trenches designed to infiltrate 100% of site runoff. See Section IV. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section II, Page 2 Minimum Requirement #8: Wetlands Protection: This requirement applies only to projects whose stormwater discharges into a wetland, either directly or indirectly through a conveyance system. Phase 1 of this project has already covered the Wetland Protections calculation for the Category IV wetland on the north side of the lot which is impacted by phase 1 runoff being directed towards the wetland. Phase 2 does not direct any additional stormwater to the wetland and does not cause any further impact on the wetland as phase 2 is on the south side of the project lot. Minimum Requirement #9: Operation and Maintenance: An Operation and Maintenance Manual that is consistent with the provisions in Volume V of the SWMMWW is required for proposed Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control BMPs/facilities. The party (or parties) responsible for maintenance and operation shall be identified in the operation and maintenance manual. For private facilities, a copy of the Operation and Maintenance Manual shall be retained on-site or within reasonable access to the site and shall be transferred with the property to the new owner. For public facilities, a copy of the operation and maintenance manual shall be retained in the appropriate department. A log of maintenance activity that indicates what actions were taken shall be kept and be available for inspection. Please see Section VIII. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section III, Page 1 Section III – Off-Site Analysis Section III Summary Task 1 – Define and map the study area Task 2 – Review all available information of the study area Task 3 – Field inspect the area Task 4 - Describe the drainage system, and its existing and predicted problems Task 1 – Define and map the study area Development projects that discharge stormwater off-site shall submit an off-site analysis report that assesses the potential off-site water quality, erosion, slope stability, and drainage impacts associated with the project and that proposes appropriate mitigation of those impacts. An initial qualitative analysis shall extend downstream for the entire flow path from the project site to the receiving water or up to one mile, whichever is less. Nearly all runoff from developed areas will be directed to infiltration trenches designed to infiltrate 100% of contributing runoff. The infiltration trenches are designed with the overflow discharge pipes from the trenches connecting to the trenches designed and built for Phase I of this project which overflow and tie into city infrastructure in 67th Ave NE. The overflow paths will be studied in this section. City Infrastructure OVERFLOW CATCH BASINS EXISTING DITCH INFILTRATION EDGECOMB CREEK ONSITE (MIDDLE FORK OF QUILCEDA CREEK) Figure III-1 Study Area from Stormwater Infrastructure Map of City of Arlington. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section III, Page 2 Figure III- 1 depicts the downstream flow path from the site. Existing drainage in 67th Ave NE flows north and outfalls into a large bioretention pond on the west side of the street. From there through a ditch and culvert system and a piped system the stormwater outfalls into the Edgecomb Creek/Middle Fork Quilceda Creek which outfalls into the Possession Sound (Puget Sound) Task 2 – Review all available information on the study area The area of the project area for Phase II is currently cleared but does not contain any stormwater improvements. Phase I of this project has been permitted and construction has begun. Existing stormwater infrastructure in the adjacent streets was determined from the survey, field inspection and the City’s online maps. The site is within the Edgecomb Creek/Quilceda Creek drainage basin which outlets to the Possession Sound. All available information on the study area has been presented in the previous Phase I drainage report for this project. The upstream flows and downstream flows both are mitigated Task 2.1 – Upstream Flows There are two on-site areas gathering concentrated upstream flows. a) Onsite Ditch on South Side of Project Site On the north side of 172nd Street NE (SR 531) drainage flows into ditch system on the south side of the subject property, and this on-site ditch then flows into Edgecomb Creek. Edgecomb Creek used to cross SR 531 from south to north in a 36-inch culvert, where it would then flow through the subject property within this existing ditch before crossing back under SR 531 again in a 60-inch culvert back to the south side of the road. WSDOT Job Number 16A032 realigned this Creek to be entirely on the south side of the right of way. As part of this work, the 36-inch pipe was abandoned. The 60-inch culvert remains in place. As built drawings from that project are provided in this report. See Figures III-3 and III-4. The on-site drainage ditch takes flows from the north side of SR 531 for roughly four thousand feet upstream of the project. These enter the site via a ditch system from the Atonement Free Lutheran Church. Edgecomb Creek no longer flows through the site, so upon the site visit in Task 3 below, the ditch was mostly dry, other than some puddled areas following the various log drops within the bottom of the channel. For the current project, the ditch system is expected to remain, and with a 150’ buffer. Flows have been preliminarily quantified to evaluate the upstream drainage entering and exiting the site. Running the upstream calculations using the SBUH method in HydroCAD, the upstream flows through the stream are as follows: 2 Year Peak Flow: 12.32 cfs 25 Year Peak Flow: 26.63 cfs 100 Year Peak Flow: 33.79 cfs For the current proposed project, we have considered this area to be undisturbed, bypassing through the site. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section III, Page 3 Task 2.2 – Downstream Flows The area of development on the site is generally the portion of the property which flows westerly toward 67th Ave NE. The infiltration trenches on site are being designed to infiltrate 100% of contributing runoff, with the street improvements and small portions of the site’s lower, west areas bypassing directly into the City’s storm system, at a level meeting flow control and LID standards. There are catch basins and conveyance pipes in 67th Ave NE which discharge to the north into stormwater ponds which overflow to the southwest into Edgecomb Creek (Figure III-54). This is the natural direction of flow from the existing site. Stormwater arrives to the 67th Ave NE system primarily by sheet flow off of the west side of the site. Task 3 – Field inspect the study area A site visit was conducted on May 29, 2019. Weather was warm and rain had not recently occurred. The area reviewed was the site (with emphasis on the onsite ditch that was previously a portion of Edgecomb Creek), SR 531, 67th Ave NE, and several nearby drainage areas and culverts. Several photographs of this preconstruction site visit are provided in this section of the report. Task 4 – Describe the drainage system, and its existing and predicted problems The drainage system is described in Task 2. Site runoff is designed to be mitigated in infiltration trench within the new parking area west of building Q. This trench will overflow into the Phase I trenches which overflow into the City storm system. See Section IV and Appendix A for further description and calculations. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section III, Page 4 Figure III-3 Upstream flows entering site from SR 531 roadside ditch Figure III-4 On-site ditch (formally Edgecomb Creek route) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section III, Page 5 Figure III-5 Looking north on 67th. Trees on left side of picture border off site pond/bioretention Figure III-6 Edgecomb Creek now flow on south side of SR 531 without crossing. Shown here crossing under 67th, south of intersection. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section IV, Page 1 Section IV – Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Section IV Summary On-Site Stormwater Management Runoff Treatment Flow Control Source Control The developed site is the portion of the lot which was left untouched during Phase I of this project. Phase II assumes that the existing 150’ buffer will be reduced to 75’ through permitting by others. The majority of the developed area will be managed by a 150’ x 10’ infiltration trench to the west of Building Q. The only Phase II surface water from an area that is not being conveyed to the trench is the southmost walkways along the buffer. These walkways will be dispersed towards the buffer area. The trench has been designed to infiltrate 99.92% of the stormwater directed towards it. Although it is not 100% infiltrating, the trench ties into the Phase I infiltration trench system which is designed to infiltrate 100% of Phase I runoff. A WWHM model is provided in Appendix A depicting how the Phase I system can still infiltrate to 100% with the additional overflow from the 99.92% infiltrating Phase II trench. The site meets the Low Impact Development (LID) Performance standard and the Flow Control Standard by tying into the 100% infiltrating system designed with Phase I of this project. Water quality is generally addressed by a treatment layer of amended soil under the infiltration trenches. The predeveloped (forested) and developed land cover used in the WWHM model is as follows (excluding stream area and its buffers). See Appendix A for more detail within the WHHM report. The areas listed below are added to the overall site drainage model for Phase I. Pervious Area Landscaping, Flat, C: 1,998 sf (0.046 ac) Total: 1,998 sf (0.046 ac) Impervious Areas Parking, Flat: 13,724 sf (0.315 ac) Roof, Flat: 16,969 sf (0.390 ac) Sidewalk, Flat: 8,168 sf (0.188 ac) Total: 38,861 sf (0.892 ac) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section IV, Page 2 In design, Infiltration was only found to be feasible by raising the site above the shallow perched water and using shallow infiltration trenches. Most hard surfaces in Phase I are routed to infiltration trenches on-site. Phase II areas are routed to an infiltration trench labeled 112 of the civil plans, picking up on the numbering system from Phase I. To infiltrate despite the perched water presence in the trench area, Trench 112 is to be protected with an impermeable PVC liner. The underlying soil will be completely replaced, building a column of sand from the bottom of the storage and treatment layers all the way down to the Marysville sand, generally noted as approximately 10’ below predeveloped surfaces in the geotechnical reports. This removes the underlying alluvium which is less permeable and seems to be causing some of the perched groundwater. The replacement sand is much more permeable, and so a 5.0 in/hr rate is being used per the Hydrogeological Assessment report. The, new, underlying sand is not being used for storage or as part of the trench, as that space is required for mounding. Because of this, we are treating these trenches as having a 10’ width and 3’ depth, meaning they do not meet the criteria of underground injection control wells (UICs). On-Site Stormwater Management & Flow Control The project must meet Minimum Requirement #5 & 7. Per Table 2.5.1 from the SWMMWW, new development projects on any parcel inside the Urban Growth Area that trigger Minimum Requirements #1 through #9 must either: 1. Use On-Site Stormwater Management BMPs from List #2 for all surfaces within each type of surface in List #2; or 2. Demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard and BMP T5.13. The project proposes to meet the LID Performance Standard and BMP T5.13. It also meets the Flow Control Standard WWHM2012 was used to determine the total amount of gravel infiltration trench required to infiltrate the runoff and the output is provided in Appendix A. Runoff Treatment Runoff treatment is required for pollution-generating hard surfaces (PGHS). Per Chapter 2.1 of Volume V of the SWMMWW, enhanced treatment is required since the project is a multi-family residential project that discharges directly to fresh waters or conveyance systems tributary to fresh waters designed for aquatic life use. According to the geotechnical report attached in Section VI the surface soil is suitable for on-site pollutant treatment. This soil will not be used in design however, as the perched groundwater could be present. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section IV, Page 3 The fill selected for areas underlying treatment areas has the appropriate cation exchange capacity to treat the stormwater. Oil water separator fittings per City details are included in upstream catch basins collecting pollution generating impervious surfaces to provide pretreatment prior to discharge into the trenches. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 1 Section V – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Section V Summary Narrative Erosion control details are provided consistent with the 2014 DOE Manual. Erosion control plan sheets are provided in full size as a part of the civil drawing set. A Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSGP) is required through the Department of Ecology because land disturbing activities total over one acre. This will be performed roughly on the same timeline as full engineering submittals to the City of Arlington. A summary of the elements is provided below. 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. Clearing limits will be to the extents of necessary land disturbance. The BMPs relevant to marking the clearing limits that will be applied for this project include: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103) 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. Stabilized construction entrances will be added on the west and east south of the site at the locations of the proposed entrances to the apartment complex. This will help to prevent sediment tracking into the right of way. The same construction entrances used for Phase I of this project will be used for Phase II. Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C105) Element 3: Control Flow Rates Stormwater should not be directed to infiltration facilities until the site has been stabilized. Protect Low Impact Development BMPs from compaction and sedimentation per Element 13. Silt Fence (BMP C233) Element 4: Install Sediment Controls Stormwater must be filtered prior to being discharged to an infiltration system or leaving the construction site. A silt fence will be installed around the entire perimeter of the site. If sediment controls are ineffective and turbid water is observed discharging from the site, additional energy dissipation BMPs and sediment control BMPs should be installed such as wattles. It may also be necessary to stabilize soils per Element 5 that are not being worked on. The specific BMPs to be used for controlling sediment on this project include: Silt Fence (BMP C233) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 2 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: Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120) Mulching (BMP C121) Nets and Blankets (BMP C122) Plastic Covering (BMP C123) Sodding (BMP C124) Topsoiling/Composting (BMP C125) Surface Roughening (BMP C130) Dust Control (BMP C140) Element 6: Protect Slopes Exposed slopes shall be stabilized with BMPs found in Element 5. Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets Drain inlets near the site and those made operable on-site will be protected from sedimentation. Stormwater shall not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. Inlet protection devices shall be cleaned or removed and replaced when sediment has filled one-third of the available storage (or as specified by the manufacturer). The specific BMPs to be used for protecting drain inlets are: Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets All temporary on-site conveyance channels shall be designed, constructed, and stabilized to prevent erosion during construction. The specific BMPs to be used for are: Channel Lining (BMP C202) Outlet Protection (BMP C209) Element 9: Control Pollutants Design, install, implement and maintain effective pollution prevention measures to minimize the discharge of pollutants. The suggested BMPs are: Concrete Handling (BMP C151) Saw Cutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention (BMP C152) Material Delivery, Storage and Containment (BMP C153) Element 10: Control Dewatering De-watering is not anticipated. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 3 Element 11: Maintain BMPs All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued performance of their intended function. Element 12: Manage the Project • Phase development projects to the maximum degree practicable and consider seasonal work limits. • Inspection and monitoring – Inspect, maintain, and repair all BMPs as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Conduct site inspections and monitoring in accordance with the Construction Stormwater General Permit or local plan approval authority. • Maintain 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. Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development BMPs Gravel infiltration trenches are proposed throughout the site. All heavy equipment should be kept off infiltration facilities that have been excavated to final grade to retain the infiltration rate of the soil. The proposed trenches shall be protected from compaction during construction with orange protective fencing. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 4 Construction Stormwater General Permit Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for Centennial Park Prepared for: The Washington State Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office Permittee / Owner Developer Operator / Contractor Williams Investments Williams Investments Exxel Pacific 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE, Arlington, WA 98223 Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) Name Organization Contact Phone Number Joshua Taylor Taylor Excavating 360.629.3078 SWPPP Prepared By Name Organization Contact Phone Number Darina Litushko CG Engineering 425.778.8500 SWPPP Preparation Date July 2020 Project Construction Dates Activity / Phase Start Date End Date Construction August 2020 December 2021 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 5 Table of Contents 1 Project Information .............................................................................................................. 9 1.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.2 Proposed Construction Activities ................................................................................................ 10 2 Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) ........................................ 11 2.1 The 13 Elements .......................................................................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Element 1: Preserve Vegetation / Mark Clearing Limits .................................................... 10 2.1.2 Element 2: Establish Construction Access .......................................................................... 11 2.1.3 Element 3: Control Flow Rates ........................................................................................... 12 2.1.4 Element 4: Install Sediment Controls ................................................................................. 13 2.1.5 Element 5: Stabilize Soils .................................................................................................... 14 2.1.6 Element 6: Protect Slopes .................................................................................................. 15 2.1.7 Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets .......................................................................................... 16 2.1.8 Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets ......................................................................... 18 2.1.9 Element 9: Control Pollutants ............................................................................................ 19 2.1.10 Element 10: Control Dewatering ........................................................................................ 22 2.1.11 Element 11: Maintain BMPs ............................................................................................... 23 2.1.12 Element 12: Manage the Project ........................................................................................ 24 2.1.13 Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs ............................................... 27 3 Pollution Prevention Team ................................................................................................. 28 4 Monitoring and Sampling Requirements ........................................................................... 29 4.1 Site Inspection ............................................................................................................................. 29 4.2 Stormwater Quality Sampling ..................................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 Turbidity Sampling .............................................................................................................. 29 4.2.2 pH Sampling ........................................................................................................................ 31 5 Discharges to 303(d) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Waterbodies ....................... 32 5.1 303(d) Listed Waterbodies .......................................................................................................... 32 5.2 TMDL Waterbodies ..................................................................................................................... 32 6 Reporting and Record Keeping ........................................................................................... 33 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 6 6.1 Record Keeping ........................................................................................................................... 33 6.1.1 Site Log Book ...................................................................................................................... 33 6.1.2 Records Retention .............................................................................................................. 33 6.1.3 Updating the SWPPP .......................................................................................................... 33 6.2 Reporting..................................................................................................................................... 34 6.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports ........................................................................................... 34 6.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance .......................................................................................... 34 List of Tables Table 1 – Summary of Site Pollutant Constituents ....................................................................................... 9 Table 2 – Pollutants ..................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 3 – pH-Modifying Sources ................................................................................................................. 19 Table 4 – Dewatering BMPs ........................................................................................................................ 22 Table 5 – Management ............................................................................................................................... 24 Table 6 – BMP Implementation Schedule ................................................................................................... 25 Table 7 – Team Information ........................................................................................................................ 28 Table 8 – Turbidity Sampling Method ......................................................................................................... 29 Table 9 – pH Sampling Method ................................................................................................................... 31 List of Appendices Appendix/Glossary A. Site Map B. BMP Detail C. Correspondence D. Site Inspection Form E. Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSWGP) F. 303(d) List Waterbodies / TMDL Waterbodies Information G. Contaminated Site Information H. Engineering Calculations 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 7 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym / Abbreviation Explanation 303(d) Section of the Clean Water Act pertaining to Impaired Waterbodies BFO Bellingham Field Office of the Department of Ecology BMP(s) Best Management Practice(s) CESCL Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead CO2 Carbon Dioxide CRO Central Regional Office of the Department of Ecology CSWGP Construction Stormwater General Permit CWA Clean Water Act DMR Discharge Monitoring Report DO Dissolved Oxygen Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ERO Eastern Regional Office of the Department of Ecology ERTS Environmental Report Tracking System ESC Erosion and Sediment Control GULD General Use Level Designation NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units NWRO Northwest Regional Office of the Department of Ecology pH Power of Hydrogen RCW Revised Code of Washington SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure su Standard Units SWMMEW Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington SWMMWW Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TESC Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control SWRO Southwest Regional Office of the Department of Ecology TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load VFO Vancouver Field Office of the Department of Ecology WAC Washington Administrative Code 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 8 Acronym / Abbreviation Explanation WSDOT Washington Department of Transportation WWHM Western Washington Hydrology Model 1. Project Information Project/Site Name: Centennial Park Phase II Street/Location: 18506 Smokey Point Blvd. City: Arlington State: WA Zip code: 98223 Subdivision: N/A Receiving waterbody: Creek 1.1 Existing Conditions Total acreage (including support activities such as off-site equipment staging yards, material storage areas, borrow areas). Total acreage: 2.05 Disturbed acreage: 1.25 ac Existing structures: 0 ac Landscape 0 ac Drainage patterns: The site generally slopes downward from the E to the W. Grades are moderate. Existing Vegetation: Bushes, shrubs, grass, stream, trees. Critical Areas (wetlands, streams, high erosion risk, Stream located towards the south side of the steep or difficult to stabilize slopes): lot, will not be impacted. List of known impairments for 303(d) listed or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the receiving waterbody: Edgecomb Creek is not listed as having impairments on the EPA website. Table 1 includes a list of suspected and/or known contaminants associated with the construction activity. No known or suspected contaminants are associated with the site. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 9 Table 1 – Summary of Site Pollutant Constituents Constituent (Pollutant) Location Depth Concentration 1.2 Proposed Construction Activities Description of site development (example: subdivision): Multi-family residential. The project will add 3 additional buildings. These include one mixed use building, two apartment buildings. Description of construction activities (example: site preparation, demolition, excavation): Clearing and grubbing of existing forested and brushed areas; excavating, filling, and grading; utility installation, parking lot surfacing, building construction. Description of site drainage including flow from and onto adjacent properties. Must be consistent with Site Map in Appendix A: The site generally slopes downward from the east to the west and drainage in the developed condition is expected to flow in the same direction. Description of final stabilization (example: extent of revegetation, paving, landscaping): Buildings, parking lots and driveways will cover about 45% of the site, with approximately 15% of the site being landscaping and the remaining 40% being encumbered by the critical area where the stream flows through. Contaminated Site Information: Proposed activities regarding contaminated soils or groundwater (example: on-site treatment system, authorized sanitary sewer discharge): N/A 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 10 2 Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) The SWPPP is a living document reflecting current conditions and changes throughout the life of the project. These changes may be informal (i.e., hand-written notes and deletions). Update the SWPPP when the CESCL has noted a deficiency in BMPs or deviation from original design. 2.1 The 13 Elements 2.1.1 Element 1: Preserve Vegetation / 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 in the field. In general, natural vegetation and native topsoil shall be retained in an undisturbed state to the maximum extent possible. A protective barrier shall be placed around the protected trees prior to land preparation or construction activities and shall remain in place until all construction activity is terminated. No equipment, chemicals, soil deposits or construction materials shall be placed within the protective barriers. Any landscaping activities subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with light machinery or hand labor. High Visibility Fence will be placed around the entire site running along the property lines. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C101: Preserving Natural Vegetation • BMP C102: Buffer Zones • BMP C103: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence • BMP C233: Silt Fence Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to clearing and grading. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 11 2.1.2 Element 2: Establish Construction Access Limit vehicle access to one route, if possible. 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. Street sweeping, street cleaning, or wheel wash/tire baths may be necessary if the stabilized construction access is not effective. If sediment is tracked off site, clean the affected roadway thoroughly at the end of each day, or more necessary as needed. All wheel wash wastewater shall be controlled on-site and CANNOT be discharged into waters of the State. Stabilized construction entrances will be added along the west edges of the site at the locations of the proposed entrances to the complex. This will help to prevent sediment tracking into the right of way. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C105: Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit • BMP C107: Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to clearing and grading. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 12 2.1.3 Element 3: Control Flow Rates The project site has a gentle slope from east to west for most of the site (<2%). There is a moderate slope near the west side of the site (12%). Stormwater will be directed to a temporary detention pond at the northwest corner of the site, and flow rates will be controlled per the BMPs listed below. The construction of the temporary sediment pond must be done as one of the first steps in grading. Infiltration facilities will be constructed for permanent stormwater control. Stormwater should not be directed to these facilities until the site has been stabilized. Protect Low Impact Development BMPs from compaction and sedimentation per Element 13. Flow rates around the rest of the site will be controlled by the silt fence that will be placed around the entire site. Will you construct stormwater retention and/or detention facilities? Yes No Will you use permanent infiltration ponds or other low impact development (example: rain gardens, bio- retention, porous pavement) to control flow during construction? Yes No List and describe BMPs: • BMP C207: Check Dams • BMP C209: Outlet Protection • BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to grading. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 13 2.1.4 Element 4: Install Sediment Controls Stormwater must be filtered prior to being discharged to an infiltration system or leaving the construction site. Sediment control BMPs will be installed as one of the first steps of grading. These BMPs must be functional before other land-disturbing activities, especially grading and filling, take place. A silt fence will be installed around the perimeter of the developed site areas. A temporary sediment pond will be installed at the northwest corner of the site where some sediment will be able to settle out prior to discharge to the public storm system. If sediment controls are ineffective and turbid water is observed discharging from the site, additional energy dissipation BMPs and sediment control BMPs should be installed such as wattles. It may also be necessary to stabilize soils per Element 5 that are not being worked on. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C233: Silt Fence • BMP C235: Wattles • BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to clearing and grading. Inspection and Maintenance plan: Repair sediment controls as needed. Remove sediment from pond as needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 14 2.1.5 Element 5: Stabilize Soils Stabilize exposed and unworked soils by the BMPs listed below to prevent erosion. Protect stockpiles with plastic covering or other approved sediment trapping measures. Stabilize exposed soils with Temporary and Permanent Seeding, Mulching, Sodding, Top soiling/Compost, or Surface Roughening. Minimize soil compaction by applying gravel base early on areas to be paved. The ESC Supervisor shall be familiar with BMPs for soil stabilization and dust control and implement these BMPs where needed on the proposed site. West of the Cascade Mountains Crest Number of Days Soils Can be Season Dates Left Exposed During the Dry Season May 1 – September 30 7 days During the Wet Season October 1 – April 30 2 days Soils must be stabilized at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast. Anticipated project dates: Start date: August 2019 End date: December 2020 Will you construct during the wet season? Yes No List and describe BMPs: • BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding • BMP C121: Mulching • BMP C123: Plastic Covering • BMP C124: Sodding • BMP C125: Top soiling/Composting • BMP C130: Surface Roughening • BMP C131: Gradient Terraces • BMP C140: Dust Control Installation Schedules: As needed as soil is exposed. Inspection and Maintenance plan: End of the shift before a holiday or weekend and prior to forecasted rain events. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 15 2.1.6 Element 6: Protect Slopes All cut and fill slopes will be designed, constructed, and protected in a manner that minimizes erosion. The interceptor swale and check dams will be located along the west side of the site as needed. Will steep slopes be present at the site during construction? Yes No (temporary excavations may create brief temporary slopes during wall construction) List and describe BMPs: • BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding • BMP C121: Mulching • BMP C123: Plastic Covering • BMP C124: Sodding • BMP C130: Surface Roughening • BMP C200: Interceptor Dike and Swale • BMP C201: Grass-Lined Channels • BMP C207: Check Dams Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to grading and as needed to minimize erosion. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 16 2.1.7 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 will be implemented for all drainage inlets and culverts that could potentially be impacted by sediment-laden runoff on and near the project site. Inlet protection should be provided as shown on the C2.1 Plan. Inlet protection devices will be cleaned (or removed and replaced), when sediment has filled the device by one third (1/3) or as specified by the manufacturer. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection Installation Schedules: Before land disturbance for existing catch basins and as new catch basins are made operable. Inspection and Maintenance plan: Inlets will be inspected weekly at a minimum and daily during storm events. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 17 2.1.8 Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets Where site runoff is to be conveyed in channels or discharged to a stream or some other natural drainage point, efforts will be taken to prevent downstream erosion. The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, all temporary on-site conveyance channels shall be designed, constructed, and stabilized to prevent erosion from the expected peak 10- minute velocity of flow from a Type 1A, 10-year, 24-hour recurrence interval storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, 1-hour peak flow rate indicated by an approved continuous runoff simulation model, increased by a factor of 1.6, shall be used. Provide stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes, and downstream reaches, will be installed at the outlets of all conveyance systems. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C202: Channel Lining • BMP C207: Check Dams • BMP C209: Outlet Protection Installation Schedules: Install BMPs prior to grading. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 18 2.1.9 Element 9: Control Pollutants The following pollutants are anticipated to be present on-site: Table 2 – Pollutants Pollutant (List pollutants and source, if applicable) Concrete Concrete process water Concrete slurry Asphalt materials Utility Materials List and describe BMPs: • BMP C151: Concrete Handling • BMP C152: Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention • BMP C153: Material Delivery, Storage and Containment Installation Schedules: As needed as pollutant source materials are used on-site. Inspection and Maintenance plan: As needed. Responsible Staff: CESCL. Will maintenance, fueling, and/or repair of heavy equipment and vehicles occur on-site? Yes No Will wheel wash or tire bath system BMPs be used during construction? Yes No Will pH-modifying sources be present on-site? Yes No Table 3 – pH-Modifying Sources None Bulk cement Cement kiln dust Fly ash Other cementitious materials New concrete washing or curing waters 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 19 Waste streams generated from concrete grinding and sawing Exposed aggregate processes Dewatering concrete vaults Concrete pumping and mixer washout waters Recycled concrete Recycled concrete stockpiles Other (i.e., calcium lignosulfate) [please describe: ] Concrete trucks must not be washed out onto the ground, or into storm drains, open ditches, streets, or streams. Excess concrete must not be dumped on-site, except in designated concrete washout areas with appropriate BMPs installed. Will uncontaminated water from water-only based shaft drilling for construction of building, road, and bridge foundations be infiltrated provided the wastewater is managed in a way that prohibits discharge to surface waters? Yes No 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 20 2.1.10 Element 10: Control Dewatering Dewatering is not anticipated to be associated with this construction project. Most excavations are intended to occur in the dry seasons above the groundwater table, although several instances of “perched” groundwater were found in the geotechnical test pits. If necessary, only clean, non-turbid dewatering water (such as well-point groundwater) may be discharged to systems tributary to, or directly into, surface waters of the State, provided the dewatering flow does not cause erosion or flooding of receiving waters. Table 4 – Dewatering BMPs Infiltration Transport off-site in a vehicle (vacuum truck for legal disposal) Ecology-approved on-site chemical treatment or other suitable treatment technologies Sanitary or combined sewer discharge with local sewer district approval (last resort) Use of sedimentation bag with discharge to ditch or swale (small volumes of localized dewatering) List and describe BMPs: N/A. Installation Schedules: N/A. Inspection and Maintenance plan: N/A. Responsible Staff: CESCL. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 21 2.1.11 Element 11: Maintain BMPs All temporary and permanent Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) BMPs shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with each particular BMP specification (see Volume II of the SWMMWW or Chapter 7 of the SWMMEW). Visual monitoring of all BMPs installed at the site 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 may be reduced to once every calendar month. All temporary ESC BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be stabilized on-site or removed. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of either BMPs or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized. Additionally, protection must be provided for all BMPs installed for the permanent control of stormwater from sediment and compaction. BMPs that are to remain in place following completion of construction shall be examined and restored to full operating condition. If sediment enters these BMPs during construction, the sediment shall be removed, and the facility shall be returned to conditions specified in the construction documents. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 22 2.1.12 Element 12: Manage the Project The project will be managed based on the following principles: • Projects will be phased to the maximum extent practicable and seasonal work limitations will be taken into account. • Inspection and monitoring: o Inspection, maintenance and repair of all BMPs will occur as needed to ensure performance of their intended function. o Site inspections and monitoring will be conducted in accordance with Special Condition S4 of the CSWGP. Sampling locations are indicated on the Site Map. Sampling station(s) are located in accordance with applicable requirements of the CSWGP. • Maintain an updated SWPPP. o The SWPPP will be updated, maintained, and implemented in accordance with Special Conditions S3, S4, and S9 of the CSWGP. As site work progresses the SWPPP will be modified routinely to reflect changing site conditions. The SWPPP will be reviewed monthly to ensure the content is current. Table 5 – Management Design the project to fit the existing topography, soils, and drainage patterns Emphasize erosion control rather than sediment control Minimize the extent and duration of the area exposed Keep runoff velocities low Retain sediment on-site Thoroughly monitor site and maintain all ESC measures Schedule major earthwork during the dry season Other (please describe) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 23 Table 6 – BMP Implementation Schedule In general, it is expected that most early grading will occur in the dry season of 2020 and be picked up again in dry season of 2021. Phase of Wet/Dry Construction Stormwater BMPs Date Season Project Pre-construction Preserving Natural Vegetation (BMP C101) 8/19/2020 Dry Pre-construction High Visibility Fence (BMP C103) 8/21/2020 Dry Pre-construction Silt Fence (BMP C233) 8/21/2020 Dry Land disturbance Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit (BMP 8/23/2020 Dry C105) Land disturbance Sediment Trap (BMP C240) NA Dry Land disturbance Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241) 8/26/2020 Dry Land disturbance Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP Throughout project Dry C120) as needed Land disturbance Mulching (BMP C121) Throughout project Dry as needed Land disturbance Nets and Blankets (BMP C122) NA Dry Land disturbance Plastic Covering (BMP C123) 10/15/2020 Dry Land disturbance Sodding (BMP C124) Throughout project Dry as needed Land disturbance Topsoiling/Composting (BMP C125) Throughout project Dry as needed Land disturbance Surface Roughening (BMP C130) Throughout project Dry as needed Land disturbance Dust Control (BMP C140) Throughout project Dry as needed Land disturbance Interceptor Dike and Swale (BMP C200) 8/23/2020 Dry Land disturbance Channel Lining (BMP C202) 8/23/2020 Dry Land disturbance Check Dams (BMP C207) 8/23/2020 Dry Land disturbance Outlet protection (BMP C209) 8/26/2020 Dry Land disturbance Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) 8/19/2020 Dry Construction Wattles (BMP C235) NA Dry Construction Concrete handling (BMP C151) NA Dry Construction Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution 4/30/2021 Dry Prevention (BMP C152) Construction Material Delivery, Storage and Containment 8/26/2020 Dry (BMP C153) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 24 2.1.13 Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs Gravel Infiltration Trenches (SWMMWW Section 3.3.11) will be the primary means of stormwater mitigation for the roofs and other hard surfaces on this project. The infiltration trenches will need to be protected from compaction during construction. This can be done by placing orange protective fencing around the trenches as they are constructed in order to avoid compaction from vehicle traffic. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 25 3 Pollution Prevention Team Table 7 – Team Information Title Name(s) Phone Number Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Joshua Taylor 360.629.3078 Lead (CESCL) Resident Engineer CG Engineering 425.778.8500 Emergency Ecology Contact Jess Eakens 360.407.6442 Emergency Permittee/ Owner Contact Ryan Kilby 425.750.7926 Non-Emergency Owner Contact Ryan Kilby 425.750.7926 Monitoring Personnel TBD TBD Ecology Regional Office Northwest Regional Office 425.649.7000 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 26 4 Monitoring and Sampling Requirements Monitoring includes visual inspection, sampling for water quality parameters of concern, and documentation of the inspection and sampling findings in a site logbook. A site logbook will be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include: • A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements • Site inspections • Stormwater sampling data File a blank form under Appendix D. The site logbook must be maintained on-site within reasonable access to the site and be made available upon request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction. Numeric effluent limits may be required for certain discharges to 303(d) listed waterbodies. See CSWGP Special Condition S8 and Section 5 of this template. 4.1 Site Inspection Site inspections will be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours following any discharge from the site. For sites that are temporarily stabilized and inactive, the required frequency is reduced to once per calendar month. The discharge point(s) are indicated on the Site Map (see Appendix A) and in accordance with the applicable requirements of the CSWGP. 4.2 Stormwater Quality Sampling 4.2.1 Turbidity Sampling Requirements include calibrated turbidity meter or transparency tube to sample site discharges for compliance with the CSWGP. Sampling will be conducted at all discharge points at least once per calendar week. Method for sampling turbidity: Table 8 – Turbidity Sampling Method Turbidity Meter/Turbidimeter (required for disturbances 5 acres or greater in size) Transparency Tube (option for disturbances less than 1 acre and up to 5 acres in size) The benchmark for turbidity value is 25 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) and a transparency less than 33 centimeters. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 27 If the discharge’s turbidity is 26 to 249 NTU or the transparency is less than 33 cm but equal to or greater than 6 cm, the following steps will be conducted: 1. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Special Condition S9. Make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. 2. Immediately begin the process to fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible. Address the problems within 10 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. If installation of necessary treatment BMPs is not feasible within 10 days, Ecology may approve additional time when the Permittee requests an extension within the initial 10-day response period. 3. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site logbook. If the turbidity exceeds 250 NTU or the transparency is 6 cm or less at any time, the following steps will be conducted: 1. Telephone or submit an electronic report to the applicable Ecology Region’s Environmental Report Tracking System (ERTS) within 24 hours. • Central Region (Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Kittitas, Klickitat, Okanogan, Yakima): (509) 575-2490 or http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/spills/forms/nerts_online/CRO_nerts_online.html • Eastern Region (Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, Whitman): (509) 329-3400 or http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/spills/forms/nerts_online/ERO_nerts_online.html • Northwest Region (King, Kitsap, Island, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom): (425) 649-7000 or http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/spills/forms/nerts_online/NWRO_nerts_online.html • Southwest Region (Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, Skamania, Thurston, Wahkiakum,): (360) 407-6300 or http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/spills/forms/nerts_online/SWRO_nerts_online.html 2. Immediately begin the process to fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible. Address the problems within 10 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. If installation of necessary treatment BMPs is not feasible within 10 days, Ecology may approve additional time when the Permittee requests an extension within the initial 10-day response period 3. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site logbook. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 28 4. Continue to sample discharges daily until one of the following is true: • Turbidity is 25 NTU (or lower). • Transparency is 33 cm (or greater). • Compliance with the water quality limit for turbidity is achieved. o 1 - 5 NTU over background turbidity, if background is less than 50 NTU o 1% - 10% over background turbidity, if background is 50 NTU or greater • The discharge stops or is eliminated. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 29 4.2.2 pH Sampling pH monitoring is required for “Significant concrete work” (i.e., greater than 1000 cubic yards poured concrete over the life of the project). The use of recycled concrete or engineered soils (soil amendments including but not limited to Portland cement-treated base [CTB], cement kiln dust [CKD] or fly ash) also requires pH monitoring. For significant concrete work, pH sampling will start the first day concrete is poured and continue until it is cured, typically three (3) weeks after the last pour. For engineered soils and recycled concrete, pH sampling begins when engineered soils or recycled concrete are first exposed to precipitation and continues until the area is fully stabilized. If the measured pH is 8.5 or greater, the following measures will be taken: 1. Prevent high pH water from entering storm sewer systems or surface water. 2. Adjust or neutralize the high pH water to the range of 6.5 to 8.5 su using appropriate technology such as carbon dioxide (CO2) sparging (liquid or dry ice). 3. Written approval will be obtained from Ecology prior to the use of chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging or dry ice. Method for sampling pH: Table 9 – pH Sampling Method pH meter pH test kit Wide range pH indicator paper 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 30 5 Discharges to 303(d) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Waterbodies 5.1 303(d) Listed Waterbodies Is the receiving water 303(d) (Category 5) listed for turbidity, fine sediment, phosphorus, or pH? Yes No List the impairment(s): N/A 5.2 TMDL Waterbodies Waste Load Allocation for CSWGP discharges: N/A List and describe BMPs: N/A Discharges to TMDL receiving waterbodies will meet in-stream water quality criteria at the point of discharge. The Construction Stormwater General Permit Proposed New Discharge to an Impaired Water Body form is included in Appendix F. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 31 6 Reporting and Record Keeping 6.1 Record Keeping 6.1.1 Site Logbook A site logbook will be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include: • A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements • Site inspections • Sample logs 6.1.2 Records Retention Records will be retained during the life of the project and for a minimum of three (3) years following the termination of permit coverage in accordance with Special Condition S5.C of the CSWGP. Permit documentation to be retained on-site: • CSWGP • Permit Coverage Letter • SWPPP • Site Logbook Permit documentation will be provided within 14 days of receipt of a written request from Ecology. A copy of the SWPPP or access to the SWPPP will be provided to the public when requested in writing in accordance with Special Condition S5.G.2.b of the CSWGP. 6.1.3 Updating the SWPPP The SWPPP will be modified if: • Found ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site. • There is a change in 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 will be modified within seven (7) days if inspection(s) or investigation(s) determine additional or modified BMPs are necessary for compliance. An updated timeline for BMP implementation will be prepared. 6.2 Reporting 6.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports Cumulative soil disturbance is one (1) acre or larger; therefore, Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) will be submitted to Ecology monthly. If there was no discharge during a given monitoring period the DMR will be submitted as required, reporting “No Discharge”. The DMR due date is fifteen (15) days following the end of each calendar month. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 32 DMRs will be reported online through Ecology’s WQWebDMR System. 6.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance If any of the terms and conditions of the permit is not met, and the resulting noncompliance may cause a threat to human health or the environment, the following actions will be taken: 1. Ecology will be notified within 24-hours of the failure to comply by calling the applicable Regional office ERTS phone number (Regional office numbers listed below). 2. Immediate action will be taken to prevent the discharge/pollution or otherwise stop or correct the noncompliance. If applicable, sampling and analysis of any noncompliance will be repeated immediately, and the results submitted to Ecology within five (5) days of becoming aware of the violation. 3. A detailed written report describing the noncompliance will be submitted to Ecology within five (5) days, unless requested earlier by Ecology. Anytime turbidity sampling indicates turbidity is 250 NTUs or greater, or water transparency is 6 cm or less, the Ecology Regional office will be notified by phone within 24 hours of analysis as required by Special Condition S5.A of the CSWGP. • Central Region at (509) 575-2490 for Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Kittitas, Klickitat, Okanogan, or Yakima County • Eastern Region at (509) 329-3400 for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, or Whitman County • Northwest Region at (425) 649-7000 for Island, King, Kitsap, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, or Whatcom County • Southwest Region at (360) 407-6300 for Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, Skamania, Thurston, or Wahkiakum 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 33 Include the following information: 1. Your name and / Phone number 2. Permit number 3. City / County of project 4. Sample results 5. Date / Time of call 6. Date / Time of sample 7. Project name In accordance with Special Condition S4.D.5.b of the CSWGP, the Ecology Regional office will be notified if chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging is planned for adjustment of high pH water. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 34 Appendix/Glossary A. Site Map Figure A-1. Site map. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 35 B. BMP Detail BMP details are shown on the approved TESC plan. Additional/alternative BMPs are listed below and available for download from the Ecology Construction Stormwater website: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/construction/index.html Element #1 - Mark Clearing Limits • BMP C101: Preserving Natural Vegetation • BMP C102: Buffer Zones • BMP C103: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence • BMP C233: Silt Fence Element #2 - Establish Construction Access • BMP C105: Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit • BMP C107: Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization Element #3 - Control Flow Rates • BMP C207: Check Dams • BMP C209: Outlet Protection • BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond Element #4 - Install Sediment Controls • BMP C233: Silt Fence • BMP C235: Wattles • BMP C241: Temporary Sediment Pond Element #5 - Stabilize Soils • BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding • BMP C121: Mulching • BMP C123: Plastic Covering • BMP C124: Sodding • BMP C125: Topsoiling/Composting • BMP C130: Surface Roughening • BMP C131: Gradient Terraces • BMP C140: Dust Control Element #6 - Protect Slopes • BMP C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding • BMP C121: Mulching • BMP C123: Plastic Covering • BMP C124: Sodding • BMP C130: Surface Roughening • BMP C200: Interceptor Dike and Swale 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 36 • BMP C201: Grass-Lined Channels • BMP C207: Check Dams Element #7 - Protect Drain Inlets • BMP C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection Element #8 - Stabilize Channels and Outlets • BMP C202: Channel Lining • BMP C207: Check Dams • BMP C209: Outlet Protection Element #9 – Control Pollutants • BMP C151: Concrete Handling • BMP C152: Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention • BMP C153: Material Delivery, Storage and Containment • See Volume IV – Source Control BMPs Element #10 - Control Dewatering NA Element #11: Maintain BMPs • BMP C150: Materials On Hand • BMP C160: Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead Element #12: Manage the Project • BMP C150: Materials On Hand • BMP C160: Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead • BMP C162: Scheduling Element #13: Protect LID BMPs • BMP C103: High Visibility Fence 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 37 C. Correspondence 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 38 D. Site Inspection Form Permit # Inspection Time Project Date Name Name of Certified Erosion Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) or qualified inspector if less than one acre Print Name: Approximate rainfall amount since the last inspection (in inches): Approximate rainfall amount in the last 24 hours (in inches): Current Weather Clear Cloudy Mist Rain Wind Fog A. Type of inspection: Weekly Post Storm Event Other B. Phase of Active Construction (check all that apply): Pre-Construction/installation of Clearing/Demo/Grading Infrastructure/storm/roads erosion/sediment controls Concrete pours Vertical Utilities Construction/buildings Offsite improvements Site temporary stabilized Final stabilization C. Questions: 1. Were all areas of construction and discharge points inspected? Yes No 2. Did you observe the presence of suspended sediment, turbidity, discoloration, Yes No or oil sheen 3. Was a water quality sample taken during inspection? (refer to permit Yes No conditions S4 & S5) 4. Was there a turbid discharge 250 NTU or greater, or Transparency 6 cm or Yes No less?* 5. If yes to #4 was it reported to Ecology? Yes No 6. Is pH sampling required? pH range required is 6.5 to 8.5. Yes No 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 39 If answering yes to a discharge, describe the event. Include when, where, and why it happened; what action was taken, and when. *If answering yes to # 4 record NTU/Transparency with continual sampling daily until turbidity is 25 NTU or less/ transparency is 33 cm or greater. Sampling Date: Results: Parameter Method (circle one) Result Other/Note NTU cm pH Turbidity tube, meter, laboratory pH Paper, kit, meter D. Check the observed status of all items. Provide “Action Required “details and dates. Element # Inspection BMPs BMP BMP Action Inspected needs failed required yes no n/a maintena (describe nce in section F) 1 Before beginning land disturbing Clearing activities are all clearing limits, Limits natural resource areas (streams, wetlands, buffers, trees) protected with barriers or similar BMPs? (high visibility recommended) 2 Construction access is stabilized Construction with quarry spalls or equivalent Access BMP to prevent sediment from being tracked onto roads? Sediment tracked onto the roadway was cleaned thoroughly at the end of the day or more frequent as necessary. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 40 3 Are flow control measures Control Flow installed to control stormwater Rates volumes and velocity during construction and do they protect downstream properties and waterways from erosion? If permanent infiltration ponds are used for flow control during construction, are they protected from siltation? 4 All perimeter sediment controls Sediment (e.g. silt fence, wattles, compost Controls socks, berms, etc.) installed, and maintained in accordance with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Sediment control BMPs (sediment ponds, traps, filters etc.) have been constructed and functional as the first step of grading. Stormwater runoff from disturbed areas is directed to sediment removal BMP. 5 Have exposed un-worked soils Stabilize Soils been stabilized with effective BMP to prevent erosion and sediment deposition? Are stockpiles stabilized from erosion, protected with sediment trapping measures and located away from drain inlet, waterways, and drainage channels? Have soils been stabilized at the end of the shift, before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast? Has stormwater and ground water 6 been diverted away from slopes and Protect Slopes disturbed areas with interceptor dikes, pipes and or swales? 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 41 Is off-site storm water managed separately from stormwater generated on the site? Is excavated material placed on uphill side of trenches consistent with safety and space considerations? Have check dams been placed at regular intervals within constructed channels that are cut down a slope? 7 Storm drain inlets made operable Drain Inlets during construction are protected. Are existing storm drains within the influence of the project protected? 8 Have all on-site conveyance channels Stabilize been designed, constructed and Channel and stabilized to prevent erosion from Outlets expected peak flows? Is stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes and downstream conveyance systems? 9 Are waste materials and demolition Control debris handled and disposed of to Pollutants prevent contamination of stormwater? Has cover been provided for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other material? Has secondary containment been provided capable of containing 110% of the volume? Were contaminated surfaces cleaned immediately after a spill incident? Were BMPs used to prevent contamination of stormwater by a pH modifying sources? Wheel wash wastewater is handled and disposed of properly. 10 Concrete washout in designated Control areas. No washout or excess concrete Dewatering on the ground. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 42 Dewatering has been done to an approved source and in compliance with the SWPPP. Were there any clean non turbid dewatering discharges? 11 Are all temporary and permanent Maintain BMP erosion and sediment control BMPs maintained to perform as intended? 12 Has the project been phased to the Manage the maximum degree practicable? Project Has regular inspection, monitoring and maintenance been performed as required by the permit? Has the SWPPP been updated, implemented and records maintained? 13 Is all Bioretention and Rain Garden Protect LID Facilities protected from sedimentation with appropriate BMPs? Is the Bioretention and Rain Garden protected against over compaction of construction equipment and foot traffic to retain its infiltration capabilities? Permeable pavements are clean and free of sediment and sediment laden- water runoff. Muddy construction equipment has not been on the base material or pavement. Have soiled permeable pavements been cleaned of sediments and pass infiltration test as required by stormwater manual methodology? Heavy equipment has been kept off existing soils under LID facilities to retain infiltration rate. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 43 E. Check all areas that have been inspected. All in place All disturbed All concrete wash out All material storage BMPs soils area areas All discharge All equipment storage All construction locations areas entrances/exits F. Elements checked “Action Required” (section D) describe corrective action to be taken. List the element number; be specific on location and work needed. Document, initial, and date when the corrective action has been completed and inspected. Element Description and Location Action Required Completion Initials # Date Attach additional page if needed Sign the following certification: “I certify that this report is true, accurate, and complete, to the best of my knowledge and belief” Inspected by: (Signature) Date: (print) Title/Qualification of Inspector: 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 44 E. Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSWGP) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 45 F. 303(d) List Waterbodies / TMDL Waterbodies Information 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 46 G. Contaminated Site Information 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section V, Page 47 H. Engineering Calculations 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VI, Page 1 Section VI – Special Reports and/or Studies Section VI Summary Narrative The following reports are included in this section have all been provided under the Phase 1 submittal of this project. Information from these reports has been used for Phase II design. They are not included as a part of this report as they are already on file as part of the overall project. 1. Geotechnical Engineering Report by Geotest, dated May 17, 2019. 2. Wetlands Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan by Soundview Consultants dated June 28, 2019. 3. As Built Drawings from Edgecomb Creek Rerouting 4. Supplemental Infiltration Report by Geotest, dated March 6, 2020 5. Cutoff Trench, Rev 1 by Geotest, dated March 17, 2020 6. Hydrogeological Assessment Report by GeoEngineers, dated June 29, 2020 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com WETLAND DELINEATION AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN CENTENNIAL PARK JUNE 2019 WETLAND DELINEATION AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN CENTENNIAL PARK JUNE 28, 2019 PROJECT LOCATION 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98030 PREPARED FOR WILLIAMS INVESTMENTS 2517 COLBY AVENUE, EVERETT, WASHINGTON 98201 PREPARED BY SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 (253) 514-8952 Executive Summary Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) is assisting Williams Investments (Applicant) with a Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan for a proposed multi-family residential and retail commercial development of an 8.81-acre site located adjacent to 67th Avenue Northeast and 172nd Street Northeast/Highway 531 in the City of Arlington, Washington. The subject property consists of one parcel situated in the Southwest ¼, of Section 23, Township 31 North, Range 5 East, W.M (Snohomish County Tax Parcel Number 31052300300800). SVC investigated the subject property for the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in the fall of 2018 and winter of 2019. Using current methodology, the site assessment identified one potentially-regulated wetland (Wetland A) and one relict stream channel (Edgecomb Creek) on the subject property and one newly relocated stream (Edgecomb Creek) offsite to the south within 225 feet of the site. Wetland A is considered a Category IV wetland with a standard 40-foot buffer based on the low habitat score per Arlington Municipal Code (AMC) 20.93.830(b). Edgecomb Creek was previously located onsite but was successfully relocated offsite as part of a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) restoration project. The relict stream channel remains onsite, and the Applicant is seeking to declassify it from being considered a stream as this relict channel no longer meets the stream definition criteria as described in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 222-16-030. A technical memorandum regarding this stream declassification request and a water type modification form has been submitted to the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) under separate cover (SVC, 2019). The relict channel was previously utilized by salmonid species and therefore is considered Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area (FHWCA) under AMC 20.93.400. SVC is currently completing a bed gradient study to determine if the channel continues to qualify as a FWHCA and should be deregulated. However, until it is formally declassified and deregulated, it is subject to a 100-foot native growth protection easement and additional 50-foot management zone per AMC 20.93.440(a). The newly relocated Edgecomb Creek offsite to the south is considered a Type F-ESA water with an associated 150-foot buffer per AMC Table 20.93-3. No other potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species were identified within 225 feet of the subject property. The Applicant proposes a phased mixed land use development consisting of multi-family residential units and commercial retail space with associated infrastructure to provide additional housing and commercial space within the City of Arlington. This report addresses Phase 1 of the development, which proposes approximately 152 residential units and approximately 8,000 square feet of retail area with associated parking, a recreational park, garden and open space. Both the park and open space meet the City of Arlington’s requirements, and these areas will be vegetated with appropriate plant species. Phase 2 proposes an additional 36 residential units and associated parking spaces and is contingent upon the declassification and deregulation of the relict Edgecomb Creek channel present on the southern portion of the site. The project was carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest extent feasible, and no direct or indirect wetland impacts are proposed. However, Phase 2 of the project will require the unavoidable fill of the relict stream channel. 1778.0001 Centennial Park i Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Size Category/ Regulated Under Regulated Under Regulated Under Wetland Name Onsite Type1 AMC Chapter 20.93 RCW 90.48 Clean Water Act ~ 21,823 Wetland A IV Yes Yes Yes SF Relict Edgecomb N/A N/A Yes2 Yes2 Potentially Creek Channel Relocated Edgecomb Type Offsite Yes Yes Yes Creek F/ESA 1. Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) wetland rating system (Hruby, 2014) per AMC 20.93.730 and AMC 20.93.800. 2. The relict channel is regulated by the local and state jurisdiction until appropriate documentation has been submitted to support its deregulation. 1778.0001 Centennial Park ii Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Proposed Project ........................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Location ................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Proposed Project .................................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 3. Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 4. Background .................................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Landscape Setting ................................................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................ 5 4.3 Soils .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 4.4 Stream and Wetland Inventories .......................................................................................................... 6 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species ................................................................................................................ 6 4.6 Precipitation ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 5. Results ............................................................................................................................................. 8 5.1 Wetlands .................................................................................................................................................. 8 5.2 Relict Edgecomb Creek Channel ....................................................................................................... 10 5.3 Artificial Drainage Ditches ................................................................................................................. 11 5.4 Offsite Improvements ......................................................................................................................... 12 5.5 Previously Identified Features ............................................................................................................ 13 Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations ......................................................................................................... 15 6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements ..................................................................................................... 15 6.2 State and Federal Considerations ....................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 7. Buffer Enhancement Plan .......................................................................................................... 20 7.1 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................................ 20 7.2 Description of Impacts and Mitigation Strategy .............................................................................. 20 7.3 Approach and Best Management Practices ...................................................................................... 21 7.4 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards ............................................................................... 21 7.5 Plant Materials and Installation .......................................................................................................... 22 7.6 Maintenance & Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................................ 24 7.7 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................... 24 7.8 Contingency Plan ................................................................................................................................. 24 Chapter 8. Closure .......................................................................................................................................... 26 Chapter 9. References .................................................................................................................................... 27 Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map. ................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2. Aerial Image of the Subject Property. ........................................................................... 5 Tables Table 1. Precipitation Summary1. ................................................................................................. 7 Table 2. Wetland Summary .......................................................................................................... 8 Table 3. Wetland A Summary. ..................................................................................................... 9 Table 4. Precipitation Summary1. ............................................................................................... 13 1778.0001 Centennial Park iii Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Table 5. Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands .................................................................. 15 Appendices Appendix A — Methods and Tools Appendix B — Background Information Appendix C — Site Plans Appendix D — Data Forms Appendix E — Wetland Rating Forms Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps Appendix G — Edgecomb Creek Relocation Documentation Appendix H — Qualifications 1778.0001 Centennial Park iv Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 1. Introduction Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) is assisting Williams Investments (Applicant) with a Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan for a proposed multi-family residential and retail commercial development of an 8.81-acre site located adjacent to 67th Avenue Northeast and 172nd Street Northeast/Highway 531 in the City of Arlington, Washington. The subject property consists of one parcel situated in the Southwest ¼, of Section 23, Township 31 North, Range 5 East, W.M (Snohomish County Tax Parcel Number 31052300300800). The purpose of this Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan is to identify the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species that may be found on or near the subject property and to assess potential impacts to any such critical areas and/or species from the proposed project. The WSDOT recently completed a stream restoration project for Edgecomb Creek, which was previously located on the subject property; the stream has since been relocated offsite and associated offsite mitigation has already occurred for these impacts. This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding: • Site description and areas of assessment; • Background research, identification, and assessment of potentially-regulated wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat and/or species in the vicinity of the proposed project; • Standard buffer recommendations, building setbacks, and development limitations; • Existing site map detailing identified critical areas; • Federal regulatory Considerations; • Proposed site plan with proposed project details; and • Supplemental information necessary for local, state, and federal regulatory review. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 1 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 2. Proposed Project 2.1 Location The subject property is located adjacent to 67th Avenue Northeast and 172nd Street Northeast/Highway 531 in the City of Arlington, Washington (Figure 1). The subject property consists of one tax parcel situated in the Southwest ¼, of Section 23, Township 31 North, Range 5 East, W.M (Snohomish County Tax Parcel Number 31052300300800). To access the subject property from I-5 North take Exit 206 for WA-531E/172nd Street Northeast/Edgecomb Road toward Lakewood/Smokey Point. Continue for approximately 2.3 miles, where the subject property will be on the left at the intersection of 172nd Street Northeast and 67th Avenue Northeast. Figure 1. Vicinity Map. Subject Property Location 2.2 Proposed Project The Applicant proposes a phased mixed land use development consisting of multi-family residential units and commercial retail space with associated infrastructure to provide additional housing and commercial space within the City of Arlington. This report addresses Phase 1 of the development, which proposes approximately 152 residential units and approximately 8,000-square feet of retail area with associated parking, a recreational park, garden and open space. Both the park and open space meet the City of Arlington’s requirements, and these areas will be vegetated with appropriate plant species. Phase 2 proposes an additional 36 residential units and associated parking spaces. The project was carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest extent 1778.0001 Centennial Park 2 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 feasible, and no direct or indirect wetland impacts are proposed; however, Phase 2 of the project will require the unavoidable fill of the relict stream channel. Phase 2 of the proposed project is contingent on the declassification and deregulation of a relict stream (relict Edgecomb Creek channel) that has been successfully relocated offsite to the south by a WSDOT fish passage barrier culvert removal project. Additional information regarding the relict stream channel and its proposed declassification is provided in Section 5.2 of this report. SVC is currently gathering data and completing an analysis of the relict stream bed to determine if this portion of channel provides off-channel habitat for listed salmonids or if no habitat exists to support deregulating the area as an Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area (FHWCA). Phase 2 development proposes to fill the relict stream channel. The existing wetland (Wetland A) will not be directly impacted by the proposed development during Phase 1 or 2 of the proposed work, and minor work within the outer 25 percent of the buffer is proposed for the recreational path, as allowed per AMC 20.93.820.1.3(A). 1778.0001 Centennial Park 3 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 3. Methods SVC investigated, assessed, and delineated any potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, and other fish and wildlife habitat on and within 225 feet of the subject property in October and November 2018. All determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in conjunction with data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) and SalmonScape mapping tools, Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water typing system, Snohomish County’s public geographic information systems (GIS), local precipitation data, and various orthophotographic resources. Appendix A contains further details for the methods and tools used to prepare this report. Wetland boundaries were determined in accordance with AMC 20.93.810, and as outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) as modified according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (USACE, 2010) and Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (USDA, 2018). Qualified wetland scientists marked boundaries of the onsite wetland with orange surveyor’s flagging labeled alpha-numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation along the wetland boundary. Pink surveyor’s flagging was labeled alpha- numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal sampling locations to mark the points where detailed data was collected (DP-1 to DP-11). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals inside and outside of the wetland boundary to further confirm the delineation. SVC classified all wetlands using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin, 1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems. Following classification and assessment, all wetlands were rated and categorized using the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014) and the definitions established in AMC 20.93.800(a). The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visits by qualified fish and wildlife biologists. The experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of fish and wildlife activity. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 4 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 4. Background 4.1 Landscape Setting The subject property is located in the City of Arlington in a mixed-use setting and is currently undeveloped (Figure 2). The subject property abuts 67th Avenue Northeast to the west with commercial properties beyond; 172nd Street Northeast/Highway 531 to the south; a church to the west; and single-family residential and undeveloped forested areas to the north. Topography on the eastern portion of the site slopes down approximately 20 feet to the center, and then remains flat at approximately 140 feet above mean sea level to the western property boundary (Appendix B1). The study area is within the Snohomish River Watershed (Water Resources Inventory Area 7). Figure 2. Aerial Image of the Subject Property. Subject Property Location 4.2 Vegetation Vegetation on the subject property is dominated by upland grasses and forbs throughout the majority of the site, including orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis capillaris), narrowleaf plantain (Plantago lanceolata), and common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus). Forested cover is present through the center and southern site boundary following the relict stream channel. Dominant forest vegetation includes western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and red alder (Alnus rubra) with an understory of red-osier dogwood (Cornus alba), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), salal (Gaultheria shallon), and western swordfern (Polystichum munitum). 1778.0001 Centennial Park 5 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 4.3 Soils The NRCS soil survey identifies two soil series on the subject property: Everett gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, and Norma loam. An NRCS soil survey map is provided in Appendix B3. A description of the soil profiles is below. Everett gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (18) According to the NRCS survey, Everett gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, is a somewhat excessively drained soil formed in glacial outwash. Permeability is rapid, and water capacity is low. In a typical profile, the surface layer is dark brown very gravelly sandy loam about 12 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is brown very gravelly loamy sand about 5 inches thick. The lower part of the subsoil is a dark brown extremely gravelly sand to a depth of 60 inches of more. The subsoil is cemented in some locations. This soil is listed as non-hydric by NRCS. Norma loam (39) According to the NRCS survey, Norma loam is a deep, poorly drained soil formed in alluvium. In a typical profile, the surface layer is very dark gray loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish brown sandy loam about 18 inches thick. The substratum is a dark gray sandy loam to a depth of 60 inches or more. This soil is listed as hydric by NRCS. 4.4 Stream and Wetland Inventories The USFWS NWI map (Appendix B2) identifies a potential riverine intermittent streambed seasonally flooded (R4SBC) watercourse along the southern property boundary in the same vicinity as the mapped DNR stream. The NWI also identifies a potential emergent wetland in the northeast corner of the site. The Snohomish County wetland and stream inventory (Appendix B4) identifies a stream (Edgecomb Creek) along the southern parcel boundary (DNR and WDFW refer to this stream as Middle Fork Quilceda Creek). The DNR stream typing map (Appendix B7) identifies Middle Fork Quilceda Creek, a Type F (fish-bearing) stream, running west to east along the southern property boundary. No other potentially-regulated streams or wetlands are documented within 225 feet of the subject property. 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species The WDFW PHS map (Appendix B4) identifies the potential presence of coho, Dolly Varden/bull trout, and fall chum in Middle Fork Quilceda Creek along the southern portion of the subject property. The WDFW Salmonscape map (Appendix B6) lists the documented presence of coho and chum salmon; modeled presence of chinook salmon, pink salmon, and winter steelhead trout; and presumed presence of Dolly Varden/bull trout in the stream along the southern portion of the subject property. No other priority habitats or species are documented within 225 feet of the subject property. 4.6 Precipitation Precipitation data was obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather station at Seattle-Tacoma Airport in order to acquire precipitation values during and preceding the field investigation. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 1. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 6 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Table 1. Precipitation Summary1. Percent of Day 1 Week 2 Weeks Last 30 days Year-to-Date2 Date Day Of Before Prior Prior (Observed/Normal) (Observed/Normal) Normal (month/year) 10/12/18 0.00 0.00 0.78 1.15 1.91/2.01 1.09/0.97 95/112 11/4/18 0.03 0.18 1.23 3.24 4.02/3.98 4.33/4.26 101/102 5/7/19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 2.86/2.53 28.63/31.36 113/91 Notes: 1. Precipitation level provided in inches. Data obtained from the NOAA (http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew) for Seattle- Tacoma airport. 2. Year-to-date precipitation is the total for the water year from October 1st to the onsite date(s). Precipitation levels during all the site visits were within the statistical normal range. The first site visit was conducted in the beginning of the water year and shows that the precipitation levels were 112 percent of normal at that time for the water year and within statistical normal for the previous 30 days (95 percent of normal). Precipitation levels during the second site visit were also noted to be within the statistical normal range; however, significant rainfall was recorded (3.24 inches) in the two weeks leading up to the site investigation during the November site visit, and over 1 inch was recorded in the week prior. Precipitation levels were also within statistical normal for the water year (91 percent of normal) and for the previous 30 days (113 percent of normal) during the May site visit, at the end of the water year. Such conditions were considered in making professional wetland boundary determinations. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 7 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 5. Results The October 2018 site investigation identified one potentially-regulated wetland (Wetland A) and one relict stream channel (Edgecomb Creek) on the subject property and one newly relocated stream (Edgecomb Creek) offsite to the south within 225 feet of the site. No other potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, or priority species were identified in the vicinity of the subject property. 5.1 Wetlands The identified wetland contained indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. A map depicting the location and sizes of the wetland is presented in Appendix C. Data forms are provided in Appendix D, wetland rating forms are provided in Appendix E, and wetland rating maps are provided in Appendix F. Table 2 below summarizes the wetland identified during the site investigation. Table 2. Wetland Summary Predominant Wetland Classification / Rating Wetland Standard Wetland City of Size Onsite Buffer Width Cowardin1 HGM2 WSDOE3 4 (feet)5 Arlington (SF) A PSS/EMBC Depressional IV IV ~21,823 40 Notes: 1. Cowardin et al. (1979), Federal Geographic Data Committee (2013), or NWI Class based on vegetation: PSS = Palustrine Scrub Shrub, PEM = Palustrine Emergent; Modifiers for Water Regime: B = Seasonally Saturated, C = Seasonally Flooded. 2. Brinson, M. M. (1993). 3. Current WSDOE rating (Hruby, 2014). 4. AMC 20.93.800 wetland classification Arlington rating according to Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014). 5. AMC 20.93.830(b) standard buffer widths. Wetland A Wetland A is approximately 21,823 square feet (0.50 acre) in size and is located on the northern portion of the subject property, extending a little offsite to the north. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by a seasonally-high water table, direct precipitation, surface runoff from adjacent uplands, and flow from a ditch that runs south to north through the wetland. Wetland vegetation is dominated by red alder saplings (Alnus rubra), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), and non-native invasive reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Wetland A is a Palustrine Scrub Shrub/Emergent, Seasonally Saturated, and Seasonally Flooded wetland (PSS/EMBC). Per AMC 20.93.800, Wetland A is considered a Category IV depressional wetland. Table 3 provides a summary of Wetland A. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 8 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Table 3. Wetland A Summary. WETLAND A – INFORMATION SUMMARY Location: Wetland A is located on the northern portion of the subject property, extending a little offsite to the north. Local Jurisdiction City of Arlington WRIA 7 – Snohomish River WSDOE Rating IV (Hruby, 2014) City of Arlington IV Rating City of Arlington 40 feet Buffer Width Wetland Size ~ 21,823 SF Cowardin PSS/EMBC Classification HGM Classification Depressional Wetland Data Sheet(s) DP-4 Upland Data Sheet (s) DP-5 Boundary Flag color Orange Dominant Wetland vegetation is dominated by red alder saplings, salmonberry, and non-native Vegetation invasive reed canarygrass. Soils Hydric soil indicator A4 (Hydrogen Sulfide) was observed. Hydrology is likely provided by a seasonally-high water table, direct precipitation, Hydrology surface runoff from adjacent uplands, and flow from a ditch that runs south to north through the wetland. Rationale for Wetland boundaries were determined by a transition to hydric soils. Delineation Rationale for Local rating is based upon WSDOE’s current rating system per AMC 20.93.800(a). Local Rating Wetland Functions Summary Wetland A provides moderate water quality functions. The wetland retains water seasonally and can provide some pollutant filtration as dense, herbaceous plants cover at Water Quality least half the area. This ability to provide pollutant filtration is valuable as the unit is in a sub-basin where water quality is an issue and TMDLs are in place. Wetland A scores 6 out of 9 points for water quality functions. Wetland A provides low hydrologic functions due to its small size, relative position within Hydrologic the sub-basin, and minimal cover of dense, rigid plants that would help slow surface flows. Wetland A scores 3 out of 9 points for hydrologic functions. Wetland A scores low for habitat functions due to lack of priority habitats, location within Habitat a high intensity land use landscape, and presence of invasive species. Wetland A scores 3 out of 9 points for habitat functions. The buffer surrounding Wetland A consists of fields and shrub areas that are degraded by Buffer Condition non-native invasive speciec such as cutleaf blackberry (Rubus laciniatus) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). 1778.0001 Centennial Park 9 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 5.1.1 Wetland Buffers Under AMC 20.93.830(b)(1), the standard buffer for a Category IV wetlands is 40 feet by following the typical minimization measures. A 15-foot building setback is also required from the edge of all critical area buffers per AMC 20.93.340. The buffer for the onsite wetland is generally low functioning due the dominance of non-native invasive species such as blackberry and reed canarygrass. 5.2 Relict Edgecomb Creek Channel The site investigations identified a relict stream channel associated with Edgecomb Creek on the southern portion of the site. Until recently, Edgecomb Creek entered the subject property through a culvert (barrier 99058) in the southeastern portion of the subject property, flowing north under SR 531. The stream flowed west along the southern border of the subject property, and then continued offsite through an additional culvert (barrier 99059) that conveyed flow south, back under SR 531. Both culverts are identified as barriers to fish passage in the completed SR 531 Edgecomb Creek Fish Passage Project, and the approved WSDOT USFWS, and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) No Effect Project Notification Form (NMFS and USFWS, 2016). The upstream barrier was removed with the elimination of that culvert during the 2017 implementation of the Edgecomb Creek Fish Passage Project, but the downstream fish passage barrier culvert remains. The 2017, SR 531 Edgecomb Creek Fish Passage Project relocated “a 330-foot section of channel between two culvert fish barriers that [had] non-functioning weirs that [posed] additional barriers to fish migration” (USFWS, 2016). Of this section of relocated stream, 275 feet were previously located on the subject property and covered approximately 5,000 square feet of area. The relocation of the stream offsite and elimination of both culverts was expected to eliminate the fish passage barriers and potential fish stranding under SR 531. The downstream culvert was not removed with this 2017 construction project and it remains in place; however, it conveys only stormwater and untreated sheet flow from the road during precipitation events since the stream was rerouted to the new channel. The stream relocation project resulted in the creation of over 650 linear feet of meandering stream channel offsite to south of the SR 531 as mitigation for the project. Both culverts which originally connected onsite portions of the drainage to Edgecomb creek were identified as fish passage barriers, and the proposed project action included “constructing the new stream channel, screening and blocking barrier 99058, plugging and abandoning barrier 99059, diverting the stream into the new section of channel, and turning over the existing channel to the City of Arlington for stormwater treatment”. Furthermore, the project was implemented to “improve access for salmon to 1.77 miles of upstream habitat, after removing the fish barrier”. The documents state that “the abandoned channel is considered fish habitat that will be displaced and replaced by the constructed and improved stream channel…” (USFWS, 2016). In addition to increased fish habitat function, the completed project was constructed to improve water quality; the project findings include the statement: “existing stormwater drainage from SR 531 drains north directly to Edgecomb Creek, and this section of the stream will be moved, thus improving water quality for Edgecomb Creek. The project removes two fish barriers and a series of weir barriers in the stream to improve passage. Following relocation, more of the stream will be connected to adjacent wetlands increasing the quantity of rearing habitat available to salmon that spawn in the creek. Edgecomb Creek will have at least 200 additional feet of stream length due to the stream relocation” (USFWS, 2016). 1778.0001 Centennial Park 10 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 In addition to the USFWS consultation, NMFS was consulted and includes similar description to the USFWS form, with the exception on pages 2 and 4 of the NMFS document which indicate barrier 99058 will be left open to allow Edgecomb Creek to backwater into a portion of the remnant channel and retain this area as refugia habitat during high flows. However, further in this document on page 10 under “project description”, the document states that fish will be excluded from the existing channel and moved downstream of the project area with the remnant channel and dysfunction weirs turned over to the City of Arlington. The document also states that barrier 99059 will be screened and blocked with structural rock and streambank material to allow drainage from the abandoned stream channel that will continue to drain stormwater runoff, effectively isolating the remnant portions of the onsite drainage from stream habitat function. In addition, the construction plan set included in the NMFS document shows the culvert (barrier 99059) “To be Abandoned”. As a result of the stream relocation, the relict channel no longer supports baseflow and appears to only convey stormwater from direct precipitation, overland flow from a nearby roadside ditch, and untreated runoff from SR 531. During the October 2018 site visit, no baseflow was noted in the relict channel, although pooled water was observed in scour holes and in the culvert itself. Similarly, during the November 2018 site visit, only shallow pools of water were observed in scoured areas despite recent heavy rainfall. Although the stream channel is abandoned, the culvert on the downstream reach is still in place, allowing for the stormwater that flows through the channel to enter Edgecomb Creek south of the subject property. As untreated stormwater during storm events is the main hydrology source for the relict channel, the channel will likely accumulate large loads of sediment and debris from SR 531 and the roadside ditch over time, and the relict channel could begin to fill in. The relict channel does not provide fish habitat due to the lack of stream hydrology and habitat connectivity to downstream fish-bearing waters. In addition, as identified on the USFWS form, barrier 99059 is a fish blockage culvert and presents the potential for fish stranding in the event high flood waters if fish are able to access the remaining onsite channel. As the relict channel is not considered a typed stream, it is not subject to stream buffers under AMC 20.93.700, but it will be considered a FHWCA per AMC 20.93.400 as the channel previously provided habitat for salmonids. Therefore, the relict channel will be subject to a 100-foot native growth protection easement and additional 50-foot management zone until such a time that this portion of channel is deregulated as a FHWCA. 5.2.1 Stream Buffers The relocated offsite Edgecomb Creek channel is considered a Type F water with documented Coho and Chum presence according to the WDFW SalmonScape inventory, which are considered ESA species, and therefore requires a standard 150-foot buffer per AMC Table 20.93-3 SalmonScape inventory. However, SR 531 intersects the buffer associated with offsite Edgecomb Creek, entirely interrupting the buffer from projecting onto the subject property, therefore, no buffer associated with Edgecomb Creek should be located on the subject property. 5.3 Artificial Drainage Ditches Three onsite linear ditches were observed on or near the subject property; all of which appear to be artificial and intentionally created. While the soils on-site are largely mapped as hydric, investigations 1778.0001 Centennial Park 11 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 found the soils throughout the site lack redoximorphic features and represent upland soil conditions. Therefore, all the ditches appear to have been excavated from non-hydric soils. Northern Ditch The northern ditch runs east to west along the northern parcel boundary and through Wetland A, receiving flows from the central ditch, and then continues offsite to the east into the City’s stormwater system at the intersection of 67th Avenue Northeast and Highland View Drive, as documented in the City’s stormwater infrastructure inventory. Historic aerials indicate that the site was previously used as agricultural land in the 1950s and 1960s (Appendices B8 and B9); the ditch is faintly visible in these aerials in the northern portion of the site. The ditch appears to be manmade and only conveys stormwater through the site. Central Ditch The central ditch flows south to north through the center of the site, beginning as a swale and flowing through Wetland A, and then flowing into the northern ditch. This ditch does not appear to be present in the 1954 and 1969 historic aerial photographs, but does appear in a 1990 aerial photograph, suggesting that it was likely established sometime between 1969 and 1990. The ditch appeared to be intentionally excavated to help drain the site for agricultural purposes. Roadside Ditch A manmade roadside ditch is present along the southern portion of the site which originates offsite to the east. The ditch flows in an east to west orientation, eventually discharging into the relict Edgecomb Creek channel and is the only source of hydrology for the relict channel. The ditch appears to have been previously excavated and is vegetated by grass upslope along the sides of the banks to the east. The ditch conveys only stormwater from upslope and surface flow from the highway as documented on the City’s stormwater infrastructure map. 5.4 Offsite Improvements The WSDOT completed the Edgecomb Creek restoration project in order to improve fish passage of the stream. Edgecomb Creek has been relocated offsite to the south of the subject property. The new reach of the channel is located entirely south of SR 531, eliminating the roadway crossings, and therefore, also eliminating the need for the culverts which may present barriers to fish passage. The relocation project has resulted in an increase of 650 linear feet of new stream channel, restored habitat features, and unimpeded access to upstream spawning habitat. The project has provided an overall benefit to the function of the stream by removing these fish barriers. According to the memorandum by WSDOT, approximately 0.13 acres and 329 linear feet of the stream were permanently impacted by this project due to abandonment of the channel on the subject property. Approximately 0.09 acre and 189 linear feet of the riffle and pool habitat within Edgecomb Creek were impacted temporarily for construction access and water handling. Mitigation for these impacts included the creation of 0.15 acre/665 linear feet of new stream area, as well as restoration within the stream channel; restoration of 0.48 acre of an adjacent wetland; and improved connectivity between Edgecomb Creek and the adjacent wetlands. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 12 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 The instream restoration and improvements included the elimination of fish barriers, increased channel meander and overall stream habitat area, improved floodplain connectivity to adjacent wetlands, addition of gravel substrate, limiting the extent of downstream grading, and stabilizing new stream meander banks to provide habitat for adult and juvenile salmon. Restoration for the adjacent riparian habitat was also completed and included: replanting affected areas with native vegetation; stabilizing stream meander bends; planting roadside areas with low growing woody vegetation; planting occasionally or seasonally flooded streambanks with appropriate native plant species that will aid in detaining flows and providing shade and cover habitat for juvenile fish and wildlife species; and planting seasonally flooded streambanks with emergent plants with fibrous roots to stabilize the banks and produce organic matter and support habitat development for macroinvertebrates. The restoration site will be monitored annually for 10 years following its construction. The riparian plantings will be monitored for three years to ensure planting survival, and the stream will be monitored in years 1, 5, and 10 for fish passage. A contingency plan is in place to address fish passage, plant survival, herbivory, weed control, and vandalism. 5.5 Previously Identified Features According to WSDOT’s “Aquatic Resources Assessment Report” dated November 2016, an area along the northeastern extent of the relict onsite channel was considered a potential wetland during the project and was identified as “Wetland 3”. Additionally, WSDOT identified the roadside ditch as a potential jurisdictional WOTUS. Please refer to Chapter 6 for WOTUS considerations. The WSDOT delineation occurred during January and February of 2016 (wet season), during a period of time in which precipitation was above statistically normal levels. Precipitation data was obtained from the NOAA weather station at Seattle-Tacoma Airport in order to obtain precipitation values during and preceding the prior field investigation efforts from WSDOT for the general Puget Sound area. While this weather station is not in the immediate vicinity of the subject property, it is the most reliable weather station with consistent and scientifically accurate measurements. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 4. Table 4. Precipitation Summary1. Percent of Day 1 Week 2 Weeks Last 30 days Year-to-Date2 Date Day Of Before Prior Prior (Observed/Normal) (Observed/Normal) Normal (month/year) 1/28/16 0.61 0.82 3.91 5.51 7.21/5.58 31.60/20.50 129/154 2/25/16 0.00 0.02 0.76 3.61 12.04/7.96 36.60/24.10 151/152 Notes: 3. Precipitation levels provided in inches. Data obtained from the NOAA (http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew) for Seattle- Tacoma airport. 4. Year-to-date precipitation is the total for the water year from October 1st to the onsite date(s). Precipitation levels during the January 2016 site visits during which time Wetland 3 was delineated were well above the statistical normal for the water year and 30 days prior to the visit. In addition, over 5.5 inches of precipitation was recorded in the two weeks leading up to the site investigation and almost 4 inches was recorded one week leading up to the site investigation. Therefore, hydrologic conditions encountered by WSDOT would have been much wetter than normal, potentially resulting in false-positive indicators of wetland hydrology. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 13 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 The area identified by WSDOT as Wetland 3 was investigated by SVC and was determined to be non- wetland as it lacks hydric soils. While hydrophytic vegetation is present due to the presence of common facultative (FAC) species typical of disturbed and/or upland area, and wetland hydrology is present during the wet season in one of the data plots, the hydrology does not appear to be sustained long enough throughout the growing season to develop redoximorphic features in the soil. Previous investigations by WSDOT identified hydric soils onsite; however, multiple test pits and formalized data plots in this area were unable to replicate these findings. SVC found that the soils in these areas lacked redox starting within the first 12 inches of the soil profile, indicating that a seasonally high- water table (water table within 12 inches of the soil surface) is not present during the growing season, and therefore the redox features have not formed. In addition, a depleted layer was also not found within 12-inches of the soil surface. SVC collected two data plots (DP-8 and DP-9) in this area which confirm the lack of hydric soils. The WSDOT assessment report indicates that the roadside ditch that contributes to the relict Edgecomb Creek is considered a jurisdictional ditch. According to the report the ditch exhibited signs of scour, the presence of a defined channel with bed and bank, debris rack, areas of flowing or standing water, and clear areas of gravel devoid of vegetation. The report later notes that no stream gravel was observed in the ditch. It should be noted that both the WSDOT investigations occurred during a wet season with significantly higher levels of precipitation than normal, which likely exaggerated hydrology both on and offsite. SVC completed investigations during statically normal precipitation levels and did not observe any of these characteristics. No flowing or standing water was observed during the fall investigation, and the ditch was noted to be vegetated with grass throughout the channel as well as the banks. No stream cobble or gravel was observed in the ditch. A conditionally approved site plan dated September 12, 2006 depicts a wetland, labeled “Wetland Z”, in the forested area in the center of the site. SVC collected two additional data plots (DP-10 and 11) in this area to support a non-wetland determination. While both areas exhibit a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, neither location displays evidence of primary wetland hydrology or hydric soils. In fact, soils lacked all evidence of redoximorphic features. Soils at DP-10 are characterized by 13 inches of very dark brown sandy loam underlain by three inches of a dual matrix of very dark grayish brown and very dark brown sandy loam, over black silt loam. DP-11 is characterized by 8 inches of very dark brown sandy loam underlain by a dual matrix of dark yellowish brown and very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam soils. It should be noted that the delineation that identified this area as wetland was completed sometime between 2001 and 2006 using an older methodology. The Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (USACE, 2010) has since been published and is acknowledged as the best available science, and therefore is used as the standard methodology for delineations. This is an important distinction as the old methodology identified any “dark” soil as being hydric, whereas the new methodology requires additional features such as a depleted matrix or redox in addition to a “dark” surface soil. Hydric soil indicators are also periodically reviewed and updated and published in the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (USDA, 2018). Therefore, the area identified on the 2006 plan as “Wetland Z” may have previously met the old wetland criteria but is not considered wetland under the updated delineation methodology. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 14 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations The site investigations in fall of 2018 identified and delineated one potentially-regulated wetland (Wetlands A) and one relict stream channel on the subject property, and one regulated stream channel offsite to the south within 225 feet of the site. No other potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, or priority species were identified on or adjacent to the subject property during the site investigations. 6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements 6.1.1 Wetland Buffers AMC 20.93.800(a) has adopted the 2014 Revised Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014). With this system, Category IV wetlands are those that generally provide low levels of function and score less than 16 points. The onsite Wetland A is classified as a Category IV wetland. Under AMC 20.93.830, the standard buffers for a Category IV wetland is 40 feet assuming the implementation of all minimization measures listed in ACM Table 20.93-5 (Table 5 below). Walking trails are proposed within outer twenty-five percent of the wetland buffer. Per AMC 20.93.430.3.A, walking trails are allowed in this portion of the buffer provided that they avoid the removal of significant trees, utilize pervious surfaces, are no more than five feet in width, and are limited to pedestrian use. Per AMC 20.93.830.b.3, the standard buffer widths assume that the buffer is vegetated with an appropriate native plant community; if the buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with non-native invasive, then the buffer should be planted or widened. The existing buffer for Wetland A is currently degraded with a presence of non-native, invasive species. Therefore, a buffer enhancements plan is proposed, and will include removing non-native, invasive species and replanting with native species, which will result in an improvement of ecological function of the wetlands and buffers over current conditions. Table 5. Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands Examples of Activities and Uses that Cause Examples of Measures to Minimize Impacts Disturbance Disturbances Lights •Parking lots •Direct lights away from critical areas and •Warehouses buffers •Manufacturing •Day use only regulations preventing the need •Residential for lights •Parks •Timer on lights Noise •Manufacturing •Locate activity that generates noise away from •Residential wetlands •Seasonal limitations on hours of operation Toxic runoff* •Parking lots •Route all new, untreated runoff away from •Roads wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered •Manufacturing •Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides •Residential areas 1778.0001 Centennial Park 15 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Examples of Activities and Uses that Cause Examples of Measures to Minimize Impacts Disturbance Disturbances •Application of agricultural pesticides within 150 ft of critical area or buffer •Landscaping •Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff •Parking lots •Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for •Roads roads and existing adjacent development •Manufacturing •Prevent channelized flow from lawns that •Residential areas directly enters the buffer •Commercial •Landscaping Change in water •Impermeable surfaces •Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into regime •Lawns buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and •Tilling new lawns •Forest and forest duff removal •Retain minimum forest and forest duff Pets and human •Residential areas •Use privacy fencing; plant dense vegetation to disturbance •Parks delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion; place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract Dust •Construction sites •Use best management practices to control dust Disruption of •Roads •Maintain connection to offsite areas that are corridors or •Residential undisturbed connections •Commercial •Restore corridors or connections to offsite •Manufacturing habitats by replanting •Landscaping •Stormwater * These examples are not necessarily adequate for minimizing toxic runoff if threatened or endangered species are present at the site. 6.1.2 Stream Buffers The relocated offsite Edgecomb Creek channel is considered a Type F-ESA water with documented Coho and Chum presence according to the WDFW SalmonScape inventory, and therefore requires a standard 150-foot buffer per AMC Table 20.93-3 . However, SR 531 intersects the buffer associated with offsite Edgecomb Creek, entirely interrupting the buffer from projecting onto the subject property, therefore, no buffer associated with Edgecomb Creek should be located on the subject property. 6.1.3 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Due to the successful relocation of the channel offsite, the Applicant is in the process of declassifying the relict channel as a stream as it no longer meets the definition of a typed waterbody described in WAC 222-16-030 or AMC 20.93.700. A technical memorandum and water type modification form has been submitted to DNR under separate cover (SVC, 2019). The relict channel was previously utilized by salmonid species and therefore is considered FHWCA under AMC 20.93.400. SVC is 1778.0001 Centennial Park 16 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 currently completing a bed gradient study to determine if the channel continues to provide habitat and qualify as a FWHCA or if it should be deregulated; the findings will be submitted under separate cover. However, until it is formally declassified and deregulated, the relict channel is subject to a 100-foot native growth protection easement and additional 50-foot management zone per AMC 20.93.440(a). Activities proposed during Phase 1 of the development will avoid all impacts to the 100-foot native growth protection easement, and 50-foot management zone. Should the relict channel no longer meet the FHWCA, the Client will seek to deregulate the relict stream channel, and plan to develop that portion of the site during Phase 2. 6.2 State and Federal Considerations 6.2.1 Potential Waters of the United States (WOTUS) The results of the 2018 site investigations identified one wetland, one relict stream channel (Edgecomb Creek), and three excavated drainage ditches on the subject property. Additional wetlands were identified by WSDOT offsite to the south of SR 531 and are associated with Edgecomb Creek restoration area. The onsite wetland is a small depressional wetland that receives water primarily from direct precipitation and surface runoff from adjacent upland areas. The offsite wetland to the south appears to be larger depressional and riverine systems associated with Edgecomb Creek. The ditches appear to have been originally constructed in upland areas for the purpose of making property boundaries and conveying stormwater runoff from adjacent roads, uplands, and for agricultural purposes. 6.2.2 The Federal Clean Water Rule The Federal Register published a final revised Clean Water Rule: “Definition of Waters of the United States” on 29 June 2015 (FR Vol 30, No. 124; pages 37054 – 37127) that defines the scope of waters protected under the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The effective date of this rule was to be 28 August 2015. This rule provided a definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS) that differed from that in the 2 December 2008 joint memorandum from EPA and USACE following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States (USACE, 2008). Implementation of the 2015 Clean Water Rule was stayed by the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals on October 9, 2015-- a little over one month after that rule’s effective date—until recently. On February 28, 2017 President Trump issued Executive Order 13778 ordering EPA and USACE to review and or rescind the 2015 Clean Water Rule. This was followed by the Suspension Rule (6 February 2018), which delayed implementation of the 2015 Clean Water Rule to 6 February 2020 and provided time for a two-part rulemaking process to revise the definition of WOTUS. But in August 2018, Judge David C. Norton of the U.S. District Court for South Carolina issued an injunction claiming that the Suspension Rule was in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. This injunction effectively reinstated the 2015 Clean Water Rule in 26 states, including Washington. Therefore, at the time of writing this report, the 2015 Clean Water Rule is currently in use within the State of Washington to describe waters that are to be regulated under Section 404 of the CWA. The 2015 Clean Water Rule generally describes waters that are WOTUS directly, that are waters of the US because they are impoundments or tributaries to WOTUS, and that are waters of the US because 1778.0001 Centennial Park 17 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 they are adjacent to or because they have a significant nexus to WOTUS. The Rule also describes waters that are not WOTUS. These general descriptions are summarized in the paragraphs that follow. The 2015 Clean Water Rule describes the following waters where Section 404 jurisdiction would be asserted and considered waters of the United States (WOTUS): (1) traditional navigable waters: all waters which are currently used, were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, included all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, (2) interstate waters (including interstate wetlands), and (3) the territorial seas. The following additional waters may be considered WOTUS in Washington State: (4) all impoundments of traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and territorial seas, (5) all “tributaries” to a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or territorial sea, (6) all waters “adjacent” to waters within categories 1 through 5 above, (7) all waters located within the 100-year floodplain of a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or territorial sea, and (8) all waters within 4,000 feet of the high tide line or ordinary high water of a WOTUS that are determined on a case-specific basis to have a “significant nexus” to a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or territorial sea. Edgecomb Creek is not a traditional navigable water (TNW), but is a tributary to the Puget Sound, which is identified as a TNW (USACE, 2008). Therefore, the relocated Edgecomb Creek is likely considered a WOTUS through criterion 5 above. Wetland A is located within 4,000 feet from the Edgecomb Creek channel and would likely be considered a WOTUS through a significant nexus test (criterion 8 above), subject to Section 404 jurisdiction. In addition, the 2015 Clean Water Rule identifies fifteen waters or areas where jurisdiction will NOT be asserted, even if they otherwise meet the description of WOTUS: (1) waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the CWA, (2) prior converted cropland, (3) ephemeral ditches that are not a relocated tributary or excavated tributary, (4) ditches with intermittent flow that are not a relocated tributary, excavated in a tributary, and that do not drain wetlands, (5) ditches that do not flow, directly or indirectly, into a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or territorial sea, (6) artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land should irrigation cease, (7) artificially constructed lakes and ponds, created in dry land, such as farm and stock watering ponds, irrigation ponds, settling basins, fields flooded for rice growing, log cleaning ponds, or cooling ponds, (8) artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools created in dry land, (9) small ornamental waters created in dry land, (10) water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to mining or construction activity, including pits excavated for obtaining fill, sand, or gravel that fill with water, (11) erosional features, including gullies, rills, and other ephemeral features that do not meet the definition of tributary, non-wetland swales, and lawfully constructed grassed waterways, (12) puddles, (13) groundwater, including groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems, (14) stormwater control features constructed to convey, treat, or store stormwater that are created in dry land, and (15) wastewater recycling structures constructed in dry land; detention and retention basins built for wastewater recycling; groundwater recharge basins; percolation ponds built for wastewater recycling; and water distributary structures built for wastewater recycling. All three of the identified ditches onsite appear to have been excavated from dry land. The ditches are within a soil map unit classified as hydric soil, however test pits in some areas adjacent to the ditches and other data plots in upland areas of the site do not meet for hydric soils. The ditches meet 1778.0001 Centennial Park 18 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 criteria 3 and 5 listed above and therefore appear to not be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA. 6.2.3 Permitting Requirements Wetland development approvals, including local review, Federal permits, and State certification, are necessary in order for the proposed project to proceed. The project does not propose any fill within a wetland or its buffer. During Phase 2, the project will propose the filling of the relict stream channel in order to construct a portion of the multi-family dwellings. The required fill within the channel will account for 210 linear feet of the relict channel, confirmation of coverage under a simplified CWA Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) should be the limit of State and Federal permitting efforts under Sections 401 and 404 of the CWA. Final determination of NWP coverage is at the discretion of the USACE, and other minor NWPs, such as NWPs 29 and 39, may be also be used to authorize this project. Therefore, careful consideration of regional permit conditions has transpired during the planning process in order to satisfy the requirements for a variety of NWPs. Given that the stream channel has already been relocated offsite and appropriate mitigation has been completed in the form of channel creation, stream restoration, and riparian habitat restoration, no further mitigation or restoration should be required for the proposed filling activity. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 19 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 7. Buffer Enhancement Plan The following sections present the proposed buffer enhancement plan to address the low functioning buffer of onsite Wetland A. The proposed plan closely adheres to local Critical Areas regulations specified in AMC Chapter 20.93. 7.1 Purpose and Need The purpose of the proposed project is to provide additional housing units, park, open space, and retail area the City of Arlington. The project does not propose the loss of any wetland area or habitat; however, the existing buffer is degraded by non-native invasive species including reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. Per AMC 20.93.830(b)(3), in order to utilize the standard buffer width, the buffer must be planted with appropriate native vegetation to ensure adequate buffer functionality. As a result, a buffer enhancement plan is proposed. 7.2 Description of Impacts and Mitigation Strategy The project was carefully designed in order to avoid impacts to critical areas to the greatest extent feasible, and no direct impacts to the wetland nor its buffer are proposed. However, the existing buffer is degraded by the presence of non-native invasive species, and therefore does not provide adequate buffer functions. The proposed buffer enhancement actions will improve ecological functions and value by providing additional functions according to the needs of the site and watershed and providing an overall improvement to wetland and buffer function. Removing wetland buffer degradations such as non-native, invasive vegetation and replacing with native plantings within the buffer will restore the habitat functions and critical area protection and improve hydrologic function and water quality of runoff leaving the project site. A diverse herbaceous layer will be established to provide browse, cover, and nesting for small mammals, which in turn provide prey for raptors and other small mammals. The proposed enhancement plan will provide a net gain in function and improved protection to the wetlands from the proposed development. The wetland buffer enhancements proposed will include, but may not be limited to, the following recommendations: • Enhance a total of 18,632 square feet of onsite buffer area for Wetland A. • Pre-treat invasive plants with a Washington Department of Agriculture approved herbicide. After pre-treatment, grub to remove the invasive plants and replant all cleared areas with native trees, shrubs, and ground covers listed in Appendix C; Pre-treatment of the invasive plants should occur a minimum of two weeks prior to removal; • Replant the enhancement area with native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers listed in Appendix C, or substitutes approved by the responsible wetland scientist, to help retain soils, filter stormwater, and increase biodiversity; • An approved native seed mix will be used to seed the disturbed mitigation areas after planting; • Maintain and control invasive plants annually, at a minimum, or more frequently if necessary. Maintenance to reduce the growth and spread of invasive plants is not restricted to chemical applications but may include hand removal, if warranted; • Provide dry-season irrigation as necessary to ensure native plant survival; 1778.0001 Centennial Park 20 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 • Direct exterior lights away from the wetlands wherever possible; and • Place all activities that generate excessive noise (e.g., generators and air conditioning equipment) away from the wetlands where feasible. 7.3 Approach and Best Management Practices The proposed wetland buffer enhancement plan is intended to provide increased wetland protections by maintenance and improvement of wetland buffer functions. Enhancement of the wetland buffer should occur concurrently with the proposed development construction. TESC measures will be implemented according to the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan submitted as a part of the site development permit. Recommended TESC measures include high-visibility fencing (HVF) installed around native vegetation along the modified perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils. These TESC measures should be installed prior to the start of development or enhancement actions and actively managed and overseen by the Certified Erosion and Sedimentation Control Lead (CESCL) for the duration of the project. All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the identified wetland and associated buffer, and the area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing will be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers and will be free of pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and debris will be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept free of the remaining wetland and buffer areas. Following completion of the development, the entire site will be cleaned and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will be removed. 7.4 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards The goals and objectives for the proposed wetland buffer enhancement actions will be based on providing additional habitat and protection for the onsite wetland and providing supplementary water quality and hydrological functions. Wetland buffer enhancement actions are capable of improving habitat function for the wetland over time by establishment of a dense vegetated barrier between the project and the critical area. The goals and performance standards for the enhancement actions are outlined below. Goal 1 – Improve and protect wetland buffer functions. Objective 1 – Establish areas of native trees and shrubs to create diverse horizontal and vertical canopy structure and additional wildlife habitat. Performance Standard 1 – By the end of Year 5, the non-compensatory buffer enhancement area will have at least 2 species of native trees, 3 species of native shrubs; native volunteer species will be included in the count. To be considered, the native species must make up at least 5 percent of the vegetation class. Performance Standard 2 – Minimum plant survivorship will be at 100 percent of installed plants at the end of Year 1 (replacement of lost plants allowed), 85 percent at the end of Year 2, and 75 percent at the end of Year 3. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 21 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Performance Standard 3 – Non-native invasive plants will not make up more than 20 percent total cover in any growing season during the monitoring period following Year 1. 7.5 Plant Materials and Installation 7.5.1 Plant Materials All plant materials to be used for the enhancement actions will be nursery grown stock from a reputable, local source. Only native species are to be used; no hybrids or cultivars will be allowed. Plant material provided will be typical of their species or variety; if not cuttings they will exhibit normal, densely-developed branches and vigorous, fibrous root systems. Plants will be sound, healthy, vigorous plants free from defects, and all forms of disease and infestation. Container stock shall have been grown in its delivery container for not less than six months but not more than two years. Plants shall not exhibit rootbound conditions. Under no circumstances shall container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops. Seed mixture used for hand or hydroseeding shall contain fresh, clean, and new crop seed mixed by an approved method. The mixture is specified in the plan set. All plant material shall be inspected by a qualified Wetland Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not conforming to the specifications below will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor. Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site. Fertilizer will be in the form of Agroform plant tabs or an approved like form. Mulch will consist of sterile wheat straw for seeded areas (if necessary) and clean recycled wood chips approximately ½- inch to 1-inch in size and ½-inch thick for woody plants. The mulch material may be sourced from non-invasive woody materials sourced from the land clearing activities. 7.5.2 Plant Scheduling, Species, Density, and Location Plant installation should occur as close to conclusion of clearing and grading activities as possible to limit erosion and limit the temporal loss of function provided by the wetland and buffer. All planting should occur between September 1 and May 1 to ensure plants do not dry out after installation, or temporary irrigation measures may be necessary. All planting will be installed according to the procedures detailed in the following subsections and as outlined on the site plans in Appendix C. 7.5.3 Quality Control for Planting Plan All plant material shall be inspected by the Wetland Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not conforming to the specifications above will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor. Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site. Under no circumstances shall container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops. The landscape contractor shall provide the Wetland Scientist with documentation of plant material that includes the supplying nursery contact information, location of genetic source, plant species, plant quantities, and plant sizes. 7.5.4 Product Handling, Delivery, and Storage All seed should be delivered in original, unopened, and undamaged containers showing weight, analysis, and name of manufacturer. This material should be stored in a manner to prevent wetting 1778.0001 Centennial Park 22 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 and deterioration. All precautions customary in good trade practice shall be taken in preparing plants for moving. Workmanship that fails to meet industry standards will be rejected. Plants will be packed, transported, and handled with care to ensure protection against injury and from drying out. If plants cannot be planted immediately upon delivery they should be protected with soil, wet peat moss, or in a manner acceptable to the Wetland Scientist. Plants and mulch not installed immediately upon delivery shall be secured on the site to prevent theft or tampering. No plant shall be bound with rope or wire in a manner that could damage or break the branches. Plants transported on open vehicles should be secured with a protective covering to prevent windburn. 7.5.5 Preparation and Installation of Plant Materials The planting contractor shall verify the location of all elements of the wetland buffer enhancement plan with the responsible Wetland Scientist prior to installation. The responsible Wetland Scientist reserves the right to adjust the locations of landscape elements during the installation period as appropriate. If obstructions are encountered that are not shown on the drawings, planting operations will cease until alternate plant locations have been selected by and/or approved by the Wetland Scientist. Circular plant pits with vertical sides will be excavated for all container stock. The pits should be at least 1.5 times the width of the rootball, and the depth of the pit should accommodate the entire root system. Please refer to planting detail in Appendix C. Broken roots should be pruned with a sharp instrument and rootballs should be thoroughly soaked prior to installation. Set plant material upright in the planting pit to proper grade and alignment. Water plants thoroughly midway through backfilling and add Agroform tablets. Water pits again upon completion of backfilling. No filling should occur around trunks or stems. Do not use frozen or muddy mixtures for backfilling. Form a ring of soil around the edge of each planting pit to retain water and install a 4- to 6-inch layer of mulch around the base of each container plant. 7.5.6 Temporary Irrigation Specifications While the native species selected for the wetland buffer enhancement actions are hardy and typically thrive in northwest conditions and the proposed actions are planned in areas with sufficient hydroperiods for the species selected, some individual plants might perish due to dry conditions. Therefore, irrigation or regular watering may be provided as necessary for the duration of the first two growing seasons, two times per week while the native plantings become established. If used, irrigation will be discontinued after two growing seasons. Frequency and amount of irrigation will be dependent upon climatic conditions and may require more or less frequency watering than two times per week. 7.5.7 Invasive Plant Control and Removal Invasive species to be removed include Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass, and all listed noxious weeds. Non-native invasive plant species are well-established within a portion of Wetland A and the onsite wetland buffer and require an effective control strategy. To ensure non-native invasive species do not expand following the wetland buffer enhancement actions, non-native invasive plants within the entire mitigation area will be pretreated with a root-killing herbicide approved for use in aquatic sites (i.e. Rodeo) a minimum of two weeks prior to being cleared and grubbed from the enhancement area. A second application is strongly recommended. The pre-treatment with herbicide should occur prior to all planned enhancement actions, and spot treatment of surviving non-native invasive vegetation should be performed again each fall prior to senescence for a minimum of five years. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 23 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 7.6 Maintenance & Monitoring Plan The conceptual maintenance and monitoring plan is described below in accordance with AMC 20.93.850. The Applicant is committed to compliance with the wetland buffer enhancement plan and overall success of the project. As such, the Applicant will continue to maintain the project, keeping the site free from of non-native invasive vegetation, trash, and yard waste. The wetland buffer enhancement plan will require continued monitoring and maintenance to ensure the actions are successful. Therefore, the project site will be monitored for a period of five years with formal inspections by a qualified Wetland Scientist. The site will be monitored for a minimum of five years with monitoring plans submitted for zero, one, two, three and five years. Closeout assessment will also be conducted in Year 5 to ensure the adequate enhancement areas were established. Monitoring will consist of percent cover measurements at permanent monitoring stations, walk- through surveys to identify invasive species presence and dead or dying enhancement plantings, photographs taken at fixed photo points, wildlife observations, and general qualitative habitat and stream function observations. To determine percent cover, observed vegetation will be identified and recorded by species and an estimate of areal cover of dominant species within each sampling plots. Circular sample plots, approximately 30 feet in diameter (706 square feet), are centered at each monitoring station. The sample plots encompass the specified wetland buffer areas and terminate at the observed wetland boundary. Trees and shrubs within each 30-foot diameter monitoring plot are then recorded to species and areal cover. Herbaceous vegetation is sampled from a 10-foot diameter (78.5 square feet) within each monitoring plot, established at the same location as the center of each tree and shrub sample plot. Herbaceous vegetation within each monitoring plot is then recorded to species and includes an estimate of percent areal cover. A list of observed tree, shrub, and herbaceous species including percent areal cover of each species and wetland indicator status is included within the monitoring report. Plant survivorship of planted stock will be estimate at as-built/time zero and for each monitoring year by counting the number of dead/dying and live planted stock in each monitoring plot. Percent survival will equate to the number plants alive divided by the total number plants counted, multiplied by 100. 7.7 Reporting Following each monitoring event, a monitoring report detailing the current ecological status of the wetland buffer enhancement actions, measurement of performance standards, and management recommendations will be prepared and submitted to the City within 90 days of each monitoring event to ensure full compliance with the wetland buffer enhancement plan, performance standards, and conditions of approval. 7.8 Contingency Plan If monitoring results indicate that performance standards are not being met, it may be necessary to implement all or part of the contingency plan. Careful attention to maintenance is essential in ensuring that problems do not arise. Should any portion of the site fail to meet the success criteria, a contingency plan will be developed and implemented with regulatory approval. Such plans are adaptive and should be prepared on a case-by-case basis to reflect the failed mitigation characteristics. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 24 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Contingency plans can include additional plant installation, erosion control, and plant substitutions including type, size, and location. Contingency/maintenance activities may include, but are not limited to: 1. Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary; 2. Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate after two growing seasons with the same species or native species of similar form and function; 3. Irrigating the mitigation areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too dry, with a minimal quantity of water; 4. Reseeding and/or repair of wetland buffer areas as necessary if erosion or sedimentation occurs; 5. Spot treat non-native invasive plant species; and 6. Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the stream and buffer areas as necessary. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 25 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 8. Closure The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this project. They have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our work was also performed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our proposal. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this project may need to be revised wholly or in part. All wetland boundaries identified by SVC are based on conditions present at the time of the site inspection and considered preliminary until the flagged wetland boundaries are validated by the jurisdictional agencies. Validation of the wetland boundaries by the regulating agency provides a certification, usually written, that the wetland boundaries verified are the boundaries that will be regulated by the agencies until a specific date or until the regulations are modified. Only the regulating agencies can provide this certification. As wetlands are dynamic communities affected by both natural and human activities, changes in wetland boundaries may be expected; therefore, wetland delineations cannot remain valid for an indefinite period of time. Local agencies typically recognize the validity of wetland delineations for a period of five years after completion of a wetland delineation report. Development activities on a site five years after the completion of this wetland delineation report may require revision of the wetland delineation. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due of such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised wholly or in part. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 26 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Chapter 9. References Arlington Municipal Code (AMC). 2018. Chapter 20.93 Environmentally Critical Areas - https://library.municode.com/wa/arlington/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_C H20.93ENCRAR. Current through October 16, 2018. Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Granger, T., T. Hruby, A. McMillan, D. Peters, J. Rubey, D. Sheldon, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-008. Olympia, Washington. April, 2005. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-29. Debose A., and Klungland, M.W. 1983. Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Washington State Department of Natural Resources, and Washington State University, Agriculture Research Center. Washington, D.C. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X Munsell Color, 2000. Munsell soil color charts. New Windsor, New York. Munsell Color, 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. Nationwide Environmental Title Research. 2019. Historic Aerials by NETROnline. Website: https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1995. Hydric Soils of Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C. Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P. Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-006. Olympia, Washington. March, 2005. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 27 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Shramek, Joe. 2017. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2017 Protocol Stream Survey Process and Water Level and Streamflow Forecast memorandum. February 28, 2017. Website: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/fp_wt_streamsurvey_20170228.pdf?vwlt7i. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008. Navigable Waters of the U.S. in Washington State. Revised December 31, 2008. Website: https://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Portals/27/docs/regulatory/permit%20guidebook/Navigable _Waters_of_the_US_in_WA_State.pdf USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Ver 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, Lichvar, R.W. and Noble, C.V. ERDC/EL TR- 10-3. Vicksburg, MSS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 8.2. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 2006. Section 222-16-030 and -031 – Water Typing System. Website: https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=222-16-030. Effective date December 16, 2006. Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 2006. Section 222-16-030 and -031 – Water Typing System. Website: https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=222-16-030. Effective date December 16, 2006. Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2016. WSDOT USFWS No Effect Project Form. Submitted March 3, 2016. WSDOT. 2016. WSDOT NOAA Short Project Form. Submitted March 3, 2016. Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 2002. Forest Practice Board Manual, Section 13 – Guidelines for Determining Fish Use for the Purpose of Typing Waters. DNR. 2018. Forest Practices Water Typing. Website: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/forest-practices-water- typing. 1778.0001 Centennial Park 28 Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix A — Methods and Tools Table A-1. Methods and tools used to prepare the report. Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Wetland USACE 1987 http://el.erdc.usace.army.mi Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Delineation Wetland l/elpubs/pdf/wlman87.pdf Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Delineation Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Manual Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Regional http://www.usace.army.mil U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Supplement to the /CECW/Documents/cecw Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Core of Engineers o/reg/west_mt_finalsupp.p Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Wetland df Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version Delineation 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Manual: Western Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: Mountains, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Valleys, and Coast Development Center. Region (Version 2.0) Wetland USFWS / http://www.fws.gov/wetlan Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. Classification Cowardin ds/Documents/Classificatio LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and Classification n-of-Wetlands-and- deepwater habitats of the United States. System Deepwater-Habitats-of-the- Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. United-States.pdf https://www.fgdc.gov/stan Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. dards/projects/wetlands/nv Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater cs-2013 Habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004- 2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Hydrogeomorphic http://el.erdc.usace.army.mi Brinson, M. M. (1993). “A hydrogeomorphic Classification l/wetlands/pdfs/wrpde4.pd classification for wetlands,” Technical Report (HGM) System f WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Wetland Washington State https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating Wetland Rating /publications/documents/1 Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. System 406029.pdf (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Wetland 2016 National Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and Indicator Wetland Plant List N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant Status List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X https://www.fws.gov/wetla nds/documents/National- Wetland-Plant-List-2016- Wetland-Ratings.pdf Stream Department of http://www.stage.dnr.wa.go Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 222- Classification Natural Resources v/forestpractices/watertypi 16-030. DNR Water typing system. (DNR) Water ng/ Typing System Stream Determining the https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy Anderson, P.S., S. Meyer, P. Olson, and E. Delineation OHW /publications/documents/1 Stockdale. 2016. Determining the Ordinary 606029.pdf High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State. Publication No. 16-06-029. Final Review Draft. Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington. Plant Names USDA Plant http://plants.usda.gov/ Website Database 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Flora of the Pacific http://www.washington.ed Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora Northwest u/uwpress/search/books/ of the Pacific Northwest. University of HITFLC.html Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Soils Data NRCS Soil Survey http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.u Website GIS data based upon: sda.gov/app/ Debose A., and Klungland, M.W. 1983. Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Washington State Department of Natural Resources, and Washington State University, Agriculture Research Center. Washington, D.C. Snohomish http://www.wa.nrcs.usda.g Natural Resources Conservation Service. County Hydric ov/technical/soils/hydric_li 1983. Hydric Soils List: Snohomish County, Soils List sts/hydsoil-wa-653.pdf Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C. Soil Color Charts Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. Field Indicators of United States Department of Agriculture, Hydric Soils in the Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov U.S. Version 8.2 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United /Internet/FSE_DOCUME States, Version 8.2. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, NTS/nrcs142p2_053171.pd and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in f cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Threatened Washington http://data- Washington Natural Heritage Program and Natural Heritage wadnr.opendata.arcgis.com/ (Data published 07/19/17). Endangered, Endangered Program datasets/wnhp-current- threatened, and sensitive plants of Washington. Species element-occurrences Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA Washington http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/p Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Priority Habitats hspage.htm Program (Data requested 06/13/18). Map of and Species priority habitats and species in project vicinity. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). NOAA fisheries http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ Website species list and ESA-Salmon- maps Listings/Salmon- Populations/Index.cfm and http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov /pr/species/ USFWS species http://www.fws.gov/westw Website lists by County afwo/se/SE_List/endanger ed_Species.asp Species of WDFW GIS Data http://wdfw.wa.gov/mappi Website Local ng/salmonscape/ Importance 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Arlington https://library.municode.co AMC Chapter 20.93 Environmentally Critical Municipal Code m/wa/arlington/codes/cod Areas Report e_of_ordinances?nodeId=T Preparation IT20ZO_CH20.93ENCRA R Historic NETROnline https://www.historicaerials. Website Aerials com/viewer 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B — Background Information This appendix includes a USGS Topographic Map (B1); USFWS NWI map (B2); NRCS soil survey map (B3); Snohomish County wetland inventory (B4); WDFW PHS map (B5); WDFW SalmonScape map (B6); DNR stream typing map (B7); 1954 Historic Aerial Photograph (B8); and 1969 Historic Aerial Photograph (B9). 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B1 – USGS Topographic Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B2 – USFWS NWI Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B3 – NRCS Soil Survey Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B4 – Snohomish County Wetland Inventory Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B5 – WDFW PHS Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B6 – WDFW SalmonScape Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B7 – DNR Steam Typing Map Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B8 – 1954 Historic Aerial Photograph Approximate Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B9 – 1969 Historic Aerial Photograph Approximate Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix B9 – 1990 Historic Aerial Photograph Approximate Subject Property Location 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix C — Site Plans 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 CENTENNIAL PARK - EXISTING CONDITIONS PRELIMINARY INFORMATION ONLY Wetland Flag ! ! ! ! ! ! Drainage NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION &' Data Point ààà` à à à` Type F Stream SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES à à à NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR Standard 40' Wetland BufferàààCategory IV Wetland CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR Delineated Wetland Edge àààSite Boundary ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET ¢ Estimated Wetland Edge à à à à à à à à à à à à ààààààààààààA-1à à à à à à à à à à à à ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !DP-3U! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !àààààààààààà! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! A-11 ' à à à à à à à à à à à à!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! & ! ààààààààààààA-2 ! A-10 à à à à à à à à à à à à! ! Wetland A àààààààààààà! à à à à à à à à à à à à! A-3 ! Category IV àààààààààààà! à à à à à à à à à à à à! A-9 ! àààààààààààà! DP-4W à à à à à à à à à à à à! ! ' DP-6U ààààààààààààA-4 ! & à à à à à à à à à à à à! A-8' DP-5U ! & ! A-7 ààààààààààààà à à à à à à à à à à à' A-6! & ! A-5 ! àààààààààààà! DP-7U! ' ! àààààààààààà& ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! DP-2U &' DP-1U &' ` ` Relocated ` ` Type F Stream ` ` (Estimated) ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` 0 55 110 220 Feet ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` DATE: 10/30/2018 ` ` ` ` ` ` CENTENNIAL PARK ` JOB: 1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview Consultants LLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY: DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions ` 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 110 ' Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: ` 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. www.soundviewconsultants.com 1 ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` CENTENNIAL PARK - EXISTING CONDITIONS HIGHLAND VIEW DR. HIGHLAND VIEW DR. PROPERTY BOUNDARY DP3U DP6U DP4W SOURCES: DP5U DP7U WETLAND A CATEGORY IV ~21,823 SF DP11U STD. 40' BUFFER 67TH AVE. N.E. DP10U DP2U 67TH AVE NE PROPERTY BOUNDARY APROX. LOCATION OF 150' BUFFER OF RELICT STREAM CHANNEL DP1U RELICT STREAM CHANNEL FROM SURVEY DP8U CULVERT V DP9U V APROX. LOCATION OF V V V V RELOCATED STREAM RANGE 05E, W.M. V OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, STANDARD 100' BUFFER 1 4 BLOCKED V V V CENTENNIAL PARK 172ND ST NE CULVERT ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 172ND ST. N.E. V APROX. LOCATION OF RELOCATED PRELIMINARY 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW V V STREAM CHANNEL (OFF-SITE) INFORMATION ONLY V LIKELY LOCATION OF TYPE F WITH 100' BUFFER DATE: 6/27/2019 V RELOCATED STREAM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION V V V V JOB: 1778.0001 V INTERRUPTED BUFFER V SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES BY: DS V NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR V CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET SHEET 1 OF 4 CENTENNIAL PARK - PROPOSED PROJECT HIGHLAND VIEW DR. HIGHLAND VIEW DR. BUILDING E.2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY6' PERIMETER 6' PERIMETER FENCING FENCING OPEN SPACE C 20' - 5" BUILDING D REAR SETBACK 30' - 1" REAR SETBACK WETLAND A CATEGORY IV BUILDINGS B, C BUILDING E SPLIT RAIL SPLIT RAIL COMM. AREA BUILDINGS B, C FENCING FENCING BLDG & D PROVIDED WITH LOFT RECREATIONAL PROPOSED VAULT Centennial Trail AREA B LOCATION. CONFIRM BUILDING K LAYOUT W/PUD POOL SOURCES: PARKING BACK ALLEY PARKING BACK ALLEY PARKING BACK ALLEY J SEC 40FT WETLAND BUFFER ZONE MAIN 25% OF BUFFER ZONE (18,948SF) TO SEC ENTRY/EXIT RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE STREET COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE PER CARPORTS SWITCH SPLIT RAIL AMC 20.52.030 (B)(6) FENCING 4,737SF OPEN SPACE E DOG RUN MINI-PARK C WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT BUILDING C J PLANTING ~18,632 SF (SEE PLANT OPEN SPACE F RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE STREET PLAYGROUND BUILDING L SCHEDULE ON NEXT SHEET) EQUIPMENT BUILDING F SHELTER AND BUILDINGS B, C & TRELLISES D PROVIDED WITH STRUCTURES LOFT UNITS AT WETLAND A LEV 1 FOR FUTURE RETAIL OPEN CONVERSION SPACE A J OPEN COMMUNITY GREEN CATEGORY IV SPACE B BUILDING H MINI-PARK A SEC Centennial Trail ~21,823 SF WITH BUILDING J PARKING BACK ALLEY RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE STREET STD. 40' BUFFER BUILDING B67TH AVE. N.E. BUILDING M BUILDING I BUILDING G PARKING BACK ALLEY SEC SEC J APROX. LOCATION OF 150' BUFFER 67TH AVE NE TRASH/ MONUMENT SIGN RELICT STREAM RECYCLING OF RELICT STREAM CHANNEL CHANNEL, 150' CL RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE STREET PROPERTY BOUNDARY SECONDARY BUFFER ENTRY/EXIT J J SEC BICYCLE SURVEYED LOCATION OF RACK J 25% OF BUFFER ZONE (73,093SF) TO RELICT STREAM CHANNEL BUILDING A SEC COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE PER AMC 20.52.030 (B)(6) 18,273SF OPEN SPACE E APROX. LOCATION OF 100' BUFFER BUILDING N OF RELOCATED STREAM CHANNEL BUILDING A DASHED GREY PHASE 2 LINES INDICATE Centennial Trail BUILDING O PHASE 2 SITE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDINGS SWITCH POTENTIAL LOCATION OF PHASE 2 PHASE 2 V BUILDING P BUILDING S V RELOCATED STREAM V V V PHASE 2 V SECONDARY RANGE 05E, W.M. ENTRY/EXIT V INTERRUPTED BUFFER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, 4 1 V APROX. LOCATION OF RELOCATED RELICT STREAM CHANNEL; V V CENTENNIAL PARK 172ND ST NE FISH PRESENCE UNLIKELY ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 172ND ST. N.E. V STREAM CHANNEL PRELIMINARY 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW V V INFORMATION ONLY V DATE: 6/27/2019 V NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION V V V V JOB: 1778.0001 V V SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES BY: DS V NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR V CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET SHEET 2 OF 4 CENTENNIAL PARK - NATIVE PLANT SCHEDULE TREE PLANTING DETAIL SOURCES: RANGE 05E, W.M. OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, 4 1 CENTENNIAL PARK PRELIMINARY ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW INFORMATION ONLY DATE: 6/27/2019 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JOB: 1778.0001 SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES BY: DS NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET SHEET 3 OF 4 CENTENNIAL PARK - SITE DETAILS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE LOCATOR LATH (IF SPECIFIED) LOCATOR LATH (IF SPECIFIED) SET TOP OF ROOT MASS / ROOT BALL FLUSH SET TOP OF ROOT MASS / ROOT BALL FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE WITH FINISH GRADE OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE 2 to 3 INCH LAYER OF MULCH - KEEP MULCH 2 to 3 INCH LAYER OF MULCH - KEEP MULCH MIN. 3" AWAY FROM TRUNK OF TREE MIN. 3" AWAY FROM TRUNK OF SHRUB NOTES: NOTES: 1. PLANT SHRUBS OF THE SAME SPECIES IN 1. PLANT TREES AS INDICATED ON PLAN. AVOID GROUPS OF 3 to 9 AS APPROPRIATE, OR AS SHOWN INSTALLING PLANTS IN STRAIGHT LINES. SOURCES: ON PLAN. AVOID INSTALLING PLANTS IN STRAIGHT 2. EXCAVATE PIT TO FULL DEPTH OF ROOT MASS LINES TO ACHIEVE A NATURAL-LOOKING LAYOUT. AND 2 X ROOT MASS DIAMETER. SPREAD ROOTS TO 2. EXCAVATE PIT TO FULL DEPTH OF ROOT MASS FULL WIDTH OF CANOPY. SCARIFY SIDES OF PIT. AND 2 X ROOT MASS DIAMETER. SPREAD ROOTS TO 3. MIDWAY THROUGH PLANTING ADD AGROFORM FULL WIDTH OF CANOPY. SCARIFY SIDES OF PIT. TABLET AND WATER THOROUGHLY. 3. MIDWAY THROUGH PLANTING ADD AGROFORM 4. BACKFILL TO BE COMPACTED USING WATER ONLY. TABLET AND WATER THOROUGHLY. 5. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. 4. BACKFILL TO BE COMPACTED USING WATER ONLY. 5. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. UNDISTURBED OR UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADE LIVE STAKE PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1. LIVE STAKES TO BE 1 TO 2 INCH DIAMETER 24 TO 32 INCHES LENGTH. 2. USE 1/2 INCH DIAMETER REBAR OR ROCK BAR TO MAKE PILOT HOLE. 3. INSTALL LIVE STAKES TAPER END DOWN WITH BUDS POINTED UP. 4. MINUMUM TWO BUDS ABOVE GRADE. 5. SET LIVE STAKES WITH DEAD-BLOW HAMMER. 6. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. STORAGE OF LIVE STAKES ALL WOODY PLANT CUTTINGS COLLECTED MORE THAN 12 HR PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, MUST BE CAREFULLY BOUND, SECURED, AND STORED OUT OF DIRECT SUNLIGHT AND SUBMERGED IN CLEAN FRESH WATER FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO TWO WEEKS. RANGE 05E, W.M. OUTDOOR TEMPERATURES MUST BE LESS OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N,4 THAN 50 DEGREES F AND TEMPERATURE 1 INDOORS AND IN STORAGE CONTAINERS CENTENNIAL PARK MUST BE BETWEEN 34 AND 50 DEGREES F. PRELIMINARY ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW INFORMATION ONLY IF THE LIVE STAKES CANNOT BE INSTALLED DURING THE DORMANT SEASON, CUT DATE: 6/27/2019 DURING THE DORMANT SEASON AND HOLD NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 70-80 % OF STAKE INSTALLED BELOW GRADE JOB: 1778.0001 IN COLD STORAGE AT TEMPERATURES BETWEEN 33 AND 39 DEGREES F FOR UP TO SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMES BY: DS NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR 2 MONTHS. CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET SHEET 4 OF 4 Appendix D — Data Forms 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-1U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.15232781 Long: -122.13997093 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met; only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected in the southwest corner of the site. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 2 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 95 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 95 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-1U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 13 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SiLo Gravelly silt loam 13 - 18 10YR 2/2 95 10YR 3/6 5 CS M SaLo Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrologic criteria met; only one secondary indicator (D5) was met indirectly. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-2U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.15270064 Long: -122.13943818 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected in the western portion of the site in a field. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 1 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 1 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Plantago lanceolata 60 Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Agrostis capillaris 30 Yes FAC 3. Ranunculus repens 10 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-2U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 15 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - SaLo Gravelly sandy loam 15 - 17 10YR 2/2 95 10YR 3/6 5 CS M SaLo Gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. Roots observed from 0 to 6 inches. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrology criteria met. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-3U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 15 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.15356159 Long: -122.13967423 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected in the northern portion of the site in a drainage. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 0 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-3U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 8 10YR 3/1 100 - - - - SiLo Silt loam 8 - 18 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - LoSa Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrologic criteria met; only one secondary indicator (D5) was met indirectly. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/18 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investment State: WA Sampling Point: DP-4W Investigator(s): Matthew Murphy, Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 5E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Swale Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.153484 Long: -122.13886242 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: All three wetland criteria met. Data collected in northern portion of the site in Wetland A. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 0 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-4W Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SiLo Silt loam 16-18 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - Organic Muck 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Hydric soils met through indicator A4. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 14 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 11 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrologic criteria met through primary indicator A3. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-5U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.15338214 Long: -122.13902839 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected west of Wetland A boundary. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 0 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-5U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 11 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SaLo Sandy loam 11 - 16 10YR 3/1 100 - - - - LoSa Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrologic criteria met; only one secondary indicator (D5) was met indirectly. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-6U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 20 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.1535363 Long: -122.13832539 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected east of Wetland A boundary. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 20 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 0 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-6U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 16 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - LoSa Loamy sand 16 - 18 10YR 3/1 100 - - - - LoSa Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrologic criteria met; only one secondary indicator (D5) was met indirectly. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 10/12/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-7U Investigator(s): Erin Harker Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.15328337 Long: -122.13887554 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met; only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected southwest of Wetland A boundary. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 0 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 10 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 10 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 100 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-7U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 11 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SiLo Silt loam 11 - 16 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - LoSa Loamy sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 17 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 16 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrologic criteria met; only one secondary indicator (D5) was met indirectly. Groundwater table is present but begins too deep to be meet A2 or A3. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 11/4/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-8U Investigator(s): Jon Pickett Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.152198 Long: -122.13838064 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria omet; only hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. Data collected north of the relict stream channel. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Thuja plicata 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 15 Yes FAC Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 35 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 40 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Sambucus racemosa 10 No FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Lonicera involucrata 10 No FAC OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 60 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 40 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Urtica dioica 15 Yes FAC 3. Equisetum arvense 10 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 65 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 35 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-8U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 6 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - SiLo Silt loam 6-13 10YR 3/2 100 - - - - SiLo Gravelly silt loam 13-15 5Y 4/1 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M SiLo Silt loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 10 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology criteria met through primary indicators A2 and A3; however, 3.24-inches of precipitation was recorded 2 weeks prior to the site investigation which likely caused areas a false positive hydrology indicator US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 11/4/2018 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-9U Investigator(s): Jon Pickett Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.152120 Long: -122.13842892 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected north of the relict stream channel. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 40 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 2. Thuja plicata 15 Yes FAC Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 55 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus spectabilis 15 Yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 45 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Moss sp. 5 NI Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 5 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hedera helix 10 Yes FACU Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 10 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 95 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-9U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 14 10YR 3/1 100 - - - - SaLo Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 14 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 13 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology not met. Water table too deep to meet A2 or A3, and 3.24-inches of precipitation was recorded 2 weeks prior to the site investigation. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 5/7/2019 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-10U Investigator(s): Jon Pickett Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.152830 Long: -122.13840503 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected in eastern-central portion of the property in a forested area. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 70 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 70 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 10 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 10 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 80 Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Equisetum arvense 20 No FAC 3. Juncus sp.* 3 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 103 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum -3 Remarks: Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. *Could not be identified to species level, assumed FAC for scoring purposes. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-10U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 13 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - SaLo Gravelly sandy loam 13-16 10YR 3/2 60 - - - - SaLo Sandy loam, dual matrix 10YR 2/2 40 - - - - SaLo Sandy loam, dual matrix 16-20 10YR 2/1 100 - - - - SiLo Silt loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 18 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 14 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology not met; saturation and water table too deep to meet A2 or A3. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1778.0001 - Centennial Park City/County: Arlington / Snohomish Sampling Date: 5/7/2019 Applicant/Owner: Williams Investments State: WA Sampling Point: DP-11U Investigator(s): Jon Pickett Section, Township, Range: 23 / 31N / 05E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 48.153032 Long: -122.13839143 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Norma loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria met, only hydrophytic vegetation. Data collected in eastern-central portion of the property in a forested area. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 75 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 75 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = 0 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Equisetum arvense 30 Yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Phalaris arundinacea 25 Yes FACW 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6. Dominance Test is >50% 7. Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 8. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 55 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Remarks: Mosses 5% of herbaceous stratum. Hydropytic vegetation criteria met through dominance test. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-11U Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 8 10YR 2/2 100 - - - - SaLo Sandy loam 8-15 10YR 4/4 60 - - - - SaLo Gravelly sandy loam, dual matrix 10YR 3/2 40 - - - - SaLo Gravelly sandy loam, dual matrix 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:________________________________None Depth (inches):________________________-- Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): None Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology not met. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Appendix E — Wetland Rating Forms 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Wetland name or number ______ A RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ A 10/12/18 Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ Erin Harker, Jon Pickett ✔ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Depressional Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N✔ NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ IV (based on functions___ or special characteristics___)✔ 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 Score for each _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 function based on three _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 ratings _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 (order of ratings is not important) FUNCTION Improving Hydrologic Habitat Water Quality 9 = H,H,H Circle the appropriate ratings 8 = H,H,M Site Potential L L L 7 = H,H,L Landscape Potential L L L 7 = H,M,M Value H L L TOTAL 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M Score Based on 5 3 3 11 5 = H,L,L Ratings 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above N/A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 4.1 (can be added to figure above) Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit HGM class to being rated use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream Depressional within boundary of depression Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other Treat as class of freshwater wetland ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. 1 points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/ of area points = 1 10 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/ of area points = 0 10 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4 0 Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3? 0 Source_______________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 1 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES 2 if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 0 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 0 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 3 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 3 Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at 0 >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down-gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): ï‚· Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2 ï‚· Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1 0 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why __________________Wetland discharges into ditches and stormwater featurespoints = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? 0 Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle 1 If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. 0 None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) 1 ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: 0.88 % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses) 3.10 /2] = _______%2.43 If total accessible habitat is: > 1/ (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 3 0 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: 2.51 % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses) 34.89 /2] = _______%19.955 Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 1 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) -2 ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above -1 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2  It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)  It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)  It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species 0  It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources  It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.  Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).  Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).  Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.  Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.  Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).  Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.  Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).  Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.  Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page).  Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.  Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.  Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.  Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?  The dominant water regime is tidal,  Vegetated, and  With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.  Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.  Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?  The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks  The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland is larger than 1/ ac (4350 ft2) 10 Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:  Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103  Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105  Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ______ A This page left blank intentionally Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 CENTENNIAL PARK - WETLAND RATING MAP Cowardin Map 330' Boundary Emergent ¢ Scrub-Shrub Site Boundary 0 75 150 300 Feet DATE: 1/3/2019 CENTENNIAL PARK JOB: 1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview Consultants LLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY: DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 125 ' Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: www.soundviewconsultants.com 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. of 51 CENTENNIAL PARK - WETLAND RATING MAP Hydroperiod Map 150' Boundary Saturated ¢ Seasonally Flooded Site Boundary 0 37.5 75 150 Feet DATE: 1/3/2019 CENTENNIAL PARK JOB: 1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview Consultants LLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY: DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 75 ' Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: www.soundviewconsultants.com 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. of 52 CENTENNIAL PARK - WETLAND RATING MAP Contributing Basin Map à à àSite Boundary à à à ààààWetland ààààContributing Basin ¢ à à à à à à à à à à à à à à àààààààà à à à à à à àààààààà à à à à à à àààààààà à à à à à à àààààààà à à à à à à ààààààà ààààààà Old Stream Channel 0 125 250 500Feet (Relocated South of 172nd Street) D.4.0 D.4.3 Area of Contributing Basin (SF) 1,211,949 Area of Wetland A (SF) 23,130 Percent of Wetland A within Contributing Basin 1.908% D.5.0 D.5.3 Area of Contributing Basin 1,211,949 Area of Intensive Human Land Uses 30,464 Percent of Intensive Human Land Use within Contributing Basin 3% DATE:1/3/2019 CENTENNIAL PARK JOB:1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview ConsultantsLLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY:DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 250 ' Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: www.soundviewconsultants.com 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. of 53 CENTENNIAL PARK - WETLAND RATING MAP Habitat Map à à à à à à à àSite Boundary ààààà à à à ààààWetland ààààHigh Intensity ¢ Moderate and Low Intensity Relatively Undisturbed à à à à àà àà 0 650 1,300 2,600 Feet H.2.0 Wetland A H.2.1 Abutting Undisturbed Habitat 0.88% Abutting Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 3.10% Accessible Habitat 2.43% H.2.2 Undisturbed Habitat 2.51% Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 34.89% Undisturbed Habitat in 1 KM Polygon 19.96% H.2.3 High Intensity Land Use in 1 KM Polygon 62.60% DATE:1/3/2019 CENTENNIAL PARK JOB:1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview ConsultantsLLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY:DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 1,300 ' Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: www.soundviewconsultants.com 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. of 54 CENTENNIAL PARK - WETLAND RATING MAP SITE ¢ 303d Map Sub Basin Category 4A Assessed Waters Category 5 Assessed Waters DNR Hydrology 0 1 2 4 Miles LISTING ID CATEGORY PARAMETER MEDIA WATERBODY WATERBODY TYPE 47512 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water UNNAMED CREEK (TRIB TO QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F.) Rivers/Streams 45266 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 7299 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 47492 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water UNNAMED CREEK (TRIB TO QUILCEDA CREEK) Rivers/Streams 46286 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK Rivers/Streams 7307 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK, M.F. Rivers/Streams 71215 5 pH Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 71213 5 pH Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 7306 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK Rivers/Streams 7304 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK Rivers/Streams 71212 5 pH Water UNNAMED CREEK (TRIB TO QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F.) Rivers/Streams 71221 5 pH Water UNNAMED DITCH (TRIB TO QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F.) Rivers/Streams 7305 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK Rivers/Streams 7302 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water QUILCEDA CREEK Rivers/Streams 47506 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water UNNAMED DITCH (TRIB TO QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F.) Rivers/Streams 7298 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK, M.F. Rivers/Streams 47502 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 9806 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK, M.F. Rivers/Streams 74184 4A Bacteria Water QUILCEDA CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams DATE: 1/3/2019 CENTENNIAL PARK JOB: 1778.0001 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 Soundview Consultants LLC ARLINGTON, WA 98223 BY: DLS Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 SCALE: 1 " = 2 mi Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 SNOHOMISH COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS: www.soundviewconsultants.com 31052300300800 FIGURE NO. of 55 Appendix G — Edgecomb Creek Relocation Documentation 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 Appendix H — Qualifications All field inspections, jurisdictional wetland boundary delineations, habitat assessments, and supporting documentation, including this Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan prepared for the Centennial Park project site were prepared by, or under the direction of, Jon Pickett of SVC. In addition, the site investigations were performed by Erin Harker, and report preparation was completed by Rachael Hyland. Jon Pickett Senior Environmental Planner Professional Experience: 9 years Jon Pickett is a Senior Scientist/Environmental Planner with diverse professional experience in habitat development as a Regional Biologist and Environmental Project Manager, with an emphasis in wetland restoration and enhancement. Jon has extensive experience successfully planning, developing, securing funding, managing and implementing numerous large-scale wetland habitat projects aimed at restoring the biological and physical functions of wetlands throughout California’s Central Valley and Southern California. During this time he managed a 2,200 acre private wetland and upland habitat complex as a public trust resource for conservation and consumptive use. He worked to ensure projects were designed and implemented to achieve habitat restoration goals, including reclamation of wetland and floodplain habitats, reintroduction of aquatic complexity and habitat, and reestablishment of riparian corridor. Jon has worked with Federal and State agencies and private entities on land acquisitions for conservational habitat and public use, including prioritizing acquisitions relative to value and opportunity and funding. In addition, Jon has experience in regulatory coordination to ensure projects operated in compliance with Federal, State and local environmental regulations, preparing permit documentation, coordinating with all pertinent agencies and stakeholders, and developing and maintaining appropriate permitting timelines to ensure timely approvals. He also oversaw earthwork construction components and revegetation efforts, as well as post-project monitoring, with an emphasis in native vegetation establishment and natural channel morphology. Jon earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Natural Resource Sciences from Washington State University and Bachelor of Science Minor in Forestry from Washington State University. He has been formally trained in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System, USACE 40-hour wetland delineation training, Determination of Ordinary High Water Mark, Using Field Indicators for Hydric Soils, and the Washington State Department of Ecology Credit and Debit Method. Erin Harker Staff Wetland Scientist Professional Experience: 3 years Erin Harker is a Staff Wetland Scientist with diverse ecological experience in both field and laboratory settings in the Pacific Northwest. She has gained hands-on experience involving research on water quality, salmon runs, amphibian surveys, restoration project performance, and marine mammal hydro- acoustics. Erin is proficient in collecting and analyzing environmental data; riparian restoration and wetland mitigation monitoring principles and techniques; analyzing local, state, and federal 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 environmental code and regulations; and technical writing. Erin has additional experience engaging students and volunteers in a suite of environmental curriculums. She currently performs wetland, ordinary high water, and forensic delineations, in addition to assisting clients through the various stages of land use planning by conducting environmental code analysis; preparing environmental assessments, mitigation reports, and biological evaluations; and completing permit applications. Erin graduated from Western Washington University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science with a Marine Ecology focus. She has received has received 40-hour Wetland Delineation Training through the USACE and formal training through the WSDOE and Coastal Training Program in conducting forage fish surveys; using the credit-debit system for estimating wetland mitigation needs, determining the ordinary high water mark; Puget Sound coastal processes; conducting eelgrass delineations; using the 2014 wetland rating system; using field indicators for hydric soils; and administering permits in the shoreline jurisdiction. Rachael Hyland Environmental Scientist Professional Experience: 5 years Rachael Hyland is a wetland profession in training (WPIT) through the Society of Wetland Scientists and a Certified Associated Ecologist through the Ecological Society of America. Rachael has a background in wetland and ecological habitat assessments in various states, most notably Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Ohio. She has experience in assessing tidal, stream, and wetland systems, reporting on biological evaluations, permitting, and site assessments. She also has extensive knowledge of bats and White Nose Syndrome (Pseudogymnoascus destructans), a fungal disease attacking bats, which was recently documented in Washington. Rachael earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from the University of Connecticut, with additional ecology studies at the graduate level. Rachael has completed Basic Wetland Delineator Training with the Institute for Wetland Education and Environmental Research, received 40-hour USACE wetland delineation training, and received formal training from the Washington State Department of Ecology in Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach. 1778.0001 Centennial Park Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland Delineation & Habitat Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 28, 2019 600 Dupont Street Bellingham, Washington 98225 360.647.1510 June 29, 2020 Williams Investments 2515 Colby Avenue Everett, Washington 98201 Attention: Ryan Kilby Subject: Hydrogeologic Assessment Report Centennial Park Project Arlington, Washington File No. 22450-002-00 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT UNDERSTANDING GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) is pleased to submit this report providing a hydrogeologic assessment of stormwater infiltration issues at the Centennial Park Project, located at the intersection of 67th Avenue NE and 172nd Street NE in Arlington, Washington. This hydrogeologic assessment is based on correspondence with civil designers (CG Engineering), a review of project documents, exploration and construction oversight, our familiarity with the area, discussions with the project team, and our experience on similar projects. Background The Centennial Park Project is currently under construction. Under Phase 1, the 13-acre Centennial Park Project site is being developed into seven apartment and mixed-use buildings. A series of 10 shallow infiltration trenches (numbered 101 through 110) were designed to infiltrate site runoff. Previous geotechnical engineering site explorations and design recommendations were provided by GeoTest Services, Inc. (GeoTest), including an evaluation of groundwater table elevation and infiltration potential for the site soils (GeoTest 2019). We understand that infiltration trenches 102, 103, and 104, located on the western portion of the site, were constructed per project plans without issue. However, shallow groundwater was encountered during excavation of infiltration trenches 107 and 108 and in cut slopes in the central and eastern portions of the site. Installation of Cutoff Drain We understand a cutoff drain running north-south along the eastern portion of the site was installed to intercept shallow perched groundwater to assist with construction of the cut slopes and infiltration facilities. The cutoff drain collects water that previously flowed to a shallow swale that traversed the central part of Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 2 the site, referred to as the “CL Swale”, draining into the Category IV wetland located in the northeast portion of the site. Excess water from the wetland discharges as surface flow along the northwest site boundary and through 24-inch-diameter culverts. Pumps installed in the cutoff drain have been running continuously (estimated flow between 20 and 60 gallons per minute [gpm]) since March 2020 and observed shallow groundwater levels on site have subsequently been reduced. Request for Hydrogeologic Review GeoEngineers was asked in late April 2020 to provide this hydrogeologic assessment after the City of Arlington (City) requested that a hydrogeologist be retained to address the following questions and comments about the hydrologic effect of the cutoff drain and stormwater trenches on the wetland: 1. Interflow between the groundwater, the impact on surface flow, is it increasing, decreasing, staying the same? With the cutoff drain so much lower than the elevation of the pre-existing swale, it seems like the project is removing groundwater from the site and increasing runoff leaving the site as surface water. 2. Impacts on the wetland due to the cutoff drain and groundwater/removal of groundwater bypassing the wetland. (It looks like a swale crossing the site emptied into the wetland previously, based on existing topography.) 3. The interflow connection between the area of the Trench 107 (which was at one time considered a wetland, but was overturned by the wetland report) and the wetland. Are they hydraulically connected, and will this work end up dewatering the wetland in the summer months? GeoEngineers developed the Scope of Services described below to provide answers to these questions and develop a full understanding of the hydrogeologic constraints presented by the site, and implemented this scope in conjunction with other members of the existing project team. SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of our services was to work with and support the existing project team, including CG Engineering and Exxel Pacific (general contractor), to develop resolutions for the problems that are being encountered with some of the infiltration trenches at the Centennial Park Project. To provide this support, we evaluated subsurface soil and groundwater conditions beneath the infiltration facilities and project vicinity, completed additional data analysis and modeling for stormwater infiltration and groundwater mounding, and provided an independent assessment of the design infiltration rate and infiltration system design. Our scope of services included the following tasks: 1. Review of existing site information including the reports prepared by GeoTest and CG Engineering relating to stormwater infiltration design. 2. Evaluate the feasibility of the existing infiltration facility design working in the presence of shallow perched groundwater at the site. 3. Evaluate possible solutions to the problem of perched groundwater impacting the infiltration facilities. 4. Examine use of detention to collect flows and transfer for increased infiltration on the western portion of the site. File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 3 5. Reassess infiltration and groundwater mounding using modeling with SEEP/W and modified design infiltration rates to infiltration trenches on western portion of the site. a. The groundwater mounding analysis would initially be completed with existing site soil and groundwater information. The groundwater mounding analysis was completed with the two-dimensional numerical modeling tool, SEEP/W, to take account of potential hydraulic interference between multiple adjacent infiltration facilities. b. An inflow hydrograph from the stormwater runoff model, and hydraulic conductivity for saturated and unsaturated soil conditions based on soil information, was used to model infiltration function and expected mounding effects. This analysis was repeated with alternate configurations to provide interactive feedback for CG Engineering’s revised design of the infiltration trenches. The model was calibrated with the data collected from the existing on-site monitoring wells. c. The effects of mitigation measures, such as deepening the stormwater infiltration trench elevations to provide a better hydraulic connection with the groundwater table in the Marysville sand, was also modeled. 6. Analysis of cutoff trench, interflow capture and drainage contributions to the CL Swale. 7. Review of potential for impacts to wetland hydrology in the summer months. 8. Water Balance calculations to quantify overall impact (pre and postconstruction) to groundwater and wetland hydrology (using spreadsheet models or extraction of data from existing Western Washington Hydrology Model [WWHM] continuous hydrograph simulations). 9. Prepare a written analysis letter report in support of design changes and to address City concerns that includes conclusions from our groundwater mounding analysis; conclusions and recommendations regarding on-site infiltration of stormwater; and discussion of recommended design modifications. A site plan and supporting test data will be included with the report. 10. Provide support for presentation of results to the City. 11. Miscellaneous meetings and joint efforts with other project team members. A number of potential solutions were developed with the project team, resulting in additional or alternate scope items and services required from GeoEngineers to advance the project to a successful resolution. This report describes hydrogeologic aspects for the design basis for the infiltration facilities, reviews the development of the design infiltration rate from a groundwater mounding analysis conducted by GeoTest, and describes the construction challenges that led to installation of the cutoff drain. We then describe the full-scale testing of Trench 106 to confirm the design infiltration rate and performance of the already constructed trenches (101 through 106). We describe the recommended infiltration facility design changes developed with the project team to address the construction challenges based on our assessment of the hydrogeologic conditions, and provide a revised groundwater mounding analysis to support the revised design, layout and construction of the additional infiltration trenches (107, 109, and 111). File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 4 INFILTRATION FACILITIES Existing Design The infiltration trenches planned and partially constructed on-site were designed by CG Engineering to infiltrate 100 percent of contributing runoff at a level meeting flow control and low impact development (LID) standards. The street improvements and small portions of the site’s lower, west areas bypass the infiltration system and discharge directly into the storm system (CG Engineering 2020). The existing design called for a system of 10 shallow infiltration trenches located underneath parking lots and driveways to be constructed at the new site totaling 37,010 square feet (sf) in plan area (Figure 1). The trenches would provide 18,505 cubic feet (cf) in peak storage volume within drain rock porosity (33 percent), generally between Elevation 137.5 feet and 139.0 feet. Figure 1 Infiltration Trench Layout (from Civil Drawing C3.1) The design of each infiltration trench includes a 1.5-foot-thick layer of amended soil (Lenz 50/50 sand blended with compost) to provide cation exchange capacity (CEC) that was lacking in the natural soils. A general range for the infiltration rate to be used for the design of the infiltration trenches was predicated on grain-size analysis of soil samples from test pits, using the Massmann (2003) equation from the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2014) to estimate saturated hydraulic conductivity. The arithmetic average of those values for alluvium (Table 3 of GeoTest’s Geotechnical Engineering Report dated May 17, 2019) was 3.3 inches per hour (in/hr), a more conservative value of 1.86 in/hr is obtained from these data if the geometric mean is used instead. Pilot infiltration tests were attempted by GeoTest in March 2019 but were unsuccessful due to shallow groundwater seepage. File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 5 The design infiltration rate was refined by GeoTest using a maximum value to limit allowable groundwater mounding at the site. The next section provides a review of how this value was developed. The final layout of shallow infiltration trenches depicted on the original plans needed to have a total surface area of 37,010 sf, based on the design infiltration rate of 0.94 in/hr being achieved. Previous Mounding Analysis Mounding analyses provided in the “Stormwater Infiltration Potential” section of the Geotechnical Report dated May 17, 2019 by GeoTest was used to back-calculate an allowable infiltration rate for amended soil (Lenz) that would result in a groundwater mounding height of 1.5 feet above the seasonal high groundwater level, established at Elevation 130 feet. The mounding analysis assumes 5 feet of vertical separation and implies infiltration into the deeper water table in the underlying Marysville sand (with a saturated aquifer thickness of 30 feet assumed). The mounding analysis was performed for a nominal 300 feet by 50 feet trench using the method presented by Carleton (2010) and a supporting spreadsheet which codifies the Hantush (1967) analytical solution for groundwater mounding under a constant rate of infiltration/recharge. The design infiltration rate of 0.94 in/hr was determined from the mounding analysis by limiting the mound height to 1.5 feet above the seasonal high groundwater elevation of 130 feet and calculating a steady-state 2-day recharge rate that would create such a mound. The approach appeared to be conservative, especially as the hydraulic conductivity of the amended soil forming the basal layer of each infiltration trench had been reduced from 13.9 in/hr to 6.95 in/hr in GeoTest’s mounding analysis. The lower value was used in the mounding analysis as the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the groundwater body receiving the infiltrated stormwater, which is assumed to be the Marysville sand and the saturated thickness of this body is assumed to be 30 feet. The following critique of the original mounding analysis is provided with assumed rationale and comments: File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 6 TABLE 1. KEY VARIABLES IN THE MOUNDING ANALYSIS Key Variable GeoTest Assumption Comments R = 1.88 ft/day Recharge Rate is a Goal Seek Value to give Separation is actually Mound Height (dh), which dh = 1.5 feet “Separation” (R equals 0.94 is conservatively limited to 1.5 feet above the in/hr) static water table, maintaining 3.5 feet of [Note: If R = 1.24 ft/day, dh = 1.0 feet] vertical separation to the base of the infiltration trenches Sy = 0.30 Specific yield of Lenz sand (or of the native Alluvium below the facility is silty sand and likely formation below the facility?) assumed to has porosity of 25 percent, and specific yield of equal total porosity of 30 percent 5 percent, no more than 10 percent K = 139 ft/day Value is based on quoted infiltration rate of Appears to be a decimal place error: 13.9 in/hr for Lenz sand, after applying a 139 ft/day = 69.5 in/hr safety factor of 2 13.9 ft/day = 6.95 in/hr x = 25 ft Half-width of 50 feet infiltration trench Nominal dimensions assumed for a typical infiltration trench prior to layout and design by y = 150 ft Half-length of 300 feet infiltration trench CG Engineering t = 2 day 48 hours drain-down time 48 x 0.62 in/hr = 29.76 inches or 2.48 feet 48 x 0.94 in/hr = 45.12 inches or 3.76 feet hi(0) = 30 ft Initial aquifer thickness of the Marysville Probably conservative. Could be increased to sand 40 or 50 feet. If K = 13.9 ft/d With R = 1.24 ft/day, dh = 3.5 ft Using a more realistic K-value for the Marysville With R = 1.88 ft/day, dh = 5.2 ft Sand would result in higher mounds and much reduced vertical separation If Sy = 0.05 With R = 1.24 ft/day, dh = 7.8 ft Using a more realistic Sy-value for the Alluvium With R = 1.88 ft/day, dh = 11.4 ft would result in higher mounds and much reduced vertical separation Notes: ft/day = feet per day; dh = mound height The mounding analysis calculation was also predicated on a high value of soil porosity (30 percent) rather than the more correct term, field capacity, where field capacity is defined as the change in moisture content from natural in-situ moisture content in moist soils above the water table, to full saturation, assuming no air voids. Also, the mounding analysis did not consider the interference effect of coalescing groundwater mounds created by infiltration recharge through other adjacent and nearby trenches at the site. The original mounding analysis was developed before the layout of infiltration trenches was finalized, but does not appear to have been revisited for the Supplemental Infiltration Report (GeoTest 2020). CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGES During construction of the project however, shallow perched groundwater was encountered throughout site excavations at elevations higher than anticipated in the design (GeoTest 2019). This potentially affects wetland hydrology, as identified in the question posed by the City, and could affect the long-term performance of infiltration trenches, which require appropriate separations from groundwater in order to function properly. Without the required separation, the infiltration trenches would not manage the stormwater as required by the City and Department of Ecology standards. File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 7 Shallow Subsurface Groundwater Conditions It is our understanding of site the conditions that there were significant quantities of existing surface water and shallow perched groundwater being intercepted and removed by the swale running through the middle of the site. Without this swale taking water away, it was being encountered in the various excavations. A cutoff drain was therefore installed by the project team to capture the perched groundwater flows and divert them away from the infiltration trenches. The discharge of the cutoff drain was originally installed at Elevation 137.5 feet, approximately a foot lower than the elevation of the old swale that crossed the site. Infiltration was found to be feasible by raising the site above the groundwater level and by using shallow infiltration trenches. Because the site was raised, an appropriate fill material for underneath the proposed infiltration beds was selected. The infiltration rate used for design was 0.94 in/hr, per the recommendations from the original groundwater mounding analysis provided in the geotechnical report (GeoTest 2019). Supplemental Infiltration Report The Supplemental Infiltration Report (GeoTest 2020) was developed to assess the impact of site conditions encountered during construction when perched groundwater was found to be flowing across much of the site at an elevation between 137 and 142 feet, and roughly corresponding to the shallow geologic contact with the alluvium. The persistence of the perched groundwater, complimented by observations made by GeoTest during excavation of the infiltration trenches, indicates that the alluvium forms an effective confining layer above the Marysville sand. Much of the site had been stripped of vegetation and pervious pit run material imported to raise the site elevation, which may have inadvertently enhanced the occurrence and persistence of perched groundwater conditions at the site by providing a pervious and permeable laterally continuous horizon above the less permeable underlying alluvium. The presence of perched water on-site for many months throughout both winter and spring (and potentially extending into summer) was observed to be inundating the partially constructed system of infiltration trenches. Furthermore, it was clear that the layer of alluvium underlying the site, and forming the base of each infiltration trench, was of significantly lower permeability than anticipated. Slot trenches were excavated in the base of some of the trenches (104, 105, 106, and 107) to examine subsoil conditions below the trenches and obtain additional soil samples for grain-size analysis. Additional values of hydraulic conductivity for the alluvium were estimated as part of the Supplemental Infiltration Report prepared by GeoTest (2020). To aid the infiltration performance of these facilities, the slot trenches were backfilled with more permeable ASTM International (ASTM) C33 concrete sand. The hydraulic conductivity of C33 concrete sand is typically between 30 and 60 ft/day, or between 15 and 30 in/hr (USDA 1984). In an effort to combat the levels and quantities of shallow perched groundwater encountered on-site, a cutoff drain was constructed on the east side of the site, to bottom elevations between 137 and 139 feet. Estimates of the flow from this trench vary but it has been effective in intercepting shallow groundwater and discharging it into the wetland at a rate of around 20 gpm. This action is estimated to have lowered perched groundwater levels across the site, but its permanent operation may impact the hydrology of the adjacent wetland. File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 8 FULL-SCALE TESTING OF INFILTRATION TRENCH 106 In order to provide assurance that the design infiltration rate of 0.94 in/hr could be achieved by the trenches already installed, a full-scale test of Trench 106 was conducted on June 8, 2020. Prior to the test, two shallow observation wells (AR-1 and AR-2) were installed by Exxel Pacific on each side of the trench to facilitate the measurement of water-level build-up and drawdown within the gravel drain rock storage layer. GeoEngineers installed pressure transducers in each observation well to monitor and provide documentation of the full-scale test (Figure 2). Figure 2. Trench 106 Plot of Water Level (AR-1) Full Scale Infiltration Test Procedure The test started at 10:15 a.m. with water discharging into the trench via a cleanout pipe. Water was provided from a City hydrant via a 3-inch flowmeter and 2-inch-diameter hose. The inflow rate over the duration of the test averaged 33.24 gpm or 0.074 cubic feet per second (cfs). The increase in measured water level the inflow created within Trench 106 is illustrated by the record of water head measured above the transducer in observation well AR-1 (Figure 2). Water flow into Trench 106 was maintained until 1:35 p.m. when the flow was briefly turned off; with the water level in the trench at around 12 inches to check that drainage would occur. Inflow resumed at 2:13 p.m. and continued until 3:08 p.m. when the water level in the trench peaked at 18 inches, corresponding to full storage within the porosity of the drain rock storage layer in the trench. The inflow stage of the test was then terminated, and the subsequent drawdown time was monitored overnight. Full Scale Infiltration Test Analysis Data from the rising limb of the water-level chart (Figure 2) was used to confirm the apparent porosity of the drain rock storage layer in Trench 106. This was calculated to be 28.3 percent (or 0.283 cf/cf of drain File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 9 rock). The calculation ignores the residual moisture retained in the drain rock, which can account for 3 or 4 percent of the total volume, and the effect of ongoing infiltration out of Trench 106, which would also increase the value for total porosity. However, the ongoing inflow of rain from precipitation occurring throughout the test, may reduce the calculated value. The flowmeter readings on which the inflow rate is based is also likely to be in error by ±5 percent. The value of 33 percent used for drain rock porosity in the drainage design is therefore validated within the limitations of the full-scale test. Data from the falling limb of the water-level chart (Figure 2) was also used to estimate the apparent infiltration rate. This is calculated by the apparent rate of drop in water level, multiplied by the porosity of the drain rock and calculated between each transducer reading, taken at 1-minute intervals. The calculated infiltration rate is plotted in Figure 3. Figure 3. Trench 106 Plot of Infiltration Rate Full Scale Infiltration Test Results The results in Figure 3 show the infiltration rate declining rapidly from initially very high rates (between 2 and 20 in/hr) until the water depth stored in Trench 106 had dropped to below 12 inches. The rate continued to drop with the falling water level, but flattened off considerably at 0.3 in/hr with a water depth of around 9 inches. With rain continuing through the night, both the water level in Trench 106 and the apparent infiltration rate were likely increasingly affected. The water level started to rise after about 6:00 a.m. on June 9 as the inflow from rainfall exceeded the infiltration rate, with a depth of 4 inches of water remaining in the trench. Full Scale Infiltration Test Conclusions The full-scale test of Trench 106 has demonstrated its successful performance and confirmed that the design infiltration rate is generally exceeded for greater inflows resulting from larger storms. The design File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 10 infiltration rate of 0.94 in/hr is increasingly exceeded by the infiltration capacity of Trench 106 when the storage depth exceeds about 10.5 inches. Over time, this excess capacity may reduce as a result of siltation and biofouling The phenomenon of an increasing infiltration rate with higher water level is a direct consequence of Darcy’s Law, in which pressure-driven flow occurs under an increasing hydraulic head. The standard design methodology for infiltration facilities does not recognize this phenomenon, which effectively provides an added factor of safety to the design and provides greater assurance that the facilities will function adequately under the rare condition of a large storm that entirely fills the available storage and triggers overflow. Examination of the later portion of the drain-down curve during the full-scale test (Figure 2) suggests that the infiltration rate may become significantly reduced, well below the design infiltration rate for smaller rain events. We suspect this effect has been caused in large part by rainfall entering the facility and corrupting the results of the full-scale test. However, it may indicate that another mechanism is affecting the performance of Trench 106, that of lateral outflow into the pit run used as imported fill to raise the elevation of the site. Lateral outflow likely occurs above a threshold depth that is probably equivalent to the excavation depth of Trench 106 below the grubbed and cleared surface of the project site, prior to the placement of up to 4 feet of pit run. As the water level rises within storage volume provided by the drain-rock porosity in the infiltration trench, it saturates an increasing thickness of pit run around the periphery of the trench. The rate of outflow would likely then increase in proportion to increased water storage depth. Further analysis of the infiltration-rate curve in Figure 3 supports this interpretation. Philip’s solution of Richards’ equation for ponded infiltration (Philip 1992) indicates that the infiltration rate declines in proportion with the square-root of elapsed time. Replotting the declining infiltration rate against the square-root of elapsed time (Figure 4) results in a compound plot with two distinct linear sections. Figure 4. Trench 106 Infiltration Rate vs Square Root of Time File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 11 â–  The red line indicates there is an early drain-down phase with higher water levels, when a higher rate of lateral outflow into the more permeable pit run likely dominates. â–  The green line fits the later drain-down phase when water levels have dropped and infiltration is likely downward into the lower permeability alluvium only. The results and analysis derived from the full-scale infiltration test performed on Trench 106 confirm that the combination of stormwater storage and infiltration capacity provided will fulfill the design objectives for the management of stormwater at Centennial Park project. RECOMMENDED INFILTRATION FACILITY DESIGN REVISIONS In view of the amounts of shallow perched groundwater or interflow encountered in the eastern portion of the site, a number of design revisions were developed and reviewed in a joint effort by GeoEngineers and the project team to provide a workable solution that would allow 100 percent stormwater infiltration to be achieved per the civil design, taking into account the shallow perched groundwater present on the site, while maintaining the hydrology of the wetland. This included the elimination of Trenches 108 and 110, the redesign of Trenches 107 and 109, and the addition of new Trench 111. Addition of Deeper Infiltration Trenches The revised stormwater infiltration system design will involve excavating one of the remaining trenches (Trench 109) in addition to a new trench (Trench 111) down through the alluvium to provide a more direct hydraulic connection with the underlying Marysville sand aquifer. Additionally, Trench 107 will be reconfigured to reduce its footprint size and re-excavated and deepened to reach the Marysville sand. The revised configuration of deepened trenches (Trenches 107, 109, and 111) will provide the primary stormwater infiltration capacity at the site. Existing Trenches 101 through 106 will remain in place and will provide additional stormwater runoff storage volume, together with some limited infiltration capacity, to the extent that this occurs through the alluvium and the pit run fill placed on-site, as demonstrated by the full-scale test of Trench 106. Some additional infiltration will occur through the slot trenches installed in Trenches 104 and 105 during construction, which were also backfilled with C33 sand. The problem of perched water entering the infiltration trenches will be tackled directly by constructing shallow impervious cutoff barriers around each of the new deep infiltration trenches. The cutoff walls will be 3 to 7 feet deep, depending on location, and will be constructed in trenches excavated to penetrate 2 feet into the alluvium layer (Figure 5). The cutoff walls will provide an effective solution to the problem of shallow perched groundwater inundating the infiltration trenches, and at the same time, will prevent the infiltration trenches from collecting or diverting natural subsurface interflow that contributes to wetland hydrology. Mitigation of Impacts to Wetland Hydrology Additionally, perennial subsurface flow has been encountered along the alignment of the swale that fed shallow perched groundwater or interflow to the wetland. The configuration of Trench 107, which originally straddled this old water course, has been modified so that flows within the subsurface water course may be maintained, and will continue to sustain the hydrology of the wetland. The resulting design configuration prepared by CG Engineering is presented in the revised sections of the Drainage Report (CG Engineering File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 12 2020) and includes three deep trenches providing improved hydraulic connection to the Marysville sand with a total additional infiltration area of 7,600 sf. The design infiltration rate for these deeper trenches is 5 in/hr. The deeper trenches (Trenches 107, 109, and 111) will function in combination with the existing shallow trenches (Trenches 101 through 106) that have already been installed. These total 18,610 sf in area, and are assigned the original design infiltration rate of 0.94 in/hr. REVISED MOUNDING ANALYSIS The performance of the revised stormwater infiltration system designed for peak runoff conditions has been examined by developing a modified mounding analysis that takes into consideration the plan area and site layout of all infiltration facilities, the higher infiltration rates provided by the smaller deeper trenches, and the hydrogeologic conditions at the site that include infiltration through the alluvium and into the underlying Marysville sand. SEEP/W Modeling Approach A SEEP/W groundwater flow and seepage model was developed to simulate groundwater mounding resulting from 100 percent infiltration of the peak 30-day runoff volume generated over the full 68-year time series used for continuous hydrograph simulation in WWHM (CG Engineering 2020). The configuration of the SEEP/W model in plan reflects the revised layout of the stormwater infiltration trenches at the Centennial Park project and the seasonal high groundwater level (Figure 5). Water Total Head 126 - 128 ft 130 128 - 130 ft 130 - 132 ft 132 - 134 ft 134 - 136 ft 136 - 138 ft 138 - 140 ft 140 - 142 ft 142 - 144 ft 144 - 146 ft 128 Figure 5. SEEP/W Model Domain showing Infiltration Trenches The model is set up to represent groundwater flow beneath the site within the Marysville sand aquifer. Values of hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer are typically quoted to be between 50 and 200 ft/day (EES 1991). To err on the conservative side, we have assumed a low-range value of hydraulic conductivity File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 13 of 50 ft/day in the SEEP/W model as there is no test data available to confirm this rate in the area. Figure 5 shows the model domain divided into regions that include the representation of each infiltration trench across the area of the Centennial Park site. Trenches 107, 109, and 111 are model with a design infiltration rate of 5 in/hr, to reflect their revised construction, with the trenches excavated through the alluvium to provide a hydraulic connection with the Marysville sand. The lower portion of the trenches will be backfilled with C33 sand, which limits the peak infiltration rate to 5 in/hr. Stormwater Inflow Hydrograph Stormwater runoff inflow hydrographs generated for the project by CG Engineering from their WWHM modeling efforts have been modified to limit the peak infiltration to 10 ft/day (equivalent to 5 in/hr) and these hydrographs are applied to define the transient inflow to each of the deeper trenches. A chart showing the hydrograph is included in Figure 6: Figure 6. Inflow Hydrograph for Deeper Trenches The 30-day inflow hydrograph is roughly centered on December 3, 2007 from the continuous hydrograph simulation, the day with peak runoff volumes in the overall flow control model, which corresponds with Day 19 of the SEEP/W simulation. The peak hydrograph shows flows in ft/day during the peak 30-day period for total runoff volume, limited by the design infiltration rate of 5 in/hr. Most smaller storms are of lower intensity and do not exceed the peak infiltration rate, but the peak storm on Day 19 of the simulation File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 14 causes the stormwater inflow rate to exceed the infiltration rate, with the excess stormwater going into storage within the trenches. Mounding Analysis Results The mounding analysis tracks the buildup in groundwater level underneath the infiltration facilities through this critical peak storm period to ensure that it generally does not exceed the bottom elevation of the trenches, at Elevation 137.5 feet. Figure 7 shows the extent of groundwater mounding on day 19 of the simulation, with water levels at or slightly above 136 feet in the area of Trench 107: 8 Water Total Head2 134 1 126 - 128 ft 128 - 130 ft 130 - 132 ft 132 - 134 ft 6 13 134 - 136 ft 136 - 138 ft 138 - 140 ft 140 - 142 ft 132 142 - 144 ft 144 - 146 ft 1 3 0 Figure 7. Peak Groundwater Mounding on Day 19 As the trenches are interconnected, if the mounding at Trench 107 causes water to back-up and overflow the facility during these peak conditions, excess stormwater can flow to the other trenches where there is less groundwater mounding. CONCLUSIONS Reconfiguration of some of the infiltration trenches at Centennial Park will allow higher rates of infiltration to be achieved while isolating the facilities from the effects of shallow perched groundwater. The use of impervious barrier walls around the sides of the deeper trenches is designed to prevent shallow perched groundwater from entering the trenches. Additionally, the impervious barrier walls will ensure that the deeper trenches are separated from the wetland, with shallow perched groundwater and interflow maintained. Additionally, shallow perched groundwater that is intercepted by the cutoff drain will be discharged to the wetland, and will help to maintain the wetland hydrology within prescribed limits. In terms of the File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 15 hydrogeologic conditions and functional performance of the site, the cutoff drain is intercepting a portion of the shallow perched groundwater (interflow) that is entering the subject property from the east. As described in the Drainage Report (CG Engineering 2020), the interflow is generated from approximately 11.7 acres of land upstream of the wetland. Under preexisting conditions, the ditch or swale that previously extended southeast of the wetland, across the central and eastern portions of the property, performed this function in concentrating interflow and directing it toward the wetland. The cutoff trench intercepts and redirects a portion of this flow, likely enhancing the volume that is flowing to the wetland, by reducing interflow that traversed the south-central portion of the site and redirecting it to the north. After reviewing the site conditions and to prevent the cutoff drain from diverting too much natural interflow to the wetland, the discharge elevation from the drain is to be raised to 139 feet elevation. This adjustment in discharge elevation of the cutoff trench will provide a better match to preexisting conditions. The potential for a lateral hydraulic connection between the wetland and Trench 107 was recognized and has been addressed by reconfiguring Trench 107 to limit the potential for capturing shallow perched groundwater (interflow). This includes the provision of lateral impervious barriers constructed around the infiltration trenches to prevent the shallow perched groundwater from flowing laterally into Trench 107 and the other deepened trenches that will provide increased infiltration capacity through the low permeability alluvium and into the underling Marysville sand. We appreciate the opportunity to present this hydrogeologic assessment report and look forward to the successful completion of the Centennial Park project with you and the rest of the project team. Please call if you have questions. REFERENCES Carleton, Glen B. 2010. “Simulation of Groundwater Mounding Beneath Hypothetical Stormwater Infiltration Basins.” USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5102, pp. 64. CG Engineering. 2020. “Drainage Report, Centennial Park.” Prepared for Williams Investments. March 26. Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. (EES). 1991. “Snohomish County Groundwater Characterization Study.” July 22. GeoTest Services, Inc.. 2019. “Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Centennial Park Townhomes.” Prepared for Williams Investments. May 17. GeoTest Services, Inc. 2020. “Supplemental Infiltration Report.” Prepared for Williams Investments. March 6. Hantush, M.S. 1967. “Growth and decay of groundwater mounds in response to uniform percolation.” Water Resources Research, V. 3, No. 1, p. 227-234. Massmann, J.W. 2003. A Design Manual for Sizing Infiltration Ponds. Washington State Department of Transportation, Research Project Agreement No. Y8265. Philip, J.R. 1992. Falling head ponded infiltration. Water Resources Research, 28(8), pp.2147-2148. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1984. Permeability of Selected Clean Sands and Gravels Soil Mechanics Note No 9, Engineering Division, Soil Conservation Service. File No. 22450-002-00 Williams Investments | June 29, 2020 Page 16 Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2014. “Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.” Water Quality Program. Publication Number 14-10-055. December. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report addendum for Williams Investments and their authorized agents, for the Centennial Park Townhomes project in Arlington, Washington. The project team may distribute copies of this report addendum to owner’s authorized agents and regulatory agencies as may be required for the Project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices for hydrogeology, stormwater infiltration and groundwater mounding analysis in this area at the time this assessment report was prepared. The conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report are based on our professional knowledge, judgment and experience. No warranty, express or implied, applies to the services provided or this report. Sincerely, GeoEngineers, Inc. June 29, 2020 Michael A.P. Kenrick, PE, LHG Sean W. Cool, PE Senior Consultant Hydrogeologist Associate MAK:BAA:SWC:tln One copy submitted Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. File No. 22450-002-00 Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VII, Page 1 Section VII – Other Permits Section VII Summary Narrative This project will require the following additional permits/approvals beyond those required by the City of Arlington. 1. Construction Stormwater General Permit by the Washington State Department of Ecology. 2. The potentially regulated channel needs to be approved as unregulated by the Department of Natural Resources prior to any work occurring within the buffer or channel. The current proposal assumes that this buffer will be reduced to 75’ by others. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VIII, Page 1 Section VIII – Operation and Maintenance Manual Section VIII Summary Narrative The Operation and Maintenance Manual is a standalone document that will be given to the property manager following the construction of the project. The contractor will be responsible for the maintenance and operation of all stormwater structures and BMPs requiring maintenance during construction and, after construction, responsibility will pass to the property management company. The manual shall be kept in the offices of the proposed buildings. Upon request by the City, it shall be made available for their inspection. It is generally expected that few to none of these defects will be present upon the yearly inspection of each facility. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VIII, Page 2 Centennial Park Phase II 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Date: September 2020 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VIII, Page 3 Operation and Maintenance Manual This Operation and Maintenance Manual has been created for Centennial Park Phase II, located at 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223. The proposed stormwater management system consists of catch basins, and conveyance pipes that collect runoff from roofs, parking, and new landscaping, and route them to gravel infiltration trenches under parking lots on the west side of the project site. Included in this Operation and Maintenance Manual is an 11” x 17” grading and drainage plan sheet showing the locations of the infiltration system and catch basins. Please note that this map is generated during the design phase and may not reflect all changes made in permitting and construction. CG Engineering may be contacted for an updated copy of this map once the as-built drawings are completed for the site. Maintenance sheets from the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington are included for the following facilities: Catch Basins: Concrete structures with steel grates that collect stormwater runoff from the site and act as junctions for storm conveyance pipes. See “No. 5” for maintenance. Gravel Infiltration Trench: Subsurface trenches backfilled with a coarse stone aggregate, allowing for temporary storage of stormwater runoff in the voids of the aggregate. Runoff is distributed through the trench with a perforated pipe and gradually infiltrates into the surrounding soil. Vegetation Management: Landscaping can include grading, soil transfer, vegetation removal, pesticide and fertilizer applications, and watering. Stormwater contaminants include toxic organic compounds, heavy metals, oils, total suspended solids, coliform bacteria, fertilizers, and pesticides. Facilities shall be inspected for defects listed in the following facility sheets. Most maintenance tasks are generally reactionary to a defect being found, rather than a matter of constant upkeep. It is generally expected that few to none of these defects will be present upon the yearly inspection of each facility. The facility sheets list the potential conditions warranting maintenance and the expected result following any maintenance. Several engineer’s notes for specific tasks are provided within the facility sheets. Unless otherwise noted on the facility sheets the maintenance tasks should be performed on an “as needed” basis: (a) When the described defect is visible to whomever performs the yearly inspection, (b) Should any defect become apparent between inspections. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Section VIII, Page 4 SAMPLE ACTIVITY LOG DATE FACILITY MAINTENANCE PERFORMED RESULTS / NOTES 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com 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 (Intent is to make sure no material is running Top Slab 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. Contamination See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). No pollution present. and Pollution Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs – December 2014 4-38 No. 5 – Catch Basins Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed 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 Volume V – Runoff Treatment BMPs – December 2014 4-39 Applicable Operational BMPs: Recommended Additional Operational BMPs S411 BMPs for Landscaping and Lawn/ Vegetation Management Description of Pollutant Sources: Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-21 Pollutant Control Approach: Applicable Operational BMPs for Landscaping: Recommended Additional Operational BMPs for Landscaping: Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-22 Applicable Operational BMPs for the Use of Pesticides: Applicable Operational BMPs for Vegetation Management Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-23 Recommended Additional Operational BMPs for the use of pesticides: Installing an amended soil/landscape system can preserve both the plant system and the soil system more effectively. This type of approach provides a soil/landscape system with adequate depth, permeability, and organic matter to sustain itself and continue working as an effective stormwater infiltration system and a sustainable nutrient cycle. For more information, contact the Washington State University (WSU) Extension Home-Assist Program, (253) 445-4556, or Bio-Integral Resource Center (BIRC), P.O. Box 7414, Berkeley, CA.94707, or EPA to Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-24 obtain a publication entitled “Suspended, Canceled, and Restricted Pesticides” which lists all restricted pesticides and the specific uses that are allowed. Applicable Operational BMPs for Vegetation Management: Temporary and Permanent Seeding MulchingPlastic CoveringSodding Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-25 Irrigation: Fertilizer Management: . Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-26 Integrated Pest Management S412 BMPs for Loading and Unloading Areas for Liquid or Solid Material Description of Pollutant Sources: Pollutant Control Approach: Applicable Operational BMPs: At All Loading/ Unloading Areas: Volume IV - Source Control BMPs – December 2014 2-27 Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 1 Appendix A – WWHM Reports Appendix A Summary A-1 Narrative A-2 Infiltration Trench Flow Control and LID Performance Standard Calculation This Appendix provides the calculation depicting the addition of Phase II and Trench 112 onto the Phase I site. Calculations for site conveyance piping, drawdown, and water quality systems are provided in the Phase I report. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 2 FIGURE A-1 DEVELOPED BASIN 2 FLOW CHART (PHASE I) FIGURE A-2 DEVELOPED BASIN 2 FLOW CHART (PHASE I w/ PHASE II & 112 ADDED) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 3 WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT ___________________________________________________________________ Project Name: 2020.07.21 ph 2 added Site Name: Centennial Park-Phase 2 Site Address: 67th and SR 531 City : Arlington Report Date: 7/24/2020 Gage : Everett Data Start : 1948/10/01 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.20 Version Date: 2018/10/10 Version : 4.2.16 ___________________________________________________________________ PHASE 2 ADDITIONS PROVIDED IN PURPLE TEXT MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 2A (107/11) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .874 Pervious Total 0.874 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.549 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.401 PARKING FLAT 0.433 Impervious Total 1.383 Basin Total 2.257 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 107,Gravel Trench Bed 107, ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Basin 2B (109) Bypass: No GroundWater: No 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 4 Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .09 Pervious Total 0.09 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.284 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.081 PARKING FLAT 0.25 Impervious Total 0.615 Basin Total 0.705 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 109 Gravel Trench Bed 109 ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Basin 2C (101-106) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .601 Pervious Total 0.601 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.63 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.42 PARKING FLAT 0.939 Impervious Total 1.989 Basin Total 2.59 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 101-Gravel Trench Bed 101- ___________________________________________________________________ Name : PHASE 2 BASIN Bypass: No GroundWater: No 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 5 Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .046 Pervious Total 0.046 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.389 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.315 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.109 Impervious Total 0.813 Basin Total 0.859 ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Gravel Trench Bed 107, 111 Bottom Length: 545.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 362.047 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 362.047 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Name : Gravel Trench Bed 109 Bottom Length: 215.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 6 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 128.504 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 128.504 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Name : Gravel Trench Bed 101-106 Bottom Length: 465.00 ft. Bottom Width: 40.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.33 Material thickness of second layer: 0 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 0.94 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 450.237 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0.014 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 450.251 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1.5 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Name : Gravel Trench 112 Bottom Length: 150.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 7 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 161.962 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0.148 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 162.11 Percent Infiltrated: 99.91 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 2.95 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Gravel Trench Bed 101-106 ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration ___________________________________________________________________ Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:6.522 Total Impervious Area:0 ___________________________________________________________________ Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:1.611 Total Impervious Area:4.8 ___________________________________________________________________ Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.21617 5 year 0.338953 10 year 0.43522 25 year 0.574742 50 year 0.692241 100 year 0.821864 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0 5 year 0 10 year 0 25 year 0 50 year 0 100 year 0 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 8 1949 0.223 0.000 1950 0.237 0.000 1951 0.194 0.000 1952 0.163 0.000 1953 0.137 0.000 1954 0.752 0.000 1955 0.271 0.000 1956 0.234 0.000 1957 0.300 0.000 1958 0.411 0.000 1959 0.206 0.000 1960 0.199 0.000 1961 0.550 0.097 1962 0.201 0.000 1963 0.331 0.000 1964 0.238 0.000 1965 0.174 0.000 1966 0.109 0.000 1967 0.219 0.000 1968 0.267 0.000 1969 0.684 0.000 1970 0.147 0.000 1971 0.248 0.000 1972 0.176 0.000 1973 0.162 0.000 1974 0.393 0.000 1975 0.160 0.000 1976 0.155 0.000 1977 0.130 0.000 1978 0.152 0.000 1979 0.435 0.000 1980 0.204 0.000 1981 0.152 0.000 1982 0.201 0.000 1983 0.358 0.000 1984 0.197 0.000 1985 0.252 0.000 1986 0.580 0.000 1987 0.268 0.000 1988 0.143 0.000 1989 0.164 0.000 1990 0.186 0.000 1991 0.194 0.000 1992 0.146 0.000 1993 0.137 0.000 1994 0.136 0.000 1995 0.197 0.000 1996 0.366 0.000 1997 0.699 0.000 1998 0.128 0.000 1999 0.161 0.000 2000 0.124 0.000 2001 0.051 0.000 2002 0.184 0.000 2003 0.144 0.000 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 9 2004 0.240 0.000 2005 0.171 0.000 2006 0.483 0.000 2007 0.381 0.000 2008 0.510 0.015 2009 0.150 0.000 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.7523 0.0967 2 0.6985 0.0153 3 0.6836 0.0000 4 0.5801 0.0000 5 0.5496 0.0000 6 0.5099 0.0000 7 0.4833 0.0000 8 0.4347 0.0000 9 0.4107 0.0000 10 0.3934 0.0000 11 0.3812 0.0000 12 0.3663 0.0000 13 0.3585 0.0000 14 0.3308 0.0000 15 0.2995 0.0000 16 0.2713 0.0000 17 0.2676 0.0000 18 0.2670 0.0000 19 0.2524 0.0000 20 0.2480 0.0000 21 0.2403 0.0000 22 0.2381 0.0000 23 0.2374 0.0000 24 0.2338 0.0000 25 0.2232 0.0000 26 0.2186 0.0000 27 0.2059 0.0000 28 0.2042 0.0000 29 0.2014 0.0000 30 0.2005 0.0000 31 0.1989 0.0000 32 0.1969 0.0000 33 0.1967 0.0000 34 0.1939 0.0000 35 0.1938 0.0000 36 0.1857 0.0000 37 0.1836 0.0000 38 0.1765 0.0000 39 0.1736 0.0000 40 0.1706 0.0000 41 0.1643 0.0000 42 0.1634 0.0000 43 0.1622 0.0000 44 0.1607 0.0000 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 10 45 0.1597 0.0000 46 0.1552 0.0000 47 0.1523 0.0000 48 0.1515 0.0000 49 0.1497 0.0000 50 0.1475 0.0000 51 0.1463 0.0000 52 0.1442 0.0000 53 0.1429 0.0000 54 0.1374 0.0000 55 0.1371 0.0000 56 0.1362 0.0000 57 0.1303 0.0000 58 0.1280 0.0000 59 0.1243 0.0000 60 0.1090 0.0000 61 0.0508 0.0000 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration POC #1 The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. Flow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.1081 15287 0 0 Pass 0.1140 13349 0 0 Pass 0.1199 11289 0 0 Pass 0.1258 9522 0 0 Pass 0.1317 7980 0 0 Pass 0.1376 6759 0 0 Pass 0.1435 5677 0 0 Pass 0.1494 4851 0 0 Pass 0.1553 4169 0 0 Pass 0.1612 3557 0 0 Pass 0.1671 3020 0 0 Pass 0.1730 2665 0 0 Pass 0.1789 2342 0 0 Pass 0.1848 2038 0 0 Pass 0.1907 1806 0 0 Pass 0.1966 1574 0 0 Pass 0.2025 1396 0 0 Pass 0.2084 1245 0 0 Pass 0.2143 1089 0 0 Pass 0.2202 994 0 0 Pass 0.2261 924 0 0 Pass 0.2320 878 0 0 Pass 0.2379 812 0 0 Pass 0.2438 756 0 0 Pass 0.2497 716 0 0 Pass 0.2556 670 0 0 Pass 0.2615 622 0 0 Pass 0.2674 589 0 0 Pass 0.2733 566 0 0 Pass 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 11 0.2792 548 0 0 Pass 0.2851 530 0 0 Pass 0.2910 513 0 0 Pass 0.2969 483 0 0 Pass 0.3028 448 0 0 Pass 0.3087 425 0 0 Pass 0.3146 403 0 0 Pass 0.3205 386 0 0 Pass 0.3264 369 0 0 Pass 0.3323 351 0 0 Pass 0.3382 336 0 0 Pass 0.3441 327 0 0 Pass 0.3500 321 0 0 Pass 0.3559 311 0 0 Pass 0.3618 304 0 0 Pass 0.3677 295 0 0 Pass 0.3736 287 0 0 Pass 0.3795 277 0 0 Pass 0.3854 265 0 0 Pass 0.3913 253 0 0 Pass 0.3972 241 0 0 Pass 0.4031 234 0 0 Pass 0.4090 219 0 0 Pass 0.4149 213 0 0 Pass 0.4208 203 0 0 Pass 0.4267 191 0 0 Pass 0.4326 175 0 0 Pass 0.4385 168 0 0 Pass 0.4444 160 0 0 Pass 0.4503 151 0 0 Pass 0.4562 146 0 0 Pass 0.4621 136 0 0 Pass 0.4680 133 0 0 Pass 0.4739 124 0 0 Pass 0.4798 114 0 0 Pass 0.4857 97 0 0 Pass 0.4916 81 0 0 Pass 0.4975 68 0 0 Pass 0.5034 58 0 0 Pass 0.5093 50 0 0 Pass 0.5152 43 0 0 Pass 0.5211 38 0 0 Pass 0.5270 36 0 0 Pass 0.5329 35 0 0 Pass 0.5388 30 0 0 Pass 0.5447 24 0 0 Pass 0.5506 18 0 0 Pass 0.5565 16 0 0 Pass 0.5624 14 0 0 Pass 0.5683 9 0 0 Pass 0.5742 6 0 0 Pass 0.5801 6 0 0 Pass 0.5860 4 0 0 Pass 0.5919 4 0 0 Pass 0.5978 4 0 0 Pass 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 September 16, 2020 Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 12 0.6037 4 0 0 Pass 0.6096 4 0 0 Pass 0.6155 4 0 0 Pass 0.6214 3 0 0 Pass 0.6273 3 0 0 Pass 0.6332 3 0 0 Pass 0.6391 3 0 0 Pass 0.6450 3 0 0 Pass 0.6509 3 0 0 Pass 0.6568 3 0 0 Pass 0.6627 3 0 0 Pass 0.6686 3 0 0 Pass 0.6745 3 0 0 Pass 0.6804 3 0 0 Pass 0.6863 2 0 0 Pass 0.6922 2 0 0 Pass _____________________________________________________ This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2020; All Rights Reserved. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Infiltration Feasibility Assessment Proposed Centennial Park Townhomes – Phase 2 Prepared For: Williams Investments 2517 Colby Avenue Everett, WA 98201 Attn: Mr. Ryan Kilby March 16, 2020 Project No. 20-0300 Williams Investments 2517 Colby Avenue Everett, WA 98201 Attention: Mr. Ryan Kilby Regarding: Infiltration Feasibility Assessment Proposed Centennial Park Townhomes NE Corner of 67th Avenue NE and State Route 531 Arlington, WA 98223 Dear Mr. Kilby, As requested, GeoTest Services, Inc. (GeoTest) is pleased to submit the following infiltration feasibility assessment for the proposed Centennial Park Townhomes – Phase II Project located in Arlington (WA) at the referenced address above (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). This report has been prepared in general accordance with the terms and conditions established in our services agreement dated February 20, 2020 and authorized by Mr. Kilby. We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward to assisting you during the construction phase. Should you have any further questions regarding the information contained within the report, or if we may be of service in other regards, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully, GeoTest Services, Inc. Tristan Coragiulo, G.I.T. Edwardo Garcia, P.E. Staff Geologist Geotechnical Department Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Surface Conditions ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Subsurface Soil Conditions ............................................................................................................................................. 3 General Geologic Conditions.......................................................................................................................................... 4 Groundwater ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................... 5 Stormwater Infiltration Potential ................................................................................................................................... 6 Stormwater Treatment ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring ...................................................................................... 7 USE OF THIS REPORT............................................................................................................................................ 7 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................ 8 Figure 2 Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3 Soil Classification System and Key Figures 4-6 Test Pit Logs Figures 7-8 Grain Size Test Data Attachment CEC/OC/pH Test Data Attachment Report Limitations and Guidelines for Its Use GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of our services is to perform an infiltration feasibility assessment for the proposed Phase II development. Our scope of services includes the following tasks: • Exploration of soil and groundwater conditions underlying the site via a single test exploration just outside the buffer zone (part of Phase 1 construction work) and two hand-excavated explorations within the buffer zone. • Installation and periodic monitoring of two hand-excavated, slotted PVC pipe monitoring wells (2 inches in diameter) with a typical sand pack and bentonite surface seal at or slightly below 137.5 feet above sea level in elevation per the Civil Engineer’s request. • Laboratory testing on representative samples to classify and evaluate the engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. • Provide a written report containing a description of subsurface conditions and exploration logs. Include findings and recommendations pertaining to the on-site stormwater infiltration potential. PROJECT DESCRIPTION GeoTest understands that a new phase of development (Phase II) is planned for the Centennial Park Townhomes project. The proposed Phase II development will include three new buildings, parking areas, and stormwater management facilities along the southern portion of the property. Notably, the proposed buildings will be near a relict channel that runs along State Route 531. GeoTest understands that a stream buffer for the channel is currently shown on development plans, and that development activities are not currently allowed by the governing municipality within the buffer area. The proposed construction is expected to consist of multi-story, wood-frame buildings that will utilize shallow conventional foundations with slab-on-grade floors. GeoTest anticipates light-to- moderate building loads. SITE CONDITIONS This section includes a description of the general surface and subsurface conditions observed at the project site during the time of our field investigation. Interpretations of site conditions are based on the results and review of available information, site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, and previous experience in the project vicinity. GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 Surface Conditions The subject area is in the southernmost, undeveloped portion of an approximately 8.8-acre property located at the northeast corner of 67th Avenue NE and State Route 531 in Arlington, WA. This portion of the property encompasses approximately 650 feet in length along the northern side of State Route 531, with the bulk of the Phase I development located to the north and east of the project area. The property (Phase I and Phase II) borders a church that is upslope to the east, in addition to bordering a residential development to the north. 67th Avenue NE borders the property to the west and State Route 531 borders the property to the south. Image 1. Site conditions, facing southeast. Source: Google Earth. Starting from State Route 531, the subject property slopes gently northwest and west from the relict channel, descending approximately 10 to 14 feet in elevation across the limits of the Phase II development. The Phase I portion of the property is currently under development. This Phase I portion has been stripped of vegetation and been graded with structural fill. The Phase II portion of the property largely exists within a delineated buffer area and contains various grasses, blackberry brush, and sporadic tree growth along State Route 531. Based on a review of the information presented on the Snohomish County PDS Map Portal website, it appears that a large portion of the Phase II property is mapped as a Riparian Wetland with an associated buffer as part of the Edgecomb Creek drainage area. Rehabilitating and stabilizing improvements were made to the area in the vicinity of Edgecomb Creek in 2017. GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 Subsurface Soil Conditions Subsurface conditions were explored by advancing 1 test pit and 2 monitoring well explorations via hand auger (TP-1 and MW-1 through MW-2 on February 6th and 13th, 2020, respectively). The test pit was advanced 9 feet below ground surface (BGS) using an excavator, while hand auger advancements reached depths between 5 and 5.5 feet BGS. The approximate locations of these explorations have been plotted on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2). Soils within the western two thirds of the subject area consisted of variable, medium dense and stiff, very silty sands and sandy silts, with alternating beds of silty, gravelly sand down to an approximate elevation of 128 feet above sea level. These variable soils overlie medium dense to dense, weathered brown to mottled tan, slightly gravelly sands, with trace silts. GeoTest interprets these soils to be Older Alluvium deposits from the Holocene Geological Epoch (11,650 BP to present), overlying Pleistocene Marysville Sand deposits (Between 2.6 million and 11,650 BP). See the attached Site and Exploration Map (Figure 2) for the approximate locations. GeoTest’s subsurface exploration within the eastern third of the Phase 2 subject property revealed approximately 1.25 feet of loose, dark brown, damp, silty, gravelly sand, with organics and rootlets overlying variable, medium dense to dense, gray to orange, damp to wet, gravelly, silty sands to the refusal depth of 5 feet BGS. GeoTest interpreted the corresponding stratigraphy to be that of more recent topsoil deposits on top of Older Alluvium deposits in which hand auger refusal was met at 5 feet BGS. Image 2. Test pit 1 excavations exposing alluvium sands and silts, with alternating beds of silty, gravelly sand overlying the slightly gravelly Marysville sands at 8 feet BGS with rapid seepage occurring at 8.5 feet. GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 General Geologic Conditions Geologic information for the project site was obtained from the Geologic Map of the Arlington West 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Snohomish County, Washington (Minard, 1985) published by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). According to Minard’s map, the geology of the site is relatively complicated, as four geologic units appear to be present within the subject property. These units are described below, beginning east of the property, extending over the property, and extending west (downslope) to the valley floor. Qvra – Advance Outwash (Pleistocene) These deposits consist of clean, gray, pebbly sand containing increasing amounts of near-surface gravel and more fine-grained sand and silt with depth. These sediments were laid down by meltwater flowing from the front of an advancing glacier and were subsequently compacted by the overriding ice. These sediments tend to be dense to very dense. Qtb – Transitional Beds (Pleistocene) These deposits underlie the Advance Outwash and consist of thick sections of thinly bedded clay and silt and fine sand. These sediments were primarily deposited by ponded water at a distance from the advancing glacial ice front. Densities may vary, but near-surface deposits trend toward medium dense/stiff compositions. Qoal – Older Alluvium (Holocene – Current Geologic Epoch) These deposits consist of coalescing alluvial fans of stratified sand and gravel deposited by upland-flowing streams and are augmented by higher silt content colluvium. Densities of Older Alluvium trend toward loose to medium dense compositions. Alluvium is compositionally similar Recessional Outwash – Marysville Sand. Qvrm – Recessional Outwash – Marysville Sand Member (Pleistocene) These deposits consist of well-drained, stratified to massive, outwash sand, some fine gravel, and some areas of silt and clay. The sediments were deposited by the stagnation and recession of the Vashon glacier. For the purposes of this report, these soils are referred to as Marysville Sand. The native soils encountered during our explorations of the subject property (February, 2020) appear to be generally consistent with the published geologic information for Older Alluvium underlain by the Marysville Sand. GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 Groundwater A regional groundwater table is known to exist under the project site but was generally observed at depths between 10 and 15 vertical feet below existing site grades in the western half of the Phase I and Phase II development areas. During construction activities, GeoTest observed the contractor establishing regional groundwater elevations near elevations of 126 to 128 feet above sea level. GeoTest observed multiple instances of near-surface sheet flow emanating along the southern property boundary in close proximity to the historic channel. GeoTest is also aware of perched water that exists within the Older Alluvium deposits, generally encountered between elevations of 142 and 136 feet above sea level. The groundwater and/or perched water conditions reported on the exploration logs are for the specific locations and dates indicated, and therefore may not be indicative of other locations and/or times. Groundwater levels are often variable with elevations depending on local subsurface conditions, precipitation, and changes in on-site and off-site use. GeoTest installed two monitoring wells within the established buffer zone. Sources of perched water were identified and GeoTest is currently recording water elevations throughout the duration of the wet season (typically from November through April) in general accordance with the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SMMWW). GeoTest will provide a memorandum with recorded water elevations upon the completion of our monitoring period. It should be stated, however, that the recorded water elevations are representative of shallow, perched water conditions as the regional groundwater presence has been documented at substantially deeper depths than the bottoms of our wells. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the evaluation of data collected during this investigation, it is our opinion that the site’s subsurface conditions are suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations contained herein are incorporated into the project design. Our subsurface explorations suggest similar subsurface soil conditions as those exposed during our Phase I investigations. However, the amount of near-surface water draining north and west from the relict channel along the southern portion of the property, in addition to the presence of perched water, presents challenges that will impact the ability to utilize conventional infiltration facilities within the Phase II development. Discussions with the design team suggest that topographic fall does not exist to install a cut-off trench or drain system that would re-route this drainage/perched water away from the Phase II development and into the adjacent relict channel. There are no facilities present that would be able to accept the amount of water captured from such a drain/cut-off trench system. Further, lateral movement of water infiltrated from captured, upslope Phase II development areas have the potential to impact the downhill GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 infiltration facilities that were designed for Phase I. Stated differently, significant risk exists in that Phase I facilities could be impacted by Phase II facilities if similar design approaches are adopted. As such, GeoTest does not recommend conventional infiltration approaches be utilized for the management of stormwater for Phase II development. Stormwater Infiltration Potential Based on the presence of surface drainage adjacent to the existing relict channel and established buffers—in addition to encountered perched water conditions—GeoTest does not recommend that conventional stormwater infiltration approaches be adopted for this project. GeoTest encountered near surface, off-site sheet flow and perched water conditions within the limits of the Phase II development that cannot be removed via a drain or dewatering trench. The resulting surface and perched water conditions are considered “restriction layers” per the SMMWW. GeoTest understands that the current design is unable to generate enough vertical separation between stormwater facilities and the restriction layer to allow for the infiltration of stormwater above the restriction layer. Thus, GeoTest recommends that alternate methods be pursued for the treatment and disposal of generated stormwater. Stormwater Treatment The on-site stormwater facilities may require some form of pollutant pretreatment with an amended soil prior to on-site infiltration or off-site discharge. The reuse of on-site topsoil is often the most sustainable and cost-effective method for pollutant treatment purposes. Cation exchange capacities, organic contents, and pH of site subsurface soils were also tested to determine possible pollutant treatment suitability. Cation exchange capacity, organic content, and pH tests were performed by Northwest Agricultural Consultants on two soil samples collected from the explorations shown in Table 1. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented in Table 1 below: TABLE 1 Cation Exchange Capacity, Organic Content, and pH Laboratory Test Results Sample Cation Exchange Organic Test Pit Geologic Depth Capacity Content pH ID Unit (ft) (meq/100 grams) (%) MW-1 0.5 Topsoil 16.4 6.52 5.7 Older MW-2 1.75 7.8 2.36 6.4 Alluvium GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 Suitability for on-site pollutant treatment is determined in accordance with SSC-6 of the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology SMMWW. Soils with an organic content of greater than or equal to 1 percent and a cation exchange capacity greater than or equal to 5 meq/100 grams are characterized as suitable for stormwater treatment. Based on the results shown in Table 1, the near-surface topsoil and underlying native soil appear to be suitable for stormwater treatment. On-site soils can be amended by mixing higher silt content soils or adding mulch (or other admixtures) to elevate the cation exchange capacity and organic contents. On-site amended soil requires additional testing to confirm compliance with ecological regulations. GTS is available to perform additional laboratory testing as part of an expanded scope of services if the soil is to be amended. Alternatively, the owner may elect to import amended soils with the desired properties for the planned treatment facilities. Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring GeoTest recommends that we be involved in the project design review process. The purpose of the review is to verify that the recommendations presented in this report are understood and incorporated into the project’s design and specifications. We also recommend that geotechnical construction monitoring services be provided. These services should include observation by GeoTest personnel during structural fill placement, compaction activities, and subgrade preparation operations to confirm that design subgrade conditions are obtained beneath the areas of improvement. Periodic field density testing should be performed to verify that the appropriate degree of compaction is obtained. The purpose of these services is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations of this report. In the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior the start of construction, GeoTest can provide revised recommendations appropriate to the conditions revealed prior to construction. GeoTest is available to provide a full range of materials testing and special inspection services during construction as required by the local building department and the International Building Code (IBC). These services may include specific construction inspections on materials such as reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, wood framing, and structural steel. These services are supported by our fully accredited materials testing laboratories. USE OF THIS REPORT GeoTest Services, Inc. has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Williams Investments and their design consultants for specific application to the design of the proposed Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase II project, located at the northeast corner of 67th Avenue NE and State Route GeoTest Services, Inc. Report Date 03/16/2020 Centennial Park Townhomes, Phase 2 – Arlington, WA Project Number: 20-0300 531 in Arlington, WA. Use of this report by others is at the user’s sole risk. This report is not applicable to other site locations. Our services are conducted in accordance with accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. Our site explorations indicate subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated. It is not warranted that these conditions are representative of conditions at other locations and times. The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions to the limited depth and time of our explorations, as well as a geological reconnaissance of the area and a review of previously published USGS geological information for the site. If variations in subsurface conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those contained within this report, GeoTest should be allowed to review the recommendations and, if necessary, make revisions. If there is a substantial lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions change due to construction operations at or adjacent to the project site, we recommend that we review this report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. The earthwork contractor is responsible to perform all work in conformance with all applicable WISHA/OSHA regulations. GeoTest Services, Inc. is not responsible for job site safety on this project, and this responsibility is specifically disclaimed. REFERENCES D.S., Job 1778.0001, Soundview Consultants LLC. (2019, December 3rd). Centennial Park - Proposed Project - Buffer Enhancement Areas Exhibit. GeoTest Services, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Centennial on 67th Avenue Townhomes, NE Corner of 67th Avenue and State Route 531, Arlington, Washington. Project No. 18-0408, August 2, 2018. GeoTest Services, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Centennial on 67th Avenue Townhomes, NE Corner of 67th Avenue and State Route 531, Arlington, Washington. Project No. 18-0408, May 17th, 2019. Minard, J.P., 1985, Geologic map of the Arlington West 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Snohomish County, Washington. United States Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-140, scale 1:24,000. Date: 2-24-2020 By: TAC Scale: As Shown Project VICINITY MAP 20-0300 CENTENNIAL PARKTOWNHOMES - PHASE 2 Figure NE CORNER OF 67TH AVE NE ANDS.R. 531 ARLINGTON, WA 1 TP-1 MW-2 MW-1 IMAGE SOURCED FROM GOOGLE EARTH. REFERENCED DRAWING PROVIDED BY SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC LEGEND 2.24.2020 TAC As shown Phase 2 Boundaries SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN 20-0300 CENTENNIALPARKTOWNHOMES- PHASE2 MW-# = Approximate Monitoring Well Location 67THAVENUE& 172NDSTREETNE TP-# = Approximate Hand Dug Test Pit Location ARLINGTON, WA 98223 2 Soil Classification System USCS MAJOR GRAPHIC LETTER TYPICAL DIVISIONS SYMBOL SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONS(1)(2) CLEAN GRAVEL GW Well-graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOIL (Little or no fines) GP Poorly graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines (More than 50% of GRAVEL WITH FINES GM Silty gravel; gravel/sand/silt mixture(s) coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve) (Appreciable amount of fines) GC Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/clay mixture(s) CLEAN SAND SW Well-graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines SAND AND SANDY SOIL (Little or no fines) SP Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines COARSE-GRAINED SOIL(More than 50% of material islarger than No. 200 sieve size)(More than 50% of SM Silty sand; sand/silt mixture(s) coarse fraction passed SAND WITH FINES through No. 4 sieve) (Appreciable amount of fines) SC Clayey sand; sand/clay mixture(s) ML Inorganic silt and very fine sand; rock flour; silty or clayey fine SILT AND CLAY sand or clayey silt with slight plasticity CL Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy (Liquid limit less than 50) clay; silty clay; lean clay OL Organic silt; organic, silty clay of low plasticity size) MH Inorganic silt; micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand SILT AND CLAY CH Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay (Liquid limit greater than 50) FINE-GRAINED SOIL(More than 50% of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve OH Organic clay of medium to high plasticity; organic silt HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL PT Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content GRAPHIC LETTER OTHER MATERIALS SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS PAVEMENT AC or PC Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement ROCK RK Rock (See Rock Classification) WOOD WD Wood, lumber, wood chips DEBRIS DB Construction debris, garbage Notes: 1. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), as outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487. 2. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined as follows: Primary Constituent: > 50% - "GRAVEL," "SAND," "SILT," "CLAY," etc. Secondary Constituents: > 30% and <_ 50% - "very gravelly," "very sandy," "very silty," etc. > 12% and <_ 30% - "gravelly," "sandy," "silty," etc. Additional Constituents: > 5% and <_ 12% - "slightly gravelly," "slightly sandy," "slightly silty," etc. <_ 5% - "trace gravel," "trace sand," "trace silt," etc., or not noted. Drilling and Sampling Key Field and Lab Test Data SAMPLE NUMBER & INTERVAL SAMPLER TYPE Code Description Code Description Sample Identification Number a 3.25-inch O.D., 2.42-inch I.D. Split Spoon PP = 1.0 Pocket Penetrometer, tsf b 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50-inch I.D. Split Spoon TV = 0.5 Torvane, tsf Recovery Depth Interval c Shelby Tube PID = 100 Photoionization Detector VOC screening, ppm d Grab Sample W = 10 Moisture Content, % 1 Sample Depth Interval e Other - See text if applicable D = 120 Dry Density, pcf Portion of Sample Retained 1 300-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop -200 = 60 Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, % for Archive or Analysis 2 140-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop GS Grain Size - See separate figure for data 3 Pushed AL Atterberg Limits - See separate figure for data 4 Other - See text if applicable GT Other Geotechnical Testing Groundwater CA Chemical Analysis Approximate water elevation at time of drilling (ATD) or on date noted. Groundwater ATD levels can fluctuate due to precipitation, seasonal conditions, and other factors. Centennial Park Townhomes Figure Phase 2 Soil Classification System and Key 3 Arlington, WA MW-1 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Drilling Method:Hand Auger Hand Auger Boring Detail Ground Elevation (ft):144.33 4 in Depth (ft)Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeBlows/FootTest DataGraphic SymbolUSCS Symbol Water Level 0 SM/ Loose, dark brown, damp, silty, gravelly OL SAND, organics, rootlets (Topsoil) 1 d 2-inch diameter, Schedule 40, PVC well casing SW/ Medium dense, gray to orange, damp, SP gravelly, coarse SAND, trace silt (Older Alluvium) Lenses of laminated sandy silt @ 1.75' BGS 2 SM Medium dense, gray to brown, wet, gravelly, silty SAND (Older Alluvium) Moderate seepage observed @ 2.25' Moderate W = 24 BGS 2 d GS 3 d 2-inch diameter, Schedule 40, PVC screen (0.010-inch slot size) Transitions to slightly gravelly SAND @ W = 19 3.75' BGS 4 4 d GS Severe caving observed @ 4' BGS 20/40 Colorado sand pack Boring Completed 02/13/20 Hand Auger Boring Completed 02/13/20 Total Depth of Boring = 5.5 ft. Elevation at Top of Protective Casing = 144.75 ft. Elevation at Top of Hand Auger Boring Casing = 6 145.88 ft. Total Depth of Hand Auger Boring = 5.0 ft. Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Centennial Park Townhomes - Figure Phase 2 Log of Hand Auger Boring MW-1 Arlington, WA 4 MW-2 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER Drilling Method:Hand Auger Hand Auger Boring Detail Ground Elevation (ft):150.75 4 in Depth (ft)Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeBlows/FootTest DataGraphic SymbolUSCS Symbol Water Level 0 SM Loose, dark brown, damp, silty, gravelly SAND, organics, rootlets (Topsoil) W = 26 5 d GS 2-inch diameter, Schedule 40, PVC well casing SW/ Medium dense to dense, weathered SP orange, damp, silt, very gravelly SAND (Older Alluvium) 2 6 d SP Medium dense to dense, gray to orange, damp, gravelly, poorly graded 2-inch diameter, SAND, trace silt (Older Alluvium) Schedule 40, PVC W = 7 screen (0.010-inch 7 d GS slot size) 4 20/40 Colorado sand pack SP/ Medium dense to dense, gray, wet, Moderate W = 27 SM slightly silty, slightly gravelly SAND 8 d GS (Older Alluvium) Moderate seepage and severe caving observed @ 4.5' BGS Boring Completed 02/13/20 Hand Auger Boring Completed 02/13/20 Total Depth of Boring = 5.0 ft. Elevation at Top of Protective Casing = 151.25 ft. Elevation at Top of Hand Auger Boring Casing = 152.00 ft. Total Depth of Hand Auger Boring = 4.5 ft. 6 Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Centennial Park Townhomes - Figure Phase 2 Log of Hand Auger Boring MW-2 Arlington, WA 5 TP-1 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE NOTES/GROUNDWATER Tracked Excavator Excavation Method: Ground Elevation (ft): 136 Depth (ft)Sample Number& IntervalSampler TypeTest DataGraphic SymbolUSCS Symbol 0 9 d W = 18 SM Medium dense, light tan to gray, damp, GS very silty SAND, trace gravel (Older Alluvium) W = 11 SP/ Medium dense, tan to gray, damp, slightly 2 10 d GS SM silty to silty, gravelly SAND (Older 11 d W = 18 Alluvium) GS 4 SM/ Stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy ML SILT (Older Alluvium) 6 Alternating beds of silty and gravelly SAND, approximately 1' thick @ 6' BGS Moderate groundwater seepage 8 SP/ Medium dense to dense, weathered brown encountered at 8.0 ft. SM to orange, slightly gravelly SAND, trace silt (Marysville Sand) Test Pit Completed 02/06/20 Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.0 ft. 10 Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Centennial Park Townhomes - Figure Phase 2 Log of Test Pit Arlington, WA 6 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 4 2 1 1/2 3 6 10 16 30 50 100 200 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 8 14 20 40 60 140 100 90 80 70 60 50 Percent Finer by Weight40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters Gravel Sand Cobbles Silt or Clay coarse fine coarse medium fine Point Depth Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu MW-1 2.3 Gravelly, silty SAND (SM) MW-1 3.8 Slightly gravelly, silty SAND (SM) MW-2 0.3 Silty, gravelly SAND (SM) MW-2 3.0 Gravelly, poorly graded SAND, trace silt (SP) 0.52 8.97 MW-2 4.5 Slightly silty, slightly gravelly SAND (SP/SM) 0.93 4.00 %Coarse % Fine % Coarse % Medium % Fine Point Depth D90 D60 D50 D30 D10 Gravel Gravel Sand Sand Sand % Fines MW-1 2.3 6.661 0.371 0.259 0.121 0.0 14.2 8.0 14.0 42.2 21.6 MW-1 3.8 5.732 0.353 0.263 0.131 5.6 5.7 5.1 17.4 44.4 21.9 MW-2 0.3 12.833 1.218 0.648 0.26 0.0 23.0 10.1 24.7 29.3 12.9 MW-2 3.0 15.063 2.613 1.508 0.632 0.291 6.5 23.3 14.8 37.4 16.3 1.6 MW-2 4.5 4.475 0.349 0.254 0.168 0.087 0.0 9.5 7.6 16.8 59.2 7.0 C = D 2/(D * D ) To be well graded: 1 < C < 3 and c 30 60 10 c Cu = D60/D10 Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW Centennial Park Townhomes Figure Phase 2 Grain Size Test Data 7 Arlington, WA U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 4 2 1 1/2 3 6 10 16 30 50 100 200 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 8 14 20 40 60 140 100 90 80 70 60 50 Percent Finer by Weight40 30 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters Gravel Sand Cobbles Silt or Clay coarse fine coarse medium fine Point Depth Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu TP-1 0.1 Very silty SAND, trace gravel (SM) TP-1 2.0 Slightly silty, very gravelly SAND (SP/SM) 0.51 27.77 TP-1 2.0 Slightly gravelly, silty SAND (SM) %Coarse % Fine % Coarse % Medium % Fine Point Depth D90 D60 D50 D30 D10 Gravel Gravel Sand Sand Sand % Fines TP-1 0.1 1.567 0.255 0.168 0.06 0.0 2.6 5.4 17.8 40.0 34.1 TP-1 2.0 14.643 4.707 2.726 0.639 0.17 0.0 39.8 15.8 19.9 19.0 5.4 TP-1 2.0 4.988 0.345 0.226 0.077 0.0 10.4 7.2 17.4 35.3 29.7 C = D 2/(D * D ) To be well graded: 1 < C < 3 and c 30 60 10 c Cu = D60/D10 Cu > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW Centennial Park Townhomes Figure Phase 2 Grain Size Test Data 8 Arlington, WA REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR ITS USE1 Subsurface issues may cause construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help: Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects At GeoTest our geotechnical engineers and geologists structure their services to meet specific needs of our clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of an owner, a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one – not even you – should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors GeoTest’s geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the clients goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless GeoTest, who conducted the study specifically states otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. 1 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed, for example, from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed construction, • alterations in drainage designs; or • composition of the design team; the passage of time; man-made alterations and construction whether on or adjacent to the site; or by natural alterations and events, such as floods, earthquakes or groundwater fluctuations; or project ownership. Always inform GeoTest’s geotechnical engineer of project changes – even minor ones – and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on the findings and conclusions of this report, whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact GeoTest before applying the report to determine if it is still relevant. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis will help determine if the report remains applicable. Most Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions Our site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoTest’s engineers and geologists review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ – sometimes significantly – from those indicated in your report. Retaining GeoTest who developed this report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with anticipated or unanticipated conditions. 2 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) A Report’s Recommendations are Not Final Do not over-rely on the construction recommendations included in this report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers or geologists develop them principally from judgment and opinion. GeoTest’s geotechnical engineers or geologists can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. GeoTest cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s recommendations if our firm does not perform the construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report may be Subject to Misinterpretation Misinterpretation of this report by other design team members can result in costly problems. Lower that risk by having GeoTest confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also, we suggest retaining GeoTest to review pertinent elements of the design teams plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having GeoTest participate in pre-bid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do not Redraw the Exploration Logs Our geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors of omissions, the logs included in this report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable; but recognizes that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, consider advising the contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with GeoTest and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A pre-bid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. 3 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) In addition, it is recommended that a contingency for unanticipated conditions be included in your project budget and schedule. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering or geology is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding can create unrealistic expectations that can lead to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce risk, GeoTest includes an explanatory limitations section in our reports. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions and we encourage our clients or their representative to contact our office if you are unclear as to how these provisions apply to your project. Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered in this Geotechnical or Geologic Report The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated containments, etc. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on environmental report prepared for some one else. Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Biological Pollutants Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts biological pollutants from growing on indoor surfaces. Biological pollutants includes but is not limited to molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional biological pollutant prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe biological infestations, a number of prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of this study, the geotechnical engineer or geologist in charge of this project is not a biological pollutant prevention consultant; none of the services preformed in connection with this geotechnical engineering or geological study were designed or conducted for the purpose of preventing biological infestations. 4 1Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org) March 17, 2020 Project No. 19-0659 Williams Investments 2517 Colby Avenue Everett, WA 98201 Attention: Mr. Ryan Kilby Regarding: Cut-Off Trench Review – REVISION 1 Centennial Park Townhomes NE Corner of 67th Avenue NE and State Route 531 Arlington, WA 98223 GeoTest Services Inc. (GeoTest) understands that a cut-off trench is being considered for the eastern portion of the site. GeoTest has been asked by the City of Arlington to provide our opinions on potential impacts to the wetland and a channel as a result of the cut-off trench and, where appropriate, provide recommendations for reducing impacts to the site. GeoTest has previously completed a Geotechnical Engineering report, titled Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Centennial Park Townhomes, NE Corner of 67th Avenue NE and State Route 531, Arlington, WA 98223, dated May 17, 2019 for the above-referenced property. Background Information GeoTest was provided a copy of the report titled Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan, dated June 28, 2019 and prepared by Soundview Consultants LLC. The report identifies the wetland in question as “Wetland A” and states that the hydrology for Wetland A is provided by a seasonally-high water table, precipitation, surface runoff from adjacent uplands, and flow from ditches that historically ran through the wetland. To paraphrase, the report states that Wetland A provides moderately high water quality functions and can provide some pollutant filtration due to the type of vegetative cover. The report also states that Wetland A provides relatively low hydrologic and habitat functions based on the small size of the wetland, minimal amount of vegetative cover, lack of priority habitats, and the presence of invasive species within the wetland. GeoTest was also provided a copy of an updated Civil plan prepared by CG Engineering, dated February 14, 2020. This plan shows the location of the proposed cut-off trench, along with the tightlined portion of the pipe transporting collected water from the trench to the designated discharge area in the northwestern portion of the Wetland A buffer area. The February 14, 2020 Civil plan directs foundation drain discharge for the entirety of Building K into the wetland buffer 1 GeoTest Services, Inc. – REVISION 1 March 17, 2020 Centenial Townhomes, Arlington, WA Project Number 19-0659 to the east of Wetland A, but GeoTest understands that the plan is being revised to allow for the entirety of Building L to also be discharged into the wetland. Pre-development Conditions A review of previously submitted and accepted documents suggest that the sloping hillside to the east of the pre-developed property conveyed off-site surface water contributions generally west across the project site. An existing man-made swale, documented in the Soundview Report and Civil site plans, ran north across the central third of the property, generally picking up and conveying collected water flows towards Wetland A in the northern portion of the property. Per the Soundview report, an existing ditch runs east to west across the northern property boundary, conveying water off site near the intersection of 67th Avenue and Highland View Drive. Also, a channel runs east to west across the southern property boundary, just north of State Route 531. Post-Development Conditions The submitted and approved construction plan is being augmented to include a cut-off trench that runs south to north along the eastern portion of the project site. The cut-off trench is intended to pick up and collect perched water that exists directly upslope from a number of planned infiltration facilities. The bottom of the infiltration facilities are generally at elevation 136, with the bottom of the cut-off trench being placed somewhere between elevations 137 and 139 per the Civil plan. The trench will span approximately 320 lineal feet, will be placed below drive paths in the eastern portion of the site, and will cross and eventually discharge into the wetland buffer in the northern portion of the project site. Development plans indicate that the foundation drains from Building K and Building L will be collected and discharged into the buffer directly east of Wetland A. This contribution will bypass the cut-off trench. Potential Impacts to Wetland A The proposed cut-off trench extends below paved surfaces in the upslope, eastern portion of the project site, with the vast majority of the trench existing well south of Wetland A. During our review, GeoTest noted that only 23 feet of the cut-off trench extended north of the southern- most edge of Wetland A. See Figure 1. If just the cut-off trench with no mitigation is considered, ignoring contributions from the foundation drains for Building K and Building L, it is possible that the very southern edge of the wetland would be impacted by the cut-off trench through the collection of up-slope water that would have otherwise passed under/through Wetland A. 2 GeoTest Services, Inc. – REVISION 1 March 17, 2020 Centenial Townhomes, Arlington, WA Project Number 19-0659 Figure 1: Potentially Impacted Area Downslope of Cut-Off Trench Due to the relatively minor encroachment of the cut-off drain to areas up-slope of Wetland A, it is difficult to say with certainty that the wetland would be negatively impacted by the presence of the cut-off trench. Notably, the south-to-north man-made swale in the central portion of the property under pre-development conditions is within 100 horizontal feet of the proposed location of the cut-off trench. The bottom of the cut-off trench (elevation 137 to 139) is also within 1 to 3 vertical feet of the bottom of the south-to-north man-made swale (approximate elevation of 140’) based on a review of the undeveloped property topography. Thus, the location and vertical alignment of the bottom of the cut-off trench is reasonably close to the pre- development swale location and elevation. Based on our review of the project information, it is prudent to provide reasonable mitigations and/or enhancements to the wetland and buffer area during the construction process. Mitigation and Enhancements to Wetland A Wetland mitigation efforts currently include routing the foundation drains for Building K and Building L into the buffer for Wetland A. Building K is approximately 115 feet long and Building L is approximately 106 feet long. Both buildings are located east of Wetland A and will be constructed upslope of the proposed cut-off trench. Notably, the northern end of the cut-off trench extends 23 feet north of the southern-most delineated portion of Wetland A. Thus, the length of the foundation drain for Building K (currently measured at 115 feet long) is greater than the length of the cut-off trench that is being constructed above the wetland. See Figure 2. 3 GeoTest Services, Inc. – REVISION 1 March 17, 2020 Centenial Townhomes, Arlington, WA Project Number 19-0659 Figure 2: Building K and Building L Foundation Drain Discharge Into Wetland A Buffer. When considering the contributions of both Building K and Building L, the total length of area being drained into Wetland A exceeds 220 horizontal feet. The potentially impacted area upslope from Wetland A is only 23 feet. Thus, the hydraulic contributions from both Building K and Building L are expected to greatly exceed potential impacted areas upslope of Wetland A due to the presence of the cut-off trench. It should also be noted that the foundation drain discharge from Buildings K and L will completely bypass the cut-off trench. The 2019 Soundview Consultant report indicates that a number of enhancements are planned in the buffer for Wetland A. The enhancements are expected to include the removal of non-native, invasive vegetation and replacing it with native plantings within the buffer. GeoTest understands that these enhancements will be installed and monitored after construction has been completed. Conclusions Our review of project documents indicate that a relatively small portion of Wetland A exists downslope of the cut-off trench. By allowing the foundation drain for Building K and Building L to discharge into the buffer east of Wetland A, water is being placed directly into the buffer, bypassing the cut-off trench, that will maintain a general east to west flow pattern across Wetland A. Thus, allowing water to discharge into the buffer from Building K and Building L foundation drains, in conjunction with the planned vegetative enhancements per the Soundview 4 GeoTest Services, Inc. – REVISION 1 March 17, 2020 Centenial Townhomes, Arlington, WA Project Number 19-0659 Consultants report, is expected to have positive contributions to the overall function of Wetland A. The cut-off trench is intended to pick up and convey collected sources of water across the site and to release those waters near the northern property boundary. As previously stated, the location and elevation of the cut-off trench is expected to be reasonably similar as to the pre- development man-made swale that has since been filled. The inclusion of the post-development cut-off trench is expected to largely serve a similar function as the pre-development man-made swale in that both systems convey water across the site and enter into the buffer to the south of Wetland A. The proposed construction plan includes the collection and distribution of stormwater across the project site through a series of infiltration facilities that exist west (downslope) of the proposed cut-off trench. These infiltration facilities are part of the stormwater plan for the site and are intended for mitigating overall site development and vegetation loss. The introduction of collected stormwater into the ground through infiltration is not expected to impact or influence Wetland A. Finally, the existing drainage ditch along the northern property boundary and the channel located along the southern property boundary are not being altered due to the installation of the cut-off trench. Development plans currently include the addition of Building N foundation drain discharge and contributions from the retaining wall foundation drain along the eastern property boundary to the southern channel. Further, the cut-off trench that will extend through the central portion of the site is horizontally offset by more than 150 feet from the channel. Due to the amount of horizontal separation, it is not feasible that the cut-off trench presents a risk of “draining” the channel. The channel will not lose existing hydraulic contributions due to the cut- off trench and will, rather, see a net hydraulic increase due to the Building N and wall foundation drain contributions. Similar conditions will exist under developed conditions for the drainage ditch in the northern portion of the property. The horizontal separation between the cut-off trench and the ditch are sizable and it is expected that site improvements will prevent water from being removed from the wetland/drainage ditch area. Thus, it is GeoTest’s opinion that the drainage ditch to the north and the existing channel to the south will maintain current hydraulic functions by conveying water generally east to west across the property. Closure Our opinions regarding potential impacts and the provided mitigation recommendations have been peer reviewed by both the Civil Engineer and Land-Use/Environmental Planner. The intent for Civil review was to confirm that elevations for the cut-off drain and tightlined portion of the discharge pipe are correct, and to confirm that foundation drains for Building K and Building L are being discharged into the buffer for Wetland A and that foundation drains for Building N and the retaining wall along the eastern property boundary are being discharged into the channel along the southern property boundray. The intent for the Land-Use/Environmental Planner review was 5 GeoTest Services, Inc. – REVISION 1 March 17, 2020 Centenial Townhomes, Arlington, WA Project Number 19-0659 to provide support and input that the discharge from the foundation drain into the buffer of Wetland A would likely only require local jurisdiction review (City of Arlington) as the disturbance is not anticipated to negatively impact the wetland due to additional hydrology input from the Building K and Building L foundation drains into the buffer area. GeoTest is not aware of any additional enhancements or mitigations that would be needed for Wetland A in order to allow for the installation of the cut-off drain at the locations shown on the February 14, 2020 Civil plan. Should you have any further questions regarding the information contained within the letter, or if we may be of service in other regards, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully, GeoTest Services, Inc. Edwardo Garcia, P.E. Geotechnical Department Manager 6 CONTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE WORKSHEET Community & Economic Development Department 18204 59th Avenue NE City of Arlington   Arlington WA 98223  (360) 403-3551 This form is to be completed and submitted with Type I , Type II Type III Construction Permit Application. 1) Based on permit type requested (Type I, Type II or Type III), complete the form as follows:  Type I permits complete all sections.  Type II permits complete as follows: - Grading Only - Complete Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). - Stormwater Drainage Only - Complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Drainage Section for Public or Private  Type III permits complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). 2) The developer shall enter the quantities shown on the construction drawings into the Construction Calculation Worksheet. This document is used to determine the amount of plan reivew and inspection fees due to the city. 3) Excel will auto-calculate the relevant fields and subtotals throughout the document. Only the 'Quantity' columns should be completed. 4) The summary page calculates the fees due at intake for Civil and Stormwater Drainage construction permits only. This does not include fees for Grading or those required by other departments or agencies. Grading fees are based on Cubic Yard Quantity and shall be calculated at time of permit submittal. Grading fees shall be paid at permit submittal. 5) If an item that is part of your project does not exist in the spreadsheet complete the Write-In-Items section with the item, quantity and associated unit cost. There are a few unit prices that are blank, please complete them accordingly. 6) Inspection fees shall be calculated for Private Development during the review process and shall be paid upon permit issuance. PROJECT COSTS PUBLIC TOTAL PRIVATE TOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 86,085.00 $ 307,355.94 $ 393,440.94 PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEES PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE (6% of Project Value) $ 23,606.46 GRADING FEE (4) (Cubic Yard ) Review fees due at time of submittal Total Review Fees Due $ 23,606.46 An Assurance Device such as a Performance Bond or Assignment of Funds needs to be on file with the City of Arlington prior to permit issuance. The Assurance Device shall be 150% of the Construction Calculation Worksheet which are as follows:  Road and Alley (Public)  Stormwater Drainage and Grading (Public)  Utilities (Public)  Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (Public and Private) ASSURANCE DEVICE Base Calculation of Performance Device $ 86,085.00 PERFORMANCE DEVICE 150% Amount Due $ 129,127.50 Base Calculation of Maintenance Device $ 75,287.50 MAINTENANCE DEVICE 20% Amount Due $ 15,057.50 1 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Reference # Backfill & compaction-embankment $ 6.50 CY $ - Check dams $ 78.00 EACH $ - BMP C207 Catch Basin Protection $ 35.50 EACH 28 $ 994.00 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus $ 18.00 TON $ - WSDOT 9-03.9(3) Ditching $ 8.00 CY $ - Excavation-bulk $ 3.00 CY 100 $ 300.00 Fence, silt $ 2.00 LF 462 $ 924.00 BMP C233 Fence, Temporary (NGPA) $ 2.00 LF $ - Geotextile Fabric $ 2.50 SY $ - Hay Bale Silt Trap $ 0.50 EACH $ - Hydroseeding $ 4,200.00 ACRE $ - BMP C120 Interceptor Swale / Dike $ 1.00 LF $ - Jute Mesh $ 2.00 SY $ - BMP C122 Level Spreader $ 1.75 LF $ - Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Piping, temporary, CPP, 6" $ 12.50 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 12" $ 24.00 LF $ - Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C123 Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes $ 50.00 CY $ - WSDOT 9-13.1(2) Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1' $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1' $ 3,600.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Sediment pond riser assembly $ 3,050.00 EACH $ - BMP C241 Sediment trap, 5' high berm $ 21.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section $ 79.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Seeding, by hand $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, level ground $ 8.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 9.50 SY $ - BMP C120 TESC Supervisor $ 84.00 HR 30 $ 2,520.00 Water truck, dust control $ 130.00 HR 30 $ 3,900.00 BMP C140 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL (TESC Only): $ 8,638.00 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ 863.80 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ 1,295.70 TOTAL: $ 10,797.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STORMWATER DRAINAGE Public Private Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Access Road, Retention / Detention $ 26.00 SY $ - $ - * (CBs include frame and lid) Beehive $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type I $ 1,650.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type IL $ 1,850.00 EACH $ - 5 $ 9,250.00 CB Type II, 48" Dia $ 2,550.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 650.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 54" Dia $ 2,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 600.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 60" Dia $ 2,900.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 750.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 72" Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 900.00 FT $ - $ - Through-curb Inlet Framework (Add) $ 550.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 4" $ 200.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 6" $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 8" $ 300.00 EACH $ - $ - Culvert, Box __ ft x __ ft $ - LS $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 4" $ 12.00 LF $ - 1340 $ 16,080.00 Culvert, PVC, 6" $ 17.00 LF $ - 1750 $ 29,750.00 Culvert, PVC, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 12" $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 8" $ 23.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 12" $ 35.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 15" $ 42.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 18" $ 47.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 24" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 30" $ 100.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 36" $ 150.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 48" $ 194.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 60" $ 310.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 72" $ 400.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 8" $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 12" $ 43.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 15" $ 52.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 18" $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 24" $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 30" $ 136.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 36" $ 165.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 42" $ 196.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 48" $ 210.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 6" $ 16.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 8" $ 22.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 12" $ 28.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 15" $ 34.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 18" $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Culvert, CPP, 24" $ 49.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 30" $ 62.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 36" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Ditching $ 12.00 CY $ - $ - Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) $ 40.00 LF $ - $ - French Drain (3' depth) $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene $ 5.00 SY $ - 170 $ 850.00 Infiltration pond testing $ 125.00 HR $ - $ - Mid-tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep $ 2,025.00 EACH $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, C900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pond Overflow Spillway $ 18.00 SY $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12" $ 1,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15" $ 1,550.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18" $ 1,680.00 EACH $ - $ - Riprap, placed $ 52.00 CY $ - $ - Tank End Reducer (36" Dia) $ 1,280.00 EACH $ - $ - Thru-Inlet at CB $ 150.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 12" $ 320.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 15" $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 18" $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 21" $ 375.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS Infiltration trenches $ - $ - $ 10,000.00 Concrete Yard drain $ - $ - $ 1,000.00 $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL: $ - $ 66,930.00 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ - $ - $ 6,693.00 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ - $ - $ 10,039.50 TOTAL: $ - $ 83,662.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET GENERAL ITEMS Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Backfill & Compaction- embankment $ 8.00 CY $ - 750 $ 6,000.00 Backfill & Compaction- trench $ 11.00 CY 10 $ 110.00 $ - Clear/Remove Brush, by hand (acre) $ 2,363.00 ACRE $ - $ - Bollards - fixed $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Bollards - removable $ 600.00 EACH $ - $ - Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal $ 6,000.00 ACRE $ - $ - Excavation - bulk $ 2.50 CY $ - 350 $ 875.00 Excavation - Trench $ 5.00 CY 10 $ 50.00 10 $ 50.00 Fencing, cedar, 6' high $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, 4' $ 19.50 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high $ 18.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 2 $ 1,563.00 EACH $ - $ - Fencing, split rail, 3' high $ 14.00 LF $ - $ - Fill & compact - common barrow $ 27.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - gravel base $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - screened topsoil $ 45.00 CY $ - $ - Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh $ 62.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh $ 86.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh $ 152.00 SY $ - $ - Grading, fine, by hand $ 2.00 SY 10 $ 20.00 2500 $ 5,000.00 Grading, fine, with grader $ 1.25 SY $ - 5500 $ 6,875.00 Guard Post $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - Monuments $ 104.00 EACH $ - $ - Sensitive Areas Sign $ 20.00 EACH $ - $ - Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 10.00 SY $ - 225 $ 2,250.00 Topsoil Type A (imported) $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers ) $ 98.00 HR $ - $ - Trail, 4" chipped wood $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" crushed cinder $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" top course $ 9.50 SY $ - $ - Wall, retaining, concrete $ 66.00 SF $ - $ - Wall, rockery $ 13.00 SF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 180.00 Subtotal $ 21,050.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET IMPROVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy $ 35.00 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000$ 8.50 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy $ 2.50 SY $ - $ - AC Removal/Disposal/Repair $ 60.00 SY $ - $ - Barricade, Type I $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade Type II $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade, Type III ( Permanent ) $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Conduit, 2" $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, rolled $ 20.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, vertical $ 15.00 LF 5 $ 75.00 $ - Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposa $ 20.00 LF 5 $ 100.00 $ - Curb, extruded asphalt $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb, extruded concrete $ 4.50 LF $ - 950 $ 4,275.00 Guard Rail $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth $ 3.50 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth $ 3.00 LF $ - $ - Sealant, asphalt $ 2.00 LF $ - $ - Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 4" thick $ 40.00 SY $ - 910 $ 36,400.00 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and dispos $ 36.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick, demolition and dispos $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Signs $ - LS $ - $ - Sign, Handicap $ 100.00 EACH $ - 3 $ 300.00 Striping, per stall $ 7.50 EACH $ - 75 $ 562.50 Street Light System $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal Modification $ - LS $ - $ - Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk ) $ 3.50 SF $ - $ - Striping, 4" reflectorized line $ 0.40 LF $ - $ - AC Patching/Trenching Restoration $ 100.00 TON $ - $ - Controlled Density Fill (CDF) $ 90.00 CY $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 175.00 Subtotal $ 41,537.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET SURFACING/PAVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Asphalt Overlay, 1.5" AC $ 12.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Overlay, 2" AC $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", First 2500 SY $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", Qty. over 2500SY $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 3", First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - 1525 $ 22,875.00 Asphalt Road 3", Qty. over 2500 SY $ 13.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", First 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", First 2500 SY $ 25.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 24.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Treated Base, 4" thick $ 14.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 2" $ 7.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 4" $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 6" $ 22.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 5", no base, over 2500 S$ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 6", no base, over 2500 $ 32.00 SY $ - $ - Thickened Edge $ 11.00 LF $ - $ - "" Gravel Base 9 $ 33.75 SY $ - 2435 $ 82,181.25 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 105,056.25 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET WATER SYSTEM Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Blowoff $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Connection to Existing Water Main $ 2,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Dia $ 65.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Dia $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Dia $ 103.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Dia. $ 125.00 LF 215 $ 26,875.00 $ - Gate Valve, 6 inch Dia $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 8 Inch Dia $ 380.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 10 Inch Dia $ 425.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 12 Inch Dia $ 500.00 EACH 1 $ 500.00 $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, with Guard Posts $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, without Guard Posts $ 2,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 8 Inch Dia $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac,10 Inch Dia $ 7,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 12 Inch Dia $ 12,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 8 In. Dia $ 3,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 10 In. D $ 4,200.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 12 In. D $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Valve Marker Post $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS Gate Valve 4" dia $ 200.00 $ - 2 $ 400.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 27,375.00 Subtotal $ 400.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET SANITARY SEWER Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Connection to Existing Sewer Main $ - EACH $ - $ - Clean Outs $ 500.00 EACH $ - 4 $ 2,000.00 Grease Interceptor, 500 gallon $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1000 gallon $ 10,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1500 gallon $ 15,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Dia $ 8.00 LF $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Dia $ 12.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Dia $ 33.00 LF $ - 163 $ 5,379.00 Sewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Dia $ 41.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Dia $ - LF $ - $ - Lift Station (Entire System) $ - LS $ - $ - Manhole, 48 Inch Dia $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - 1 $ 3,000.00 for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - 1 $ 532.00 Manhole, 54 Inch Dia $ 3,500.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 60 Inch Dia $ 3,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 72 Inch Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 96 Inch Dia $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo $ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Outside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Inside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Pipe, C-900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 10,911.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Street Trees $ 500.00 EACH 5 $ 2,500.00 Root Barrier EACH $ - Median Landscaping $ - LS $ - Right-of-Way Landscaping $ - LS $ - Wetland Landscaping $ - LS $ - Private Landscaping $ - LS $ 30,000.00 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 32,500.00 (INCLUDES GENERAL, STREET, SURFACING, WATER, PUBLIC PRIVATE SEWER, LANDSCAPING) SUBTOTAL $ 60,230.00 $ 178,954.75 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ 6,023.00 $ 17,895.48 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ 9,034.50 $ 26,843.21 GRANDTOTAL: $ 75,287.50 $ 223,693.44 Rev 7/2017 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park II Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 3.2.2021 Contact: Michael Stevens Phone No.: 425-259-5242 Review Phase: Civil 1 Report Date: Storm – 9/16/2020 Reviewing Dept.: CED Applicant: Dykeman Architects DWG Issue Date: 1/29/2021 # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 1. NEH Mitigation Plan - Would like to utilize a smaller The Applicant is working with the City on a footprint that expands the deep water wetland and refined Mitigation Plan for the offsite mitigation plant that area, instead of just planting the whole area. site area which will create additional deeper Looking to create a higher quality wetland area on a water wetland hydroperiods. It is the Applicants smaller footprint in order to improve water in Hayho understanding the Applicant will be responsible Creek and provide future connectivity to similar for the mitigation actions which do not require improvements on adjacent property. a nationwide permit and the City will be responsible for the proposed mitigation actions which may require a nationwide permit. 2. NEH Sidewalk must continue to road and put to east Added sidewalk toward east property line. This property line. was being left off to avoid crossing the ditch until future improvements as part of the WSDOT project. We have put a culvert in for the ditch at the crossing 3. NEH Provide permanent fencing for wetland area. Permanent split rail fencing has been added to edge of critical area buffer. See wetland plans. 4. NEH Show removal of invasive species within wetland area. Label for invasive species removal has been added. See wetland plans and C2.1 5. NEH What parts of the street improvements are planned WSDOT future street improvements turned off. with this project? It is unclear. 6. NEH With the proposed roundabout shown on all sheets it WSDOT future street improvements turned off. will be confusing for the contractor to know what to do in connection to the existing frontage that is out there. Page 1 of 3 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park II Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 3.2.2021 Contact: Michael Stevens Phone No.: 425-259-5242 Review Phase: Civil 1 Report Date: Storm – 9/16/2020 Reviewing Dept.: CED Applicant: Dykeman Architects DWG Issue Date: 1/29/2021 # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 7. NEH Drainage Clearly discuss and show that the area of Phase II The Phase I trench 109 was left with some extra Report going to Phase 1 infiltration trench was part of Phase capacity to account for the sheet flows from the 1 analysis. parking pavement, landscape islands, and adjacent sidewalk. All Phase II areas and WWHM revisions are included in Purple text in the WWHM calculation now. This includes: -the supplemental areas in sub-basin 2B -the remaining area called subbasin 2D routing to new trench 112 -the trench 112 readout. All four individual sub-basins were now sized to 100% infiltrate. The previous submittal, for simplicity purposes in the CUP intake, included all this area going to 112, but this is now broken down much more accurately. 8. NEH Describe buildings as residential, mixed use, and how Added to cover sheet below sheet index that is divided up; # of each units. 9. NEH Describe each water and sewer service as residential The only commercial service is one to Building or commercial. 4. Callouts added for each meter. 10. NEH Construction Cost Worksheet is missing landscaping Updated. and water and sewer connections. 11. RRM Connect dead end main serving buildings M and N to Added main serving building #1 to create loop. 12. RRM No gate valves smaller than 6" allowed. Replace all 4" revised valves with 6" on a 12"x6" tee and then reduce after the valve. Page 2 of 3 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park II Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 3.2.2021 Contact: Michael Stevens Phone No.: 425-259-5242 Review Phase: Civil 1 Report Date: Storm – 9/16/2020 Reviewing Dept.: CED Applicant: Dykeman Architects DWG Issue Date: 1/29/2021 # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 13. RRM Residential portion of the building requires a separate Revised (applicable Building 4, M and N are 2” waterline and meter. residential only) 14. RRM Commercial portion of the building requires a Revised (applicable Building 4, M and N are separate 2” waterline and meter. residential only) 15. RRM Utility application needs to submitted for meter Submitted installation. Meter size and fees are determined by the number of fixtures. 16. BG There is a drainage outfall protection between the end Sidewalk revised per NEH comment #2. Outfall of the sidewalk on the east end of the project and adjusted 172nd. That outfall protection needs to be moved to allow that sidewalk to be extended in the future without making alterations to the drainage. 17. BG Erosion control details show a construction entrance Entrance shown, sediment pond removed. and an infiltration pond that are not shown on the erosion control plan sheet. Where are they being installed. 18. BG An ecology block wall is shown the plans that appears This area is adjusted and wall is removed. to cut through some electrical cabinets and a sidewalk on the east side of building M. 19. BG Confirm that the phase 1 drainage infiltration Confirmed, see NEH comment response for trenches can accommodate the added parking areas more detail on the north side of buildings N and L. 20. LP Resubmittal Full size plan sets with landscaping – 2 copies Resubmitted. Drainage Report – 2 copies Construction Cost Worksheet (added) Utility Application (added) Review Comments Form with Responses Electronic file of all submittal items - 1 Page 3 of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eccosDesign 142 WAWAWA . WAWAWA Landscape Architecture WAWA WA 152 6. FINE BARK MULCH IS TO BE INSTALLED AT ALL NEW PLANTING AREAS WITH A MINIMUM OF 2 INCHES. F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F WAWAWA F F and Planning 154 F F 140 F F 7. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL HAVE PLANTING BACKFILL AMENDED WITH A TRANSPLANT AMENDMENT Mount Vernon, WA 99273 MATCHLINE; SEE SHEET L-5MATCHLINE; SEE SHEET L-4 F Future Address TBD F 4 F FFE: 143.5 F (SUPERTHRIVE OR EQUAL) p. 360.419.7400 L-2F L-3 F F eccosDesign SS F F F < F SS F < f. 800.508.2017 F F F F F F F F F F F F SS 8. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL SITE UTILITIES PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE < SS SS < < IMPLEMENTATION. PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED TO AVOID CONFLICT. 9. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT EXISTING SITE STAMP: 172ND ST. N.E. IMPROVEMENTS, PAVING, WALLS, AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION AND AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. STATE OF KEY MAP 10. PLANT COUNT IS FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE; IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY, THE PLAN SHALL WASHINGTON GOVERN. ACTUAL PLANT QUANTITIES TO BE DETERMINED BY REQUIRED PLANT SPACING. REGISTERED C NO SCALE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C 11. ALL AREAS TO BE PLANTED WITH GROUNDCOVER ARE INDICATED ON THE PLAN WITH A HATCH PATTERN. SEE PLANT LIST FOR PLANT TYPE, SIZE, AND SPACING. PATRIK DYLAN WA FFE:145.0 FFE:145.5 WA WA < SS CERTIFICATE NO. 793 WA SS < WA WA 12. SUBSTITUTION OF PLANT VARIETIES DUE TO LACK OF AVAILABILITY SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS < SS WA WA WA SS WA WA < REPRESENTATIVE. WA WA < WA 146 WA SS WA WA WA WA SS WA 144 < WA WA WA WA WA < WA SS WA WA SEC J SWITCH SS WA WA WA WA WA WA < WA SS WA WA WA WA WA WA < WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA 142 WA WA WA WA WA WA < WA SS WA WA WA WA H H WA WA WASS WA 13. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ASSUMED TO BE PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. WA Y YD SS D < < WA 144 WA H WA SS YD < SS WA WA WA < WA WA SS < WA WA 146 SS < WA SS WA WA WA 14. ALL SOIL GRADES TO BE A MINIMUM SIX INCHES BELOW ADJACENT FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS UNLESS 142 SS < 138 140 < WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA SS < SS WAWA < SS < NOTED OTHERWISE ALL GRADES ADJACENT TO A BUILDING SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5% 3' FROM WA WA 148WA WA WA WAWA PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < WAWA WA < WA WA SS SEC J < FOUNDATION. < SS SS SS SS WAWA SS WAWA WA 150 WA < 142 WA < < < < SS SS SS WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WAWA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA < WA < < WA WA WA WA WA WA < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS SS WAWA WA SS SS WA < SS J SS 15. ALL GRADES, DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO < SS < WAWA WA F F F F SS 142 F F F F F F F <F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F WA F F F F F F F F J Centennial Park < FWA F F F WA F WA CONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE SS 142 F F WA F F F F WA F SEC FWA F F F F WA WA F F WA F F F F F F F F F ARCHITECT. F F F 17215 WA 17327 67TH AVE F F F F F F F F F 17327 67TH AVE SEC 67TH AVE N F WA RF M Mixed Use F F 1 FFE: 144.5 F FFE:142.5 F 17327 WA FFE: 145.5 FFE: 147.5 FFE: 149.0 F F F F 67TH AVE 16. BASEMAP PROVIDED BY DYKEMAN ARCHITECTS AND CG ENGINEERING. WA F F F L F FFE:152.5 F WA F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F RF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F PHASE 2 WA F F F F 150 F WAWA F 142 F 148 144 WAWAWA WAWAWA 142 WAWAWA SOIL NOTES FOR WAWAWA WAWAWA 152 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F WAWA WA F F Williams Investments, 154 1. CONTRACTOR MAY STOCKPILE SITE TOPSOIL FOR POSSIBLE RE-USE IN LANDSCAPE BEDS. STOCKPILED F F 140 F F TOPSOIL TO BE APPROVED BY OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. F Future Address TBD F 4 F FFE: 143.5 F F F F SS F F F < 2. SITE TOPSOIL TO BE SCREENED TO REMOVE ALL GRASS CLODS AND DEBRIS LARGER THAN 1" F SS F < F F F F F F F F F F F F SS < SS AT SS < < 3. EXISTING SITE TOPSOIL TO BE AMENDED WITH COMPOST AT A RATIO OF 3:1. 3 UNITS OF EXISTING SOIL TO 2517 Colby Ave ONE UNIT OF COMPOST. 172ND ST. N.E. 4. IN LIEU OF AMENDING SITE TOPSOIL CONTRACTORS MAY CHOOSE TO USE IMPORTED 2-WAY TOPSOIL. Everett, WA 98201 B 5. TOPSOIL DEPTHS B This drawing is: 5.1. TOPSOIL TO BE PLACED AT A MINIMUM OF 4" IN ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS AND TILLED INTO EXISTING VEHICLE ACCOMOMDATION SHADE AREA 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. SUBGRADE. 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. NO SCALE 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's 5.2. TOPSOIL TO BE PLACED AT AT MINIMUM OF 12" IN ALL TREE-PIT AREAS. SEE DETAIL THIS SET. written permission for any other use or reproduction. 5.3. TOPSOIL TO BE PLACED AT A MINIMUM OF 2" IN ALL LAWN AREAS. SEE DETAIL THIS SET. ISSUED: 6. IN ALL INSTANCES, PLACED TOPSOIL TO BE ROTOTILLED INTO EXISTING GRADE. DATE DESCRIPTION 1.29.21 permit set 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) Landscape Statistics 1-1/2" caliper to be INTERIOR SHADE TREES provided between provided per code. buildings 2" caliper approved tree STREET FRONTAGE every 30' o.c. provided per code. PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed Rootbarrier required PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE 86 STALLS CHECKED BY: vehicle accommodation area 22,851 SF DRAWING TITLE: shade required (20% VAC) 4,570 SF required 9,326 SF provided COVERSHEET, A A Number of trees required NOTES, AND SITE 18 required 22 provided (1 tree / 5 stalls) STATISTICS DRAWING NUMBER: one inch Mar 18, 2021 L-1 (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D WA WA SS WA 144 PLANT SCHEDULE WA < WA WA WA TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WA WA WA SS WA WA WA WA WA WA 142 ACE BLO 1 Acer palmatum `Bloodgood` Bloodgood Japanese Maple 2" Cal. < WA H H Y Y D SS D WA ACE KA3 2 Acer rubrum `Karpick` Karpick Red Maple 2" Cal. < WA WA BER AT4 CAR JAP 15 Carpinus japonica Japanese Hornbeam 2" Cal. SS WA < CHA ARR 14 Chamaecyparis nootkatensis `Green Arrow` Green Arrow Nootka Cypress 7` Ht. WA HEM YH3 142 SS 138 140 WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA GIN G10 3 Ginkgo biloba `Goldspire` Fastigiate Maidenhair Tree 2" Cal. < WA WA CONSULTANT: SS LIQ FAS 4 Liquidambar styraciflua `Fastigiata` Sweetgum `Fastigiata` 2" Cal. WA WA CAR JAP WA WA NYS WIL 7 Nyssa sylvatica `Wildfire` Black Gum 2" Cal. eccosDesign < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < Landscape Architecture WA SS < WA STE PSE 3 Stewartia pseudocamellia Japanese Stewartia 2" Cal. < SS and Planning SS WA WA SS WA < 142 WA Mount Vernon, WA 99273 < < SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SS SS p. 360.419.7400 WA WA ACE CIR 7 Acer circinatum Vine Maple 5 gal. eccosDesign WA < WA < f. 800.508.2017 SS SS BER AT4 6 Berberis thunbergii `Atropurpurea Nana` Dwarf Redleaf Japanses Barberry 2 gal. J SS < WA < BUD PU4 8 Buddleja x `Purple Haze` Lo & Behold Purple Hazef Butterfly Bush 2 gal. STAMP: F F F F SS 142 F HEB AUT F F F F F F F < WA AZA LAI COR VA2 2 Cornus stolonifera `Elegantissima` Variegated Redtwig Dogwood 2 gal. SS 142 F F STATE OF SEC F PIE CA2 VIB DA2 NAN MOO WASHINGTON WA COR KE3 16 Cornus stolonifera `Kelseyi` Kelsey Dogwood 2 gal. F REGISTERED F C F LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C F F COT COG 4 Cotinus coggygria Smoke Tree 7 gal. 17215 WA 17327 67TH AVE F 67TH AVE N FOR FI2 8 Forsythia x intermedia `Fiesta` Fiesta Forsythia 2 gal. PATRIK DYLAN WA LIR BI2 1 NYS WIL F FFE: 144.5 CERTIFICATE NO. 793 FFE:142.5 GAU SHA 37 Gaultheria shallon Salal 2 gal. WA F THU EM2 HEB AUT 13 Hebe x `Autumn Glory` Autumn Glory Hebe 2 gal. WA F FOR FI2 PHY DON HYD WAV 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Wave` Blue Wave Lacecap Hydrangea 2 gal. F MIS LI2WA PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: F F F F F F F F F F F F F F ILE SKY 4 Ilex crenata `Sky Pencil` Sky Pencil Japanese Holly 5 gal. WA F ILE GGI 27 Ilex glabra `Gem Box` Inkberry Holly 2 gal. Centennial Park HEM YH3 F WA WA MAH RE4 63 Mahonia repens Creeping Mahonia 2 gal. 142 Mixed Use 144 WA WA NAN LE8 6 Nandina domestica `Lemon Lime` Lemon Lime Nandina 2 gal. WA BUD PU4 PHASE 2 MAH RE4 NAN MOO 16 Nandina domestica `Moon Bay` TM Heavenly Bamboo 2 gal. WA WA WA GRA SEL RUD SUL 142 PHY DON 6 Physocarpus opulifolius `Donna May` TM Little Devil Ninebark 2 gal. FOR WA WA WA PIE CA2 13 Pieris japonica `Cavatine` Lily of the Valley Bush 2 gal. Williams Investments, WA WA WA NAN LE8 PRU OT2 24 Prunus laurocerasus `Otto Luyken` Luykens Laurel 2 gal. STE PSE WA WA WA NATIVE GROWTH AREA; NO RHO SC2 2 Rhododendron schlippenbachii Royal Azalea 5 gal. AT ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPE IN F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F WA WA WA THIS LOCATION AZA LAI 22 Rhododendron x `Girard`s Pleasant White` Girard`s Pleasant White Evergreen Azalea 2 gal. 2517 Colby Ave F F AJU RCC SAR RUS Everett, WA 98201 PIE CA2 SAR RUS 6 Sarcococca ruscifolia Fragrant Sarcococca 2 gal. F F 140 AZA LAI B B SPI SP2 6 Spiraea japonica `Little Princess` Little Princess Japanese Spirea 2 gal. F ILE GGI F HEU B21 MATCHLINE; SEE SHEET L-3 This drawing is: TAX EME 91 Taxus cuspidata `Emerald Spreader` TM Emerald Spreader Japanese Yew 2 gal. 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. F CAR OS2 Future Address TBD F ILE GGI 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. GIN G10 4 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's THU EM2 3 Thuja occidentalis `Emerald` Emerald Arborvitae 5` Ht. F F FFE: 143.5 SPLIT RAIL FENCE INSTALLED AT written permission for any other use or reproduction. MIS LI2 COR KE3 F EDGE OF CRITICAL AREA BUFFER; VIB DA2 20 Viburnum davidii David Viburnum 2 gal. F F SS HEU B21 SEE PLANS PREPARED BY ISSUED: F F F < SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS VIB NE2 9 Viburnum plicatum `Newzam` Newport Dwarf Doublefile Viburnum 5 gal. F SS F DATE DESCRIPTION < 1.29.21 permit set COT COG F F F F F F F F F F F F PERENNIALS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SS RUD SUL LIQ FAS HEU LRF 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) < AST PU7 12 Astilbe chinensis `Pumila` Dwarf Pink Astilbe 1 gal. SS TAX EME SS < < CAR OS2 24 Carex oshimensis `Everoro` Everoro Japanese Sedge 1 gal. . HEM YH3 71 Hemerocallis x Hybrid Daylily 1 gal. HEU B21 43 Heuchera x `Black Beauty` Coral Bells 1 gal. HEU LRF 44 Heuchera x `Lime Ruffles` Lime Ruffles Coral Bells 1 gal. 1/L-4; STREET TREE PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed ROOT BARRIER LIR BI2 68 Liriope spicata `Big Blue` Creeping Lily Turf 1 gal. PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan 172ND ST. N.E. MIS LI2 10 Miscanthus sinensis `Little Kitten` Little Kitten Eulalia Grass 1 gal. CHECKED BY: POL MU2 67 Polystichum munitum Western Sword Fern 1 gal. RUD SUL 11 Rudbeckia fulgida `Little Goldstar` Coneflower 1 gal. DRAWING TITLE: PLANTING PLAN GROUND COVERS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE 1" = 20'-0" PLANTING PLAN AJU RCC 33 Ajuga reptans `Black Scallop` Black Scallop Carpet Bugle 6" A A WEST ARC UVA 288 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Kinnikinnick 6" SOD/SEED CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GRA SEL 3,482 sf Grass Sod Locally Proven Turf sod DRAWING NUMBER: one inch Mar 18, 2021 L-2 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D WA WA WA WA SS WA SEC J SWITCH SS PLANT SCHEDULE < WA WA WA WA < WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WA WA WA WA WA WA SS WA WA WA WA WA WA SS WA WA < ACE BLO 1 Acer palmatum `Bloodgood` Bloodgood Japanese Maple 2" Cal. < 144 WA H SS Y D SS ACE KA3 2 Acer rubrum `Karpick` Karpick Red Maple 2" Cal. WA < WA WA < 146 CAR JAP 15 Carpinus japonica Japanese Hornbeam 2" Cal. SS WA WA SS WA < ARC UVA < CHA ARR 14 Chamaecyparis nootkatensis `Green Arrow` Green Arrow Nootka Cypress 7` Ht. BER AT4 WA WA WA SS SS GIN G10 3 Ginkgo biloba `Goldspire` Fastigiate Maidenhair Tree 2" Cal. < HEM YH3 < MAH RE4 WA COR KE3WA 148WA CONSULTANT: CAR JAP LIQ FAS 4 Liquidambar styraciflua `Fastigiata` Sweetgum `Fastigiata` 2" Cal. < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS < SSPRU OT2< SS WA LIR BI2 WA WA eccosDesign SEC J < NYS WIL 7 Nyssa sylvatica `Wildfire` Black Gum 2" Cal. SS SS Landscape Architecture WA WA WA 150 STE PSE 3 Stewartia pseudocamellia Japanese Stewartia 2" Cal. < < and Planning SS WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA Mount Vernon, WA 99273 WA WA WA WA WA WA SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WA WA < WA WA WA WA < SS < SS < SS < SS < SS p. 360.419.7400 WA WA ACE CIR 7 Acer circinatum Vine Maple 5 gal. eccosDesign WA SS WA < f. 800.508.2017 AST PU7 POL MU2 SS SS AST PU7 ACE CIR WA WA BER AT4 6 Berberis thunbergii `Atropurpurea Nana` Dwarf Redleaf Japanses Barberry 2 gal. F F F F F F F < F F F F F F F F F F F F F WA F F F F F F F F J STAMP: WA F F F BUD PU4 8 Buddleja x `Purple Haze` Lo & Behold Purple Hazef Butterfly Bush 2 gal. F WA F WA F PIE CA2 F F F WAF F F COR VA2 2 Cornus stolonifera `Elegantissima` Variegated Redtwig Dogwood 2 gal. WA SAR RUS F F WA STATE OF WA F GAU SHA F F F F COR KE3 16 Cornus stolonifera `Kelseyi` Kelsey Dogwood 2 gal. WASHINGTON F F ARC UVA HYD WAV F REGISTERED 17327 67TH AVEC F F F F F F LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C F F POL MU2 17327 67TH AVE SEC COT COG 4 Cotinus coggygria Smoke Tree 7 gal. GAU SHA ACE CIR F R F M F F FOR FI2 8 Forsythia x intermedia `Fiesta` Fiesta Forsythia 2 gal. VIB DA2 F PATRIK DYLAN FFE: 145.5 FFE: 147.5 FFE: 149.0 17327 CERTIFICATE NO. 793 F F GAU SHA 37 Gaultheria shallon Salal 2 gal. NAN MOO SPI SP2 F 67TH AVE SPI SP2 F F CHA ARR ILE SKY L HEB AUT 13 Hebe x `Autumn Glory` Autumn Glory Hebe 2 gal. PHY DON TAX EME ILE GGI ILE GGI F FFE:152.5 F CAR OS2 F HYD WAV 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Wave` Blue Wave Lacecap Hydrangea 2 gal. F F F F F F F F F F F F RF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: ILE SKY 4 Ilex crenata `Sky Pencil` Sky Pencil Japanese Holly 5 gal. F F F 150 ILE GGI 27 Ilex glabra `Gem Box` Inkberry Holly 2 gal. Centennial Park F F 148 MAH RE4 63 Mahonia repens Creeping Mahonia 2 gal. Mixed Use GRA SEL NAN LE8 6 Nandina domestica `Lemon Lime` Lemon Lime Nandina 2 gal. PHASE 2 NAN MOO 16 Nandina domestica `Moon Bay` TM Heavenly Bamboo 2 gal. PHY DON 6 Physocarpus opulifolius `Donna May` TM Little Devil Ninebark 2 gal. FOR PIE CA2 13 Pieris japonica `Cavatine` Lily of the Valley Bush 2 gal. Williams Investments, PRU OT2 24 Prunus laurocerasus `Otto Luyken` Luykens Laurel 2 gal. 152 RHO SC2 2 Rhododendron schlippenbachii Royal Azalea 5 gal. AT AZA LAI 22 Rhododendron x `Girard`s Pleasant White` Girard`s Pleasant White Evergreen Azalea 2 gal. 2517 Colby Ave NATIVE GROWTH AREA; NO SPLIT RAIL FENCE INSTALLED AT 154 ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPE IN Everett, WA 98201 EDGE OF CRITICAL AREA BUFFER; SAR RUS 6 Sarcococca ruscifolia Fragrant Sarcococca 2 gal. THIS LOCATION SEE PLANS PREPARED BY B B MATCHLINE; SEE SHEET L-2 SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS SPI SP2 6 Spiraea japonica `Little Princess` Little Princess Japanese Spirea 2 gal. This drawing is: TAX EME 91 Taxus cuspidata `Emerald Spreader` TM Emerald Spreader Japanese Yew 2 gal. 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. THU EM2 3 Thuja occidentalis `Emerald` Emerald Arborvitae 5` Ht. 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's written permission for any other use or reproduction. VIB DA2 20 Viburnum davidii David Viburnum 2 gal. ISSUED: VIB NE2 9 Viburnum plicatum `Newzam` Newport Dwarf Doublefile Viburnum 5 gal. DATE DESCRIPTION 1.29.21 permit set PERENNIALS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) AST PU7 12 Astilbe chinensis `Pumila` Dwarf Pink Astilbe 1 gal. CAR OS2 24 Carex oshimensis `Everoro` Everoro Japanese Sedge 1 gal. HEM YH3 71 Hemerocallis x Hybrid Daylily 1 gal. HEU B21 43 Heuchera x `Black Beauty` Coral Bells 1 gal. HEU LRF 44 Heuchera x `Lime Ruffles` Lime Ruffles Coral Bells 1 gal. PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed PLANTING PLAN LIR BI2 68 Liriope spicata `Big Blue` Creeping Lily Turf 1 gal. PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan 1" = 20'-0" MIS LI2 10 Miscanthus sinensis `Little Kitten` Little Kitten Eulalia Grass 1 gal. CHECKED BY: POL MU2 67 Polystichum munitum Western Sword Fern 1 gal. RUD SUL 11 Rudbeckia fulgida `Little Goldstar` Coneflower 1 gal. DRAWING TITLE: GROUND COVERS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE PLANTING PLAN AJU RCC 33 Ajuga reptans `Black Scallop` Black Scallop Carpet Bugle 6" A A EAST ARC UVA 288 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Kinnikinnick 6" SOD/SEED CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE GRA SEL 3,482 sf Grass Sod Locally Proven Turf sod DRAWING NUMBER: one inch Mar 18, 2021 L-3 (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D · PLANT SHRUB 1/2" HIGHER THAN DEPTH GROWN AT NURSERY. · FERTILIZE ALL PLANTS WITH APPROVED GROUNDCOVER PLANT. STARTER FERTILIZER APPLIED AT CUTBACK, PULL OUT AND DISTURB ALL SEE PLANT LIST MANUFACTURER'S SUGGESTED RATES CIRCLING ROOTS FROM ANY CONTAINER · SCARIFY ROOTBALL OF GROWN PLANTS BARK MULCH CONTAINER-GROWN PLANTS. PRIOR TO BACKFILLING CONSULTANT: TOPSOIL DEPTH AND eccosDesign TYPE AS SPECIFIED 2" DEPTH BARK MULCH Landscape Architecture EXISTING and Planning 4" WATERING BASIN SECTION SUBGRADE Mount Vernon, WA 99273 SURROUNDING PLANT p. 360.419.7400 eccosDesign FINISH GRADE f. 800.508.2017 COMPLETELY REMOVE ALL STAMP: BURLAP, GROWBAG, STRING EQUAL GROUNDCOVER PLANT AND FOREIGN MATERIALS DISTANCE SPACING AS INDICATED FROM THE ROOT BALL. ON PLANT LIST (TYPICAL) STATE OF WASHINGTON DISTANCE EDGE OF PLANTER REGISTERED C EQUAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C PLANTING BACKFILL 60° SCARIFY PLANTING PIT WALLS EQUAL PATRIK DYLAN DISTANCE CERTIFICATE NO. 793 EXISTING SUBGRADE 2 TIMES * WHEN TREE IS IN A PLANTER BEHIND SIDEWALK, A 15' ROOTBALL DIA. SET ROOTBALL ON MOUND OF 1/2 DISTANCE COMPACTED PLANTING BACKFILL MIX ROOTBARRIER IS TO BE INSTALLED ON SIDEWALK SIDE ONLY. PLAN PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: 1 STREET TREE WITH ROOT BARRIER 2 SHRUB PLANTING 3 GROUNDCOVER PLANTING Centennial Park L-4 NO SCALE L-4 NO SCALE L-4 NO SCALE Mixed Use PHASE 2 FOR Williams Investments, AT 2517 Colby Ave Everett, WA 98201 B B This drawing is: 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's written permission for any other use or reproduction. ISSUED: GUYING APPARATUS: DATE DESCRIPTION HEAVY DUTY POLY CHAIN LOCK TURF BLADES 1.29.21 permit set 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) 8 FOOT, 2" ROUND TREE STAKES TO BE VERTICAL, LODGEPOLE PINE STAKES, PARALLEL, EVEN-TOPPED, 2 PER TREE UNSCARRED AND DRIVEN INTO SOD ROOT ZONE; MIN 1.5" 2" DEPTH BARK MULCH UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE MULCH FERTILIZE ALL TREES WITH 2" TWO WAY TOPSOIL 4" WATERING BASIN APPROVED STARTER FERTILIZER SURROUNDING TREE APPLIED AT MANUFACTURER'S PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed SUGGESTED RATES FINISH GRADE PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan PLANT TREE 1/2" HIGHER THAN EXISTING SUBGRADE DEPTH GROWN AT NURSERY. CHECKED BY: COMPLETELY REMOVE ALL BURLAP, GROWBAG, STRING NOTES: 1. SOD SHALL BE A LOCALLY PROVEN VARIETIES AND GROWN FOR LOCAL USDA 12"MIN. AND FOREIGN MATERIALS FROM HARDINESS ZONE DRAWING TITLE: THE ROOT BALL. 2. PREPARE EXISTING SUB-GRADE BY MECHANICALLY LOSENING PLANTING BACKFILL MIX 3. LEVEL SURFACE WITH IRON RAKE, KNOCK DOWN ANY HIGH SPOTS AND FILL DEPRESIONS PLANTING DETAILS 4. PLACE 2" OF TWO-WAY TOPSOIL AND LEVEL A A EXISTING SUBGRADE 5. INSURE SOIL LEVEL IS MIN 1" BELOW GRADE OF ANY PAVED SURFACE 6. LAY FIRST ROW IN THE LONGEST STRAIGHT ROW POSSIBLE, OFTEN ADJACENT TO PAVED SURFACE SCARIFY PLANTING 1.5 - 2 TIMES ROOT PIT WALLS 7. LAY SUBSEQUENT ROWS TIGHTLY PARALLEL TO FIRST ROW WITH LATERAL JOINT STAGGER. DO NOT OVERLAP SOD SECTIONS. BALL DIAMETER SET ROOTBALL ON MOUND 8. WATER AND FERTILIZE FIRST DAY OF INSTALLATION, PER SUPPLIERS OF COMPACTED PLANTING DIRECTIONS. 4 TIMES ROOT BALL DIAMETER BACKFILL MIX DRAWING NUMBER: 4 TREE PLANTING - general 5 SOD PLANTING one inch L-4 NO SCALE L-4 NO SCALE Mar 18, 2021 L-4 (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D END CAP PAINTED BLACK 13'-8" 7' 5" THROUGH EYE BOLT WITH 5 WASHER SET AND TURNBUCKLE WALL EXPANSION JOINT. 1'-9" ON ONE SIDE ADD EXTRA JOINTS AS NEEDED BIKE RACK 11'-9" (TWO THIS LOCATION) FREE-STANDING F F F F STAINLESS CABLE ON CONSULTANT: SEATING WALL TURNBUCKKE 22'-9" F eccosDesign EXPANSION JOINT. 1/L-6 -RAISED PLANTER ADD EXTRA JOINTS STRING LIGHTS ON FEIT LED STRING LIGHTS ATTACH Landscape Architecture AS NEEDED BUILDING CORNER and Planning TO CABLE F Mount Vernon, WA 99273 140 2/L-5 - 'HOP POST' WITH POWER RECEPTACLE STRING LIGHTS. NEEDED FROM p. 360.419.7400 FREE-STANDING BUILDINGS eccosDesign SEATING WALL f. 800.508.2017 F 6" PRESSURE TREATED PINE "HOP POLE" CONTROL JOINT. AVAIL AT PACIFIC WESTERN LUMBER, STAMP: ADD EXTRA JOINTS LAKEWOOD WA AS NEEDED F 5' WWW.PACWESTLUMBER.COM STATE OF 14' WASHINGTON F REGISTERED C LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C TOP OF WALL TO BE LEVEL. STEEL EDGE HEIGHT OF WALL ESTABLISED AT BASE OF F PATRIK DYLAN STAIRS STRING LIGHTS ON CERTIFICATE NO. 793 SS BUILDING CORNER < POWER RECEPTACLE 16' F NEEDED FROM OUTDOOR POWER RECEPTACLE SS BUILDINGS WITH DUSK/DAWN SENSOR FREE-STANDING SEATING WALL < F F F F PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: SS < SS Centennial Park SS < 1'-2" Mixed Use < 1 LAYOUT PLAN - 100° PATIO PHASE 2 L-5 1" = 10'-0" FOR Williams Investments, WASHED CLEAN COBBLE IN LANDSCAPE FABRIC; 4" MIN DEPTH 3' AT 2517 Colby Ave Everett, WA 98201 B B CONCRETE This drawing is: MINIMUM PAD DIMENSIONS; FOOTING PER 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. SEE PLAN FOR LAYOUT ENGINEER 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's written permission for any other use or reproduction. ISSUED: 2 HOP POST FOR STRING LIGHT DATE DESCRIPTION 1.29.21 permit set L-5 NO SCALE 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) 5' PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan 7' CHECKED BY: PLAN IMAGE DRAWING TITLE: NOTES: 1. BIKE RACK MANUFACTURED BY BELSON OUTDOOR, 800.323.5664 2. MODEL: BRBC-8 LAYOUT AND 3. COLOR TO BE 'GRAPHITE GREY', TEXTURED FINISH A A 4. INSTALLED ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATIONS. DETAILS 5. ALL FASTENERS TO BE STAINLESS STEEL DRAWING NUMBER: 3 SPIRAL BIKE RACK L-5 NO SCALE one inch Mar 18, 2021 L-5 (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D SEE PLANS FOR LAYOUT SKATE STOPS INSTALLED EVERY 30" PER MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS 6" BOARD FORMED CONCRETE 1 CONSULTANT: BOARDS STAGGERED 4" IN FORM; SEE SECTION eccosDesign 1'-8" Landscape Architecture 1" SHADOW OFFSET and Planning Mount Vernon, WA 99273 p. 360.419.7400 eccosDesign f. 800.508.2017 THREE 1" DRAIN HOLES AT STAMP: BOTH ENDS, BOTH SIDES (planter only) 1" W PREMOLDED EXPANSION 2 JOINT AND SEALANT 25' O.C. STATE OF WASHINGTON ELEVATION / SECTION REGISTERED C LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT C PATRIK DYLAN CERTIFICATE NO. 793 SECTION A - A' 1 PLANTER WALL & SEATING WALL - elevation 2 SKATE STOP ON WALL PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: L-6 NO SCALE L-6 NO SCALE Centennial Park 1' Mixed Use 1/2" RADIUS PHASE 2 BOARDS SLIGHTLY STAGGERED #3 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL BARS; FREE DRAINING TOPSOIL; FOR FINISH GRADE 1" BELOW TOP OF WALL 2" CLEAR ALL SIDES; Williams Investments, 24" O.C. ALL WAYS 1' 1/2" RADIUS 1'-8" 6" ROUGH SAWN CEDAR FORM-BOARD FOR AT TEXTURE; BOARDS SLIGHTLY STAGGERED 2517 Colby Ave Everett, WA 98201 COVER INSIDE OF PLANTER WITH POND LINER (NO LINER ON BOTTOM OF PLANTER) B B BASE / EDGE CONDITION VARIES ; SEE PLAN This drawing is: GEOTEXTILE; TURN UP AT SIDES 1. Copyright 2018 Dykeman, Inc. 2. The Architect's Instrument of Professional Service. 3. For use on this project only. Obtain Architect's SCREENING OVER DRAIN HOLES written permission for any other use or reproduction. GEOTEXTILE; TURN UP AT SIDES ISSUED: DATE DESCRIPTION 1" SHADOW LINE 1.29.21 permit set EXPANSION JOINT 3.2.21 civil comments (fence and frontage) 1 INCH DRAIN HOLE 1'-4" 4" BASE / EDGE CONDITION VARIES PER PROJECT; SEE PLAN 6" MIN CRUSHED C.S.T.C 4" EXPANSION JOINT PROJECT NUMBER: 1901ed PROJECT MANAGER: Patrik Dylan FREE DRAINING AGGREGATE, DEPTH COVERS DRAIN HOLE CHECKED BY: 6" MIN CRUSHED C.S.T.C DRAWING TITLE: SECTION A - A' PLANTER WALL VIEW NOTES: SITE DETAILS SECTION B - B' 1. NO AIR HOLES, BUG-HOLES, OR VOIDS TO BE A A FREESTANDING WALL VIEW GREATER THAN 1" IN ANY DIRECTION 4 2. ALL SNAP TIE HOLES TO BE REPAIRED 3. CONTRACTOR TO USE FIBER AD-MIX PER MANUFACTURES INSTRUCTIONS 4 PLANTER WALL - section L-6 NO SCALE DRAWING NUMBER: 3 SEATING WALL - section one inch L-6 NO SCALE Mar 18, 2021 L-6 (base v.3 ed3) NORTH. 1 2 3 4 5 SUPPLEMENTAL DRAINAGE REPORT Centennial Park-Phase II 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223 CG Project No.: 18386.20 03/26/2021 250 4th Ave S Ste 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone: (425) 778-8500 Fax: (425) 778-5536 Table of Contents Section I – Project Overview Section IV – Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Appendix A – WWHM Reports 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Section I, Page 1 Section I – Project Overview Section I Summary Overview This project is the development of three buildings (mostly for apartments), along with associated driveways, parking, sidewalks, and common areas as part of the second phase of the Centennial Park project. The overall parcel is an 8.81-acre site at the northeast corner of the 67th Ave and 172nd Street NE Arlington, WA 98223 (TPN: 31052300300800). This report is intended as a supplement to the previously submitted drainage report dated September 16, 2020. This report was submitted for CUP and for the first submittal of engineering review. As comments on these two reviews only affected Section IV and Appendix A, this report presents only those sections. Other sections and supplemental reports will remain unchanged. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Section IV, Page 1 Section IV – Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Section IV Summary On-Site Stormwater Management Runoff Treatment Flow Control Source Control The developed site is the portion of the lot which was left untouched during Phase I of this project. Phase II assumes that the existing 150’ buffer will be reduced to 75’ through permitting by others. The developed area will be managed by either a 185’ x 10’ infiltration trench to the west of Building Q, or a 215’ x 10’ trench to the north of buildings M and N. The only Phase II surface water from an area that is not being conveyed to the trench is the southmost walkways along the buffer. These walkways will be dispersed towards the buffer area. The trenches have been designed to infiltrate 100% of the stormwater directed towards it. A WWHM model is provided in Appendix A depicting how the Phase I system can still infiltrate to 100% with some additional flows to the Phase I trenches. The site meets the Low Impact Development (LID) Performance standard and the Flow Control Standard by tying into the 100% infiltrating system designed with Phase I of this project. Water quality is generally addressed by a treatment layer of amended soil under the infiltration trenches. The predeveloped (forested) and developed land cover used in the WWHM model is as follows (excluding stream area and its buffers). See Appendix A for more detail within the WHHM report. The areas listed below are added to the overall site drainage model for Phase II. Pervious Area Landscaping, Flat, C: 6,068 sf (0.139 ac) Total: 6,068 sf (0.139 ac) Impervious Areas Parking, Flat: 13,355 sf (0.307 ac) Roof, Flat: 15,163 sf (0.348 ac) Sidewalk, Flat: 8,109 sf (0.186 ac) Total: 36,627 sf (0.841 ac) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Section IV, Page 2 In design, Infiltration was only found to be feasible by raising the site above the shallow perched water and using shallow infiltration trenches. Most hard surfaces in Phase I are routed to infiltration trenches on-site. Approximately 0.779 ac of Phase II areas are routed to an infiltration trench labeled 112 of the civil plans, while the remaining 0.201 ac of developed area will flow to existing trench 109. To infiltrate despite the perched water presence in the trench area, Trench 112 is to be protected with an impermeable PVC liner. The underlying soil will be completely replaced, building a column of sand from the bottom of the storage and treatment layers all the way down to the Marysville sand, generally noted as approximately 10’ below predeveloped surfaces in the geotechnical reports. This removes the underlying alluvium which is less permeable and seems to be causing some of the perched groundwater. See Figure IV-1 for a map of Phase II infiltration basins. The replacement sand is much more permeable, and so a 5.0 in/hr rate is being used per the Hydrogeological Assessment report. The new, underlying sand is not being used for storage or as part of the trench, as that space is required for mounding. Because of this, we are treating these trenches as having a 10’ width and 3’ depth, meaning they do not meet the criteria of underground injection control wells (UICs). On-Site Stormwater Management & Flow Control The project must meet Minimum Requirement #5 & 7. Per Table 2.5.1 from the SWMMWW, new development projects on any parcel inside the Urban Growth Area that trigger Minimum Requirements #1 through #9 must either: 1. Use On-Site Stormwater Management BMPs from List #2 for all surfaces within each type of surface in List #2; or 2. Demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard and BMP T5.13. The project proposes to meet the LID Performance Standard and BMP T5.13. It also meets the Flow Control Standard WWHM2012 was used to determine the total amount of gravel infiltration trench required to infiltrate the runoff and the output is provided in Appendix A. Runoff Treatment Runoff treatment is required for pollution-generating hard surfaces (PGHS). Per Chapter 2.1 of Volume V of the SWMMWW, enhanced treatment is required since the project is a multi-family residential project that discharges directly to fresh waters or conveyance systems tributary to fresh waters designed for aquatic life use. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Section IV, Page 3 According to the geotechnical report attached in Section VI the surface soil is suitable for on-site pollutant treatment. This soil will not be used in design however, as the perched groundwater could be present. The fill selected for areas underlying treatment areas has the appropriate cation exchange capacity to treat the stormwater. Oil water separator fittings per City details are included in upstream catch basins collecting pollution generating impervious surfaces to provide pretreatment prior to discharge into the trenches. Figure IV-1 Phase II infiltration basin map. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 1 Appendix A – WWHM Reports Appendix A Summary A-1 Narrative A-2 Infiltration Trench Flow Control and LID Performance Standard Calculation This Appendix provides the calculation depicting the addition of Phase II and Trench 112 onto the Phase I site. Calculations for site conveyance piping, drawdown, and water quality systems are provided in the Phase I report. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 2 FIGURE A-1 DEVELOPED BASIN 2 FLOW CHART (PHASE I) FIGURE A-2 DEVELOPED BASIN 2 FLOW CHART (PHASE I w/ PHASE II & 112 ADDED) 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 3 Purple text denotes Phase II improvements. WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT ___________________________________________________________________ Project Name: 2021.03.03 Phase 1 & 2 Site Name: Centennial Park Phase 2 Site Address: 67th and SR 531 City : Arlington Report Date: 3/12/2021 Gage : Everett Data Start : 1948/10/01 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.20 Version Date: 2019/09/13 Version : 4.2.17 ___________________________________________________________________ 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 acre C, Forest, Flat 3.461 C, Forest, Mod 1.747 C, Forest, Steep 1.324 Pervious Total 6.532 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 6.532 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ___________________________________________________________________ MITIGATED LAND USE 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 4 Name : Basin 2A (107,111) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .874 Pervious Total 0.874 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.549 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.401 PARKING FLAT 0.433 Impervious Total 1.383 Basin Total 2.257 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 107,Gravel Trench Bed 107, ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Basin 2B (109) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .104 (0.014 from Phase II) Pervious Total 0.104 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.284 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.148 (0.067 from Phase II) PARKING FLAT 0.37 (0.120 from Phase II) Impervious Total 0.802 Basin Total 0.906 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 109 Gravel Trench Bed 109 ___________________________________________________________________ 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 5 Name : Basin 2C (101-106) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .602 Pervious Total 0.602 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.63 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.42 PARKING FLAT 0.939 Impervious Total 1.989 Basin Total 2.591 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 101-Gravel Trench Bed 101- ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Basin 2D (112) Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat .125 Pervious Total 0.125 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.348 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.119 PARKING FLAT 0.186 Impervious Total 0.653 Basin Total 0.778 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 112 Gravel Trench Bed 112 ___________________________________________________________________ 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 6 Name : Gravel Trench Bed 107,111 Bottom Length: 545.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 362.047 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 362.047 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 ___________________________________________________________________ Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.) Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.125 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0333 0.125 0.001 0.000 0.630 0.0667 0.125 0.002 0.000 0.630 0.1000 0.125 0.004 0.000 0.630 0.1333 0.125 0.005 0.000 0.630 0.1667 0.125 0.007 0.000 0.630 0.2000 0.125 0.008 0.000 0.630 0.2333 0.125 0.010 0.000 0.630 0.2667 0.125 0.011 0.000 0.630 0.3000 0.125 0.013 0.000 0.630 0.3333 0.125 0.014 0.000 0.630 0.3667 0.125 0.016 0.000 0.630 0.4000 0.125 0.017 0.000 0.630 0.4333 0.125 0.019 0.000 0.630 0.4667 0.125 0.020 0.000 0.630 0.5000 0.125 0.021 0.000 0.630 0.5333 0.125 0.023 0.000 0.630 0.5667 0.125 0.024 0.000 0.630 0.6000 0.125 0.026 0.000 0.630 0.6333 0.125 0.027 0.000 0.630 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 7 0.6667 0.125 0.029 0.000 0.630 0.7000 0.125 0.030 0.000 0.630 0.7333 0.125 0.032 0.000 0.630 0.7667 0.125 0.033 0.000 0.630 0.8000 0.125 0.035 0.000 0.630 0.8333 0.125 0.036 0.000 0.630 0.8667 0.125 0.038 0.000 0.630 0.9000 0.125 0.039 0.000 0.630 0.9333 0.125 0.040 0.000 0.630 0.9667 0.125 0.042 0.000 0.630 1.0000 0.125 0.043 0.000 0.630 1.0333 0.125 0.045 0.000 0.630 1.0667 0.125 0.046 0.000 0.630 1.1000 0.125 0.048 0.000 0.630 1.1333 0.125 0.049 0.000 0.630 1.1667 0.125 0.051 0.000 0.630 1.2000 0.125 0.052 0.000 0.630 1.2333 0.125 0.054 0.000 0.630 1.2667 0.125 0.055 0.000 0.630 1.3000 0.125 0.056 0.000 0.630 1.3333 0.125 0.058 0.000 0.630 1.3667 0.125 0.059 0.000 0.630 1.4000 0.125 0.061 0.000 0.630 1.4333 0.125 0.062 0.000 0.630 1.4667 0.125 0.064 0.000 0.630 1.5000 0.125 0.065 0.000 0.630 1.5333 0.125 0.067 0.000 0.630 1.5667 0.125 0.068 0.000 0.630 1.6000 0.125 0.069 0.000 0.630 1.6333 0.125 0.071 0.000 0.630 1.6667 0.125 0.072 0.000 0.630 1.7000 0.125 0.073 0.000 0.630 1.7333 0.125 0.075 0.000 0.630 1.7667 0.125 0.076 0.000 0.630 1.8000 0.125 0.078 0.000 0.630 1.8333 0.125 0.079 0.000 0.630 1.8667 0.125 0.080 0.000 0.630 1.9000 0.125 0.082 0.000 0.630 1.9333 0.125 0.083 0.000 0.630 1.9667 0.125 0.084 0.000 0.630 2.0000 0.125 0.086 0.000 0.630 2.0333 0.125 0.087 0.000 0.630 2.0667 0.125 0.089 0.000 0.630 2.1000 0.125 0.090 0.000 0.630 2.1333 0.125 0.091 0.000 0.630 2.1667 0.125 0.093 0.000 0.630 2.2000 0.125 0.094 0.000 0.630 2.2333 0.125 0.095 0.000 0.630 2.2667 0.125 0.097 0.000 0.630 2.3000 0.125 0.098 0.000 0.630 2.3333 0.125 0.100 0.000 0.630 2.3667 0.125 0.101 0.000 0.630 2.4000 0.125 0.102 0.000 0.630 2.4333 0.125 0.104 0.000 0.630 2.4667 0.125 0.105 0.000 0.630 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 8 2.5000 0.125 0.106 0.000 0.630 2.5333 0.125 0.108 0.000 0.630 2.5667 0.125 0.109 0.000 0.630 2.6000 0.125 0.111 0.000 0.630 2.6333 0.125 0.112 0.000 0.630 2.6667 0.125 0.113 0.000 0.630 2.7000 0.125 0.115 0.000 0.630 2.7333 0.125 0.116 0.000 0.630 2.7667 0.125 0.117 0.000 0.630 2.8000 0.125 0.119 0.000 0.630 2.8333 0.125 0.120 0.000 0.630 2.8667 0.125 0.122 0.000 0.630 2.9000 0.125 0.123 0.000 0.630 2.9333 0.125 0.124 0.000 0.630 2.9667 0.125 0.126 0.000 0.630 3.0000 0.125 0.127 0.000 0.630 ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Gravel Trench Bed 109 Bottom Length: 215.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 166.256 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0.008 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 166.264 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 ___________________________________________________________________ Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.) Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0333 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.248 0.0667 0.049 0.001 0.000 0.248 0.1000 0.049 0.001 0.000 0.248 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 9 0.1333 0.049 0.002 0.000 0.248 0.1667 0.049 0.002 0.000 0.248 0.2000 0.049 0.003 0.000 0.248 0.2333 0.049 0.004 0.000 0.248 0.2667 0.049 0.004 0.000 0.248 0.3000 0.049 0.005 0.000 0.248 0.3333 0.049 0.005 0.000 0.248 0.3667 0.049 0.006 0.000 0.248 0.4000 0.049 0.006 0.000 0.248 0.4333 0.049 0.007 0.000 0.248 0.4667 0.049 0.008 0.000 0.248 0.5000 0.049 0.008 0.000 0.248 0.5333 0.049 0.009 0.000 0.248 0.5667 0.049 0.009 0.000 0.248 0.6000 0.049 0.010 0.000 0.248 0.6333 0.049 0.010 0.000 0.248 0.6667 0.049 0.011 0.000 0.248 0.7000 0.049 0.012 0.000 0.248 0.7333 0.049 0.012 0.000 0.248 0.7667 0.049 0.013 0.000 0.248 0.8000 0.049 0.013 0.000 0.248 0.8333 0.049 0.014 0.000 0.248 0.8667 0.049 0.015 0.000 0.248 0.9000 0.049 0.015 0.000 0.248 0.9333 0.049 0.016 0.000 0.248 0.9667 0.049 0.016 0.000 0.248 1.0000 0.049 0.017 0.000 0.248 1.0333 0.049 0.017 0.000 0.248 1.0667 0.049 0.018 0.000 0.248 1.1000 0.049 0.019 0.000 0.248 1.1333 0.049 0.019 0.000 0.248 1.1667 0.049 0.020 0.000 0.248 1.2000 0.049 0.020 0.000 0.248 1.2333 0.049 0.021 0.000 0.248 1.2667 0.049 0.021 0.000 0.248 1.3000 0.049 0.022 0.000 0.248 1.3333 0.049 0.023 0.000 0.248 1.3667 0.049 0.023 0.000 0.248 1.4000 0.049 0.024 0.000 0.248 1.4333 0.049 0.024 0.000 0.248 1.4667 0.049 0.025 0.000 0.248 1.5000 0.049 0.025 0.000 0.248 1.5333 0.049 0.026 0.000 0.248 1.5667 0.049 0.027 0.000 0.248 1.6000 0.049 0.027 0.000 0.248 1.6333 0.049 0.028 0.000 0.248 1.6667 0.049 0.028 0.000 0.248 1.7000 0.049 0.029 0.000 0.248 1.7333 0.049 0.029 0.000 0.248 1.7667 0.049 0.030 0.000 0.248 1.8000 0.049 0.030 0.000 0.248 1.8333 0.049 0.031 0.000 0.248 1.8667 0.049 0.031 0.000 0.248 1.9000 0.049 0.032 0.000 0.248 1.9333 0.049 0.032 0.000 0.248 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 10 1.9667 0.049 0.033 0.000 0.248 2.0000 0.049 0.034 0.000 0.248 2.0333 0.049 0.034 0.000 0.248 2.0667 0.049 0.035 0.000 0.248 2.1000 0.049 0.035 0.000 0.248 2.1333 0.049 0.036 0.000 0.248 2.1667 0.049 0.036 0.000 0.248 2.2000 0.049 0.037 0.000 0.248 2.2333 0.049 0.037 0.000 0.248 2.2667 0.049 0.038 0.000 0.248 2.3000 0.049 0.038 0.000 0.248 2.3333 0.049 0.039 0.000 0.248 2.3667 0.049 0.040 0.000 0.248 2.4000 0.049 0.040 0.000 0.248 2.4333 0.049 0.041 0.000 0.248 2.4667 0.049 0.041 0.000 0.248 2.5000 0.049 0.042 0.000 0.248 2.5333 0.049 0.042 0.000 0.248 2.5667 0.049 0.043 0.000 0.248 2.6000 0.049 0.043 0.000 0.248 2.6333 0.049 0.044 0.000 0.248 2.6667 0.049 0.044 0.000 0.248 2.7000 0.049 0.045 0.000 0.248 2.7333 0.049 0.046 0.000 0.248 2.7667 0.049 0.046 0.000 0.248 2.8000 0.049 0.047 0.000 0.248 2.8333 0.049 0.047 0.000 0.248 2.8667 0.049 0.048 0.000 0.248 2.9000 0.049 0.048 0.000 0.248 2.9333 0.049 0.049 0.000 0.248 2.9667 0.049 0.049 0.000 0.248 3.0000 0.049 0.050 0.000 0.248 ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Gravel Trench Bed 101-106 Bottom Length: 465.00 ft. Bottom Width: 40.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.33 Material thickness of second layer: 0 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 0.94 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 450.197 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 450.197 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 11 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1.5 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 ___________________________________________________________________ Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.) Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.427 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0167 0.427 0.002 0.000 0.404 0.0333 0.427 0.004 0.000 0.404 0.0500 0.427 0.007 0.000 0.404 0.0667 0.427 0.009 0.000 0.404 0.0833 0.427 0.011 0.000 0.404 0.1000 0.427 0.014 0.000 0.404 0.1167 0.427 0.016 0.000 0.404 0.1333 0.427 0.018 0.000 0.404 0.1500 0.427 0.021 0.000 0.404 0.1667 0.427 0.023 0.000 0.404 0.1833 0.427 0.025 0.000 0.404 0.2000 0.427 0.028 0.000 0.404 0.2167 0.427 0.030 0.000 0.404 0.2333 0.427 0.032 0.000 0.404 0.2500 0.427 0.035 0.000 0.404 0.2667 0.427 0.037 0.000 0.404 0.2833 0.427 0.039 0.000 0.404 0.3000 0.427 0.042 0.000 0.404 0.3167 0.427 0.044 0.000 0.404 0.3333 0.427 0.047 0.000 0.404 0.3500 0.427 0.049 0.000 0.404 0.3667 0.427 0.051 0.000 0.404 0.3833 0.427 0.054 0.000 0.404 0.4000 0.427 0.056 0.000 0.404 0.4167 0.427 0.058 0.000 0.404 0.4333 0.427 0.061 0.000 0.404 0.4500 0.427 0.063 0.000 0.404 0.4667 0.427 0.065 0.000 0.404 0.4833 0.427 0.068 0.000 0.404 0.5000 0.427 0.070 0.000 0.404 0.5167 0.427 0.072 0.000 0.404 0.5333 0.427 0.075 0.000 0.404 0.5500 0.427 0.077 0.000 0.404 0.5667 0.427 0.079 0.000 0.404 0.5833 0.427 0.082 0.000 0.404 0.6000 0.427 0.084 0.000 0.404 0.6167 0.427 0.086 0.000 0.404 0.6333 0.427 0.089 0.000 0.404 0.6500 0.427 0.091 0.000 0.404 0.6667 0.427 0.093 0.000 0.404 0.6833 0.427 0.096 0.000 0.404 0.7000 0.427 0.098 0.000 0.404 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 12 0.7167 0.427 0.101 0.000 0.404 0.7333 0.427 0.103 0.000 0.404 0.7500 0.427 0.105 0.000 0.404 0.7667 0.427 0.108 0.000 0.404 0.7833 0.427 0.110 0.000 0.404 0.8000 0.427 0.112 0.000 0.404 0.8167 0.427 0.115 0.000 0.404 0.8333 0.427 0.117 0.000 0.404 0.8500 0.427 0.119 0.000 0.404 0.8667 0.427 0.122 0.000 0.404 0.8833 0.427 0.124 0.000 0.404 0.9000 0.427 0.126 0.000 0.404 0.9167 0.427 0.129 0.000 0.404 0.9333 0.427 0.131 0.000 0.404 0.9500 0.427 0.133 0.000 0.404 0.9667 0.427 0.136 0.000 0.404 0.9833 0.427 0.138 0.000 0.404 1.0000 0.427 0.140 0.000 0.404 1.0167 0.427 0.143 0.000 0.404 1.0333 0.427 0.145 0.000 0.404 1.0500 0.427 0.148 0.000 0.404 1.0667 0.427 0.150 0.000 0.404 1.0833 0.427 0.152 0.000 0.404 1.1000 0.427 0.155 0.000 0.404 1.1167 0.427 0.157 0.000 0.404 1.1333 0.427 0.159 0.000 0.404 1.1500 0.427 0.162 0.000 0.404 1.1667 0.427 0.164 0.000 0.404 1.1833 0.427 0.166 0.000 0.404 1.2000 0.427 0.169 0.000 0.404 1.2167 0.427 0.171 0.000 0.404 1.2333 0.427 0.173 0.000 0.404 1.2500 0.427 0.176 0.000 0.404 1.2667 0.427 0.178 0.000 0.404 1.2833 0.427 0.180 0.000 0.404 1.3000 0.427 0.183 0.000 0.404 1.3167 0.427 0.185 0.000 0.404 1.3333 0.427 0.187 0.000 0.404 1.3500 0.427 0.190 0.000 0.404 1.3667 0.427 0.192 0.000 0.404 1.3833 0.427 0.194 0.000 0.404 1.4000 0.427 0.197 0.000 0.404 1.4167 0.427 0.199 0.000 0.404 1.4333 0.427 0.202 0.000 0.404 1.4500 0.427 0.204 0.000 0.404 1.4667 0.427 0.206 0.000 0.404 1.4833 0.427 0.209 0.000 0.404 1.5000 0.427 0.211 0.000 0.404 ___________________________________________________________________ Name : Gravel Trench Bed 112 Bottom Length: 185.00 ft. Bottom Width: 10.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 13 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.35 Material thickness of second layer: 1.5 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 5 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 139.669 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 0.005 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 139.674 Percent Infiltrated: 100 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. Riser Diameter: 12 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 ___________________________________________________________________ Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.) Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0333 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.214 0.0667 0.042 0.001 0.000 0.214 0.1000 0.042 0.001 0.000 0.214 0.1333 0.042 0.002 0.000 0.214 0.1667 0.042 0.002 0.000 0.214 0.2000 0.042 0.003 0.000 0.214 0.2333 0.042 0.003 0.000 0.214 0.2667 0.042 0.004 0.000 0.214 0.3000 0.042 0.004 0.000 0.214 0.3333 0.042 0.005 0.000 0.214 0.3667 0.042 0.005 0.000 0.214 0.4000 0.042 0.005 0.000 0.214 0.4333 0.042 0.006 0.000 0.214 0.4667 0.042 0.006 0.000 0.214 0.5000 0.042 0.007 0.000 0.214 0.5333 0.042 0.007 0.000 0.214 0.5667 0.042 0.008 0.000 0.214 0.6000 0.042 0.008 0.000 0.214 0.6333 0.042 0.009 0.000 0.214 0.6667 0.042 0.009 0.000 0.214 0.7000 0.042 0.010 0.000 0.214 0.7333 0.042 0.010 0.000 0.214 0.7667 0.042 0.011 0.000 0.214 0.8000 0.042 0.011 0.000 0.214 0.8333 0.042 0.012 0.000 0.214 0.8667 0.042 0.012 0.000 0.214 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 14 0.9000 0.042 0.013 0.000 0.214 0.9333 0.042 0.013 0.000 0.214 0.9667 0.042 0.014 0.000 0.214 1.0000 0.042 0.014 0.000 0.214 1.0333 0.042 0.015 0.000 0.214 1.0667 0.042 0.015 0.000 0.214 1.1000 0.042 0.016 0.000 0.214 1.1333 0.042 0.016 0.000 0.214 1.1667 0.042 0.017 0.000 0.214 1.2000 0.042 0.017 0.000 0.214 1.2333 0.042 0.018 0.000 0.214 1.2667 0.042 0.018 0.000 0.214 1.3000 0.042 0.019 0.000 0.214 1.3333 0.042 0.019 0.000 0.214 1.3667 0.042 0.020 0.000 0.214 1.4000 0.042 0.020 0.000 0.214 1.4333 0.042 0.021 0.000 0.214 1.4667 0.042 0.021 0.000 0.214 1.5000 0.042 0.022 0.000 0.214 1.5333 0.042 0.022 0.000 0.214 1.5667 0.042 0.023 0.000 0.214 1.6000 0.042 0.023 0.000 0.214 1.6333 0.042 0.024 0.000 0.214 1.6667 0.042 0.024 0.000 0.214 1.7000 0.042 0.025 0.000 0.214 1.7333 0.042 0.025 0.000 0.214 1.7667 0.042 0.026 0.000 0.214 1.8000 0.042 0.026 0.000 0.214 1.8333 0.042 0.026 0.000 0.214 1.8667 0.042 0.027 0.000 0.214 1.9000 0.042 0.027 0.000 0.214 1.9333 0.042 0.028 0.000 0.214 1.9667 0.042 0.028 0.000 0.214 2.0000 0.042 0.029 0.000 0.214 2.0333 0.042 0.029 0.000 0.214 2.0667 0.042 0.030 0.000 0.214 2.1000 0.042 0.030 0.000 0.214 2.1333 0.042 0.031 0.000 0.214 2.1667 0.042 0.031 0.000 0.214 2.2000 0.042 0.032 0.000 0.214 2.2333 0.042 0.032 0.000 0.214 2.2667 0.042 0.033 0.000 0.214 2.3000 0.042 0.033 0.000 0.214 2.3333 0.042 0.033 0.000 0.214 2.3667 0.042 0.034 0.000 0.214 2.4000 0.042 0.034 0.000 0.214 2.4333 0.042 0.035 0.000 0.214 2.4667 0.042 0.035 0.000 0.214 2.5000 0.042 0.036 0.000 0.214 2.5333 0.042 0.036 0.000 0.214 2.5667 0.042 0.037 0.000 0.214 2.6000 0.042 0.037 0.000 0.214 2.6333 0.042 0.038 0.000 0.214 2.6667 0.042 0.038 0.000 0.214 2.7000 0.042 0.039 0.000 0.214 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 15 2.7333 0.042 0.039 0.000 0.214 2.7667 0.042 0.040 0.000 0.214 2.8000 0.042 0.040 0.000 0.214 2.8333 0.042 0.041 0.000 0.214 2.8667 0.042 0.041 0.000 0.214 2.9000 0.042 0.041 0.000 0.214 2.9333 0.042 0.042 0.000 0.214 2.9667 0.042 0.042 0.000 0.214 3.0000 0.042 0.043 0.000 0.214 ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration ___________________________________________________________________ Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:6.532 Total Impervious Area:0 ___________________________________________________________________ Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:1.705 Total Impervious Area:4.827 ___________________________________________________________________ Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.267787 5 year 0.412497 10 year 0.52445 25 year 0.685015 50 year 0.819023 100 year 0.965819 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.48554 5 year 1.526813 10 year 1.5437 25 year 1.558425 50 year 1.566273 100 year 1.572308 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.268 1.498 1950 0.287 1.498 1951 0.247 1.498 1952 0.203 1.498 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 16 1953 0.169 1.498 1954 0.910 1.498 1955 0.334 1.498 1956 0.296 1.270 1957 0.366 1.498 1958 0.464 1.501 1959 0.259 1.498 1960 0.242 1.498 1961 0.624 1.679 1962 0.244 1.498 1963 0.397 1.498 1964 0.298 1.457 1965 0.224 1.435 1966 0.139 1.491 1967 0.272 1.498 1968 0.322 1.498 1969 0.824 1.498 1970 0.187 1.434 1971 0.313 1.498 1972 0.219 1.498 1973 0.200 1.498 1974 0.481 1.498 1975 0.198 1.498 1976 0.195 1.417 1977 0.157 1.442 1978 0.188 1.301 1979 0.528 1.498 1980 0.250 1.498 1981 0.189 1.452 1982 0.240 1.461 1983 0.435 1.498 1984 0.241 1.498 1985 0.317 1.498 1986 0.694 1.498 1987 0.323 1.498 1988 0.181 1.498 1989 0.208 1.498 1990 0.231 1.418 1991 0.242 1.498 1992 0.186 1.498 1993 0.171 1.442 1994 0.169 1.437 1995 0.245 1.436 1996 0.441 1.498 1997 0.840 1.498 1998 0.169 1.498 1999 0.214 1.304 2000 0.163 1.498 2001 0.067 1.388 2002 0.240 1.396 2003 0.183 1.498 2004 0.288 1.498 2005 0.213 1.498 2006 0.604 1.498 2007 0.468 1.498 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 17 2008 0.602 1.498 2009 0.191 1.498 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.9100 1.6789 2 0.8400 1.5012 3 0.8243 1.4985 4 0.6938 1.4985 5 0.6240 1.4985 6 0.6039 1.4985 7 0.6024 1.4985 8 0.5278 1.4985 9 0.4808 1.4985 10 0.4680 1.4985 11 0.4638 1.4985 12 0.4410 1.4985 13 0.4347 1.4985 14 0.3969 1.4985 15 0.3663 1.4985 16 0.3337 1.4985 17 0.3231 1.4985 18 0.3220 1.4985 19 0.3168 1.4985 20 0.3131 1.4985 21 0.2982 1.4985 22 0.2955 1.4985 23 0.2882 1.4985 24 0.2874 1.4985 25 0.2724 1.4985 26 0.2680 1.4985 27 0.2589 1.4985 28 0.2503 1.4985 29 0.2471 1.4985 30 0.2447 1.4985 31 0.2443 1.4985 32 0.2423 1.4985 33 0.2417 1.4985 34 0.2407 1.4985 35 0.2400 1.4985 36 0.2397 1.4985 37 0.2307 1.4985 38 0.2243 1.4985 39 0.2194 1.4985 40 0.2136 1.4985 41 0.2126 1.4985 42 0.2076 1.4985 43 0.2035 1.4985 44 0.2005 1.4985 45 0.1980 1.4908 46 0.1951 1.4614 47 0.1912 1.4568 48 0.1888 1.4517 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Centennial Park 18386.20 March 26, 2021 Supplemental Drainage Report Appendix A, Page 18 49 0.1878 1.4418 50 0.1866 1.4416 51 0.1862 1.4366 52 0.1834 1.4358 53 0.1807 1.4350 54 0.1712 1.4343 55 0.1692 1.4183 56 0.1690 1.4173 57 0.1686 1.3964 58 0.1633 1.3883 59 0.1570 1.3044 60 0.1395 1.3007 61 0.0667 1.2698 ___________________________________________________________________ LID Report LID Technique Used for Total Volume Volume Infiltration Cumulative Percent Water Quality Percent Comment Treatment? Needs Through Volume Volume Volume Water Quality Treatment Facility (ac-ft.) Infiltration Infiltrated Treated (ac-ft) (ac-ft) Credit Gravel Trench Bed 107,111 POC N 329.46 N 100.00 Gravel Trench Bed 109 POC N 151.30 N 99.99 Gravel Trench Bed 101-106 POC N 409.68 N 100.00 Gravel Trench Bed 112 POC N 127.10 N 100.00 Total Volume Infiltrated 1017.55 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0% No Treat. Credit Compliance with LID Standard 8 Duration Analysis Result = Failed ___________________________________________________________________ Perlnd and Implnd Changes No changes have been made. ___________________________________________________________________ This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by: Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2021; All Rights Reserved. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 | f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com CENTENNIAL PARK - PROPOSED PROJECT - SETBACK ENHANCEMENT AREAS EXHIBIT HIGHLAND VIEW DR. HIGHLAND VIEW DR. DP3U DP6U SOURCES: DP4W DP5U J SEC WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT DP7U SEC SWITCH PLANTING ~18,632 SF (SEE NATIVE PLANT SCHEDULE ON THIS SHEET) J WETLAND A CATEGORY IV DP11USEC ~21,823 SF WITH J J STD. 40' BUFFER SEC TRANSFER STATION TRANSFER STATION POTENTIAL STORMWATER 67TH AVE. N.E. INFILTRATION AREA DP2U SEC DP10U SEC J SWITCH APROX. LOCATION OF PROPOSED 75' BUFFER FROM RELIC STREAM CHANNEL J J SURVEYED LOCATION OF POTENTIAL J RELIC STREAM CHANNEL SEC DP1U DP15U DP14U DP8U V V DP17UV DP13U V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V DP9U V V V RANGE 05E, W.M. V V OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, V 4 V 1 V DP16U V APROX. LOCATION OF RELOCATED V CENTENNIAL PARK V V V V V ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 172ND ST. N.E. V STREAM CHANNEL V 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW V V V V V V V STREAM BUFFER ENHANCEMENT V V V DATE: 3/29/2021 V V V V PLANTING ~32,844 SF (ON-SITE AREA V V V V V V V V V V V JOB: 1778.0001 V V V V - REMOVE HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY, V V V BY: MW V V JAPANESE KNOTWEED, & OTHER V PROPOSED EDGE OF V V V V FUTURE ROADWAY INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC - SEE SHEETS 2, 3 AND 4) IMPROVEMENTS BY WSDOT SHEET1 CENTENNIAL PARK - PROPOSED PROJECT - SETBACK ENHANCEMENT PLANTING AREAS J J SEC POTENTIAL STORMWATER INFILTRATION AREA 150' BUFFER SOURCES: E V A V V V V V V V V V V V B V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V C V V D V POST-CONSTRUCTION BUFFER V WITHCRITICAL AREAS SIGNS V POSTEDEVERY 100 FEET V (5 TOTAL) PROPOSED EDGE OF V V EXISTING V V V FUTURE ROADWAY V LEGEND 172ND ST. N.E. IMPROVEMENT BY WSDOT WEIR (TYP.) V BERM V V BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING AREA "A" V (19,184 SF) 100% COVERAGE BIOSWALE TO TREAT ROADSIDE DITCH STORMWATER BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING AREA "B" (CONSTRUCTED WITH BERM - NO (8,287 SF) 25% COVERAGE EXCAVATION) SEED AND PLUGS ONLY - NO TREES OR SHRUBS BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING AREA "C" STORMWATER OUTFALL FOR BLDGS RANGE 05E, W.M. (5,373 SF) 50% COVERAGE OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, 4 L, M, AND N ROOF DRAINS AND 1 FOOTING DRAINS FOR 0.39 ACRES CENTENNIAL PARK BUFFER ENHANCEMENT OFF-SITE AREA "D" ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 (52 SF) SEEDING ONLY OF BUILDINGS 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW DATE: 3/29/2021 BUFFER IMPACT AREA "E" JOB: 1778.0001 (46,634 SF) BY: MW NOTE: SEE PLANT SCHEDULE NEXT SHEET SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET2 CENTENNIAL PARK - NATIVE PLANT SCHEDULE SOURCES: 9 C P RANGE 05E, W.M. OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, 4 1 CENTENNIAL PARK ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW DATE: 3/29/2021 JOB: 1778.0001 BY: MW SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET 3 CENTENNIAL PARK - PROPOSED PROJECT - SETBACK ENHANCEMENT PLANTING PLAN POTENTIAL STORMWATER INFILTRATION AREA PLANTING AREA E - ADD COIR LOGS (RED DASHED LINE) AT BASE OF BERM WITH WILLOW STAKES 12" TO 24" O.C. NOTE: 4 WILLOWS PER SYMBOL THIS AREA "E" C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C P C P P P C C C P P C C C C C C C C C C C 9 C C 9 C P P P C 9 9 P C P P P 9 9 P P P C P 9 P 9 C P P V 9 9 9 C C C P 9 P C P V 9 9 9 C C C C C C C P 9 9 P P C P P C 9 C C C P P C P V SOURCES: A C 9 C C C P P 9 C C C P C C C C C V 9 9 9 9 C C C 9 9 9 C C V 9 9 C C C V C C C C V C 9 V V V V V B V C C P 9 9 V V V 25'V C C P PV 9 V V V C C P V C P P V 9 9 9 V 9 V C C P C P P P 9 V P C P C P V 9 9 9 V V C P C C C C C P C C C C C C C C V V EDGE EXISTING EXISTING V BERM OF PAVING WEIR (TYP.) PLANTING V AREAS A, V NATIVE SEED PROPOSED EDGE OF V V V MIX (OFF-SITE) B AND C V FUTURE ROADWAY BIOSWALE TO TREATV IMPROVEMENT BY WSDOT ROADSIDE DITCH STORMWATER (CONSTRUCTED WITH BERM - NO EXCAVATION) SEED AND PLUGS ONLY - NO TREES OR SHRUBS STORMWATER OUTFALL FOR BLDGS L, M, AND N ROOF DRAINS AND FOOTING DRAINS FOR 0.39 ACRES OF BUILDINGS RANGE 05E, W.M. OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31N, 4 1 CENTENNIAL PARK ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 67TH AVE NE & 172ND ST NE/HWY 531 THE SW DATE: 3/29/2021 JOB: 1778.0001 BY: MW SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET4 CENTENNIAL PARK - OFFSITE - EXISTING CONDITIONS FF-20 FF-19 FF-18 FF-17 FF-16 FF-15 STANDARD BUFFER, TYP. WETLAND A CATEGORY II FF-14 165-FT BUFFER (284,924 SF ON-SITE) FF-13 FF-12 FF-11 FF-10 EXISTING FF-9 RESIDENCE FF-8 FF-7 FF-6 FF-4 FF-5 FF-3 FF-2 FF-1 DATE: 3/29/2020 51ST AVENUE NE (NORTH) 0 75 150 300 16430 51ST AVENUE NE Soundview ConsultantsLLC JOB: 1778.0001 ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 Environmental Assessment Planning Land Use Solutions BY: MW GRAPHIC SCALE 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D P. 253.514.8952 THE NE 14 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 31, GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 F. 253.514.8954 SCALE: AS SHOWN 1"=150' RANGE 5E, W.M. WWW.SOUNDVIEWCONSULTANTS.COM SHEET: 5 CENTENNIAL PARK - OFFSITE - MITIGATION PLAN EXISTING DITCH PLANTING TYPICAL VIEWPORT - FIG. 6 25' POST-CONSTRUCTION BUFFER/SPLIT RAIL FENCE 50' WETLAND A CATEGORY II 25' 50' PROPOSED THALWEG LOCATION, TYP. EXISTING DITCH MITIGATION LEGEND PLAN LEGEND WETLAND ENHANCEMENT 98,523 SF PROPERTY LINE (INCLUDES THALWEG CREATION) EXISTING WETLAND DEEP WATER WETLAND AREAS - 155,435 SF EXISTING DITCH BOUNDARY DATE: 3/29/2020 51ST AVENUE NE (NORTH) 0 75 150 300 16430 51ST AVENUE NE Soundview ConsultantsLLC JOB: 1778.0001 ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 Environmental Assessment Planning Land Use Solutions BY: MW GRAPHIC SCALE 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D P. 253.514.8952 THE NE 14 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 31, GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 F. 253.514.8954 SCALE: AS SHOWN 1"=150' RANGE 5E, W.M. WWW.SOUNDVIEWCONSULTANTS.COM SHEET: 6 CENTENNIAL PARK - OFFSITE - PLANTING PLAN HABITAT FEATURE LEGEND SNAG LARGE WOODY DEBRIS (LWD) NOTE: SEE SHEET 8 FOR DETAILED PLANT Sc SCHEDULE Si Sc Sc WETLAND Si HUMMOCK, TYP. Sc Si Sc Si Sc Si Si Si L PROPOSED THALWEG L Sc L Sc Sc L Si Si L Si Si Si Sc Sc Si Si Sc Si Si Sc Sc Sc L Si Sc Si Si Si Si Si Sc L Sc L Si Sc L Si Si DEEP Sc L Si Si Si WATER L Si Si WETLAND Si Si Si L Si Si Si Si Si Si L Si Si Si Si Si Si L Si Si Si L Si Si Si Si Si Si L Si L Si Si L Si Si Si L L L Si L L DATE: 3/29/2020 51ST AVENUE NE (NORTH) 0 75 150 300 16430 51ST AVENUE NE Soundview ConsultantsLLC JOB: 1778.0001 ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 Environmental Assessment Planning Land Use Solutions BY: MW GRAPHIC SCALE 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D P. 253.514.8952 THE NE 14 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 31, GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 F. 253.514.8954 SCALE: AS SHOWN 1"=150' RANGE 5E, W.M. WWW.SOUNDVIEWCONSULTANTS.COM SHEET: 7 CENTENNIAL PARK - OFFSITE - PLANT SCHEDULE L Sc Si DATE: 3/29/2020 51ST AVENUE NE (NORTH) 0 75 150 300 16430 51ST AVENUE NE Soundview ConsultantsLLC JOB: 1778.0001 ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON 98223 Environmental Assessment Planning Land Use Solutions BY: MW GRAPHIC SCALE 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D P. 253.514.8952 THE NE 14 OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 31, GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 F. 253.514.8954 SCALE: AS SHOWN 1"=150' RANGE 5E, W.M. WWW.SOUNDVIEWCONSULTANTS.COM SHEET: 8 CONTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE WORKSHEET Community & Economic Development Department 18204 59th Avenue NE City of Arlington   Arlington WA 98223  (360) 403-3551 This form is to be completed and submitted with Type I , Type II Type III Construction Permit Application. 1) Based on permit type requested (Type I, Type II or Type III), complete the form as follows:  Type I permits complete all sections.  Type II permits complete as follows: - Grading Only - Complete Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). - Stormwater Drainage Only - Complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Drainage Section for Public or Private  Type III permits complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). 2) The developer shall enter the quantities shown on the construction drawings into the Construction Calculation Worksheet. This document is used to determine the amount of plan reivew and inspection fees due to the city. 3) Excel will auto-calculate the relevant fields and subtotals throughout the document. Only the 'Quantity' columns should be completed. 4) The summary page calculates the fees due at intake for Civil and Stormwater Drainage construction permits only. This does not include fees for Grading or those required by other departments or agencies. Grading fees are based on Cubic Yard Quantity and shall be calculated at time of permit submittal. Grading fees shall be paid at permit submittal. 5) If an item that is part of your project does not exist in the spreadsheet complete the Write-In-Items section with the item, quantity and associated unit cost. There are a few unit prices that are blank, please complete them accordingly. 6) Inspection fees shall be calculated for Private Development during the review process and shall be paid upon permit issuance. PROJECT COSTS PUBLIC TOTAL PRIVATE TOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 138,835.00 $ 290,623.44 $ 429,458.44 OK PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEES PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE (6% of Project Value) $ 25,767.51 GRADING FEE (4) (Cubic Yard ) $ - Review fees due at time of submittal Total Review Fees Due $ 25,767.51 An Assurance Device such as a Performance Bond or Assignment of Funds needs to be on file with the City of Arlington prior to permit issuance. The Assurance Device shall be 150% of the Construction Calculation Worksheet which are as follows:  Road and Alley (Public)  Stormwater Drainage and Grading (Public)  Utilities (Public)  Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (Public and Private) ASSURANCE DEVICE Base Calculation of Performance Device $ 138,835.00 PERFORMANCE DEVICE 150% Amount Due $ 208,252.50 Base Calculation of Maintenance Device $ 128,412.50 MAINTENANCE DEVICE 20% Amount Due $ 25,682.50 1 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Reference # Backfill & compaction-embankment $ 6.50 CY $ - Check dams $ 78.00 EACH $ - BMP C207 Catch Basin Protection $ 35.50 EACH 28 $ 994.00 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus $ 18.00 TON $ - WSDOT 9-03.9(3) Ditching $ 8.00 CY $ - Excavation-bulk $ 3.00 CY $ - Fence, silt $ 2.00 LF 462 $ 924.00 BMP C233 Fence, Temporary (NGPA) $ 2.00 LF $ - Geotextile Fabric $ 2.50 SY $ - Hay Bale Silt Trap $ 0.50 EACH $ - Hydroseeding $ 4,200.00 ACRE $ - BMP C120 Interceptor Swale / Dike $ 1.00 LF $ - Jute Mesh $ 2.00 SY $ - BMP C122 Level Spreader $ 1.75 LF $ - Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Piping, temporary, CPP, 6" $ 12.50 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 12" $ 24.00 LF $ - Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C123 Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes $ 50.00 CY $ - WSDOT 9-13.1(2) Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1' $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1' $ 3,600.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Sediment pond riser assembly $ 3,050.00 EACH $ - BMP C241 Sediment trap, 5' high berm $ 21.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section $ 79.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Seeding, by hand $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, level ground $ 8.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 9.50 SY $ - BMP C120 TESC Supervisor $ 84.00 HR 30 $ 2,520.00 Water truck, dust control $ 130.00 HR 30 $ 3,900.00 BMP C140 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL (TESC Only): $ 8,338.00 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ 833.80 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ 1,250.70 TOTAL: $ 10,422.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STORMWATER DRAINAGE Public Private Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Access Road, Retention / Detention $ 26.00 SY $ - $ - * (CBs include frame and lid) Beehive $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type I $ 1,650.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type IL $ 1,850.00 EACH $ - 5 $ 9,250.00 CB Type II, 48" Dia $ 2,550.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 650.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 54" Dia $ 2,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 600.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 60" Dia $ 2,900.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 750.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 72" Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 900.00 FT $ - $ - Through-curb Inlet Framework (Add) $ 550.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 4" $ 200.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 6" $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 8" $ 300.00 EACH $ - $ - Culvert, Box __ ft x __ ft $ - LS $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 4" $ 12.00 LF $ - 1340 $ 16,080.00 Culvert, PVC, 6" $ 17.00 LF $ - 1,750 $ 29,750.00 Culvert, PVC, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 10" $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 12" $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 8" $ 23.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 12" $ 35.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 15" $ 42.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 18" $ 47.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 24" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 30" $ 100.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 36" $ 150.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 48" $ 194.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 60" $ 310.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 72" $ 400.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 8" $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 12" $ 43.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 15" $ 52.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 18" $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 24" $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 30" $ 136.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 36" $ 165.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 42" $ 196.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 48" $ 210.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 6" $ 16.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 8" $ 22.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 12" $ 28.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 15" $ 34.00 LF $ - $ - Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Culvert, CPP, 18" $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 24" $ 49.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 30" $ 62.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 36" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Ditching $ 12.00 CY $ - $ - Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) $ 40.00 LF $ - $ - French Drain (3' depth) $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene $ 5.00 SY $ - 170 $ 850.00 Infiltration pond testing $ 125.00 HR $ - $ - Mid-tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep $ 2,025.00 EACH $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, C900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pond Overflow Spillway $ 18.00 SY $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12" $ 1,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15" $ 1,550.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18" $ 1,680.00 EACH $ - $ - Riprap, placed $ 52.00 CY $ - $ - Tank End Reducer (36" Dia) $ 1,280.00 EACH $ - $ - Thru-Inlet at CB $ 150.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 12" $ 320.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 15" $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 18" $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 21" $ 375.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS 18" Concrete Yard Drain $ 250.00 EACH $ - 4 $ 1,000.00 infiltration trenches $ - $ 10,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL: $ - $ 66,930.00 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ - CONTINGENCY 15%: $ - TOTAL: $ - $ 66,930.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET GENERAL ITEMS Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Backfill & Compaction- embankment $ 8.00 CY $ - 750 $ 6,000.00 Backfill & Compaction- trench $ 11.00 CY 10 $ 110.00 $ - Clear/Remove Brush, by hand (acre) $ 2,363.00 ACRE $ - $ - Bollards - fixed $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Bollards - removable $ 600.00 EACH $ - $ - Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal $ 6,000.00 ACRE $ - $ - Excavation - bulk $ 2.50 CY $ - 350 $ 875.00 Excavation - Trench $ 5.00 CY 10 $ 50.00 10 $ 50.00 Fencing, cedar, 6' high $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, 4' $ 19.50 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high $ 18.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 2 $ 1,563.00 EACH $ - $ - Fencing, split rail, 3' high $ 14.00 LF $ - $ - Fill & compact - common barrow $ 27.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - gravel base $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - screened topsoil $ 45.00 CY $ - $ - Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh $ 62.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh $ 86.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh $ 152.00 SY $ - $ - Grading, fine, by hand $ 2.00 SY 10 $ 20.00 2500 $ 5,000.00 Grading, fine, with grader $ 1.25 SY $ - 5500 $ 6,875.00 Guard Post $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - Monuments $ 104.00 EACH $ - $ - Sensitive Areas Sign $ 20.00 EACH $ - $ - Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 10.00 SY $ - 225 $ 2,250.00 Topsoil Type A (imported) $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers ) $ 98.00 HR $ - $ - Trail, 4" chipped wood $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" crushed cinder $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" top course $ 9.50 SY $ - $ - Wall, retaining, concrete $ 66.00 SF $ - $ - Wall, rockery $ 13.00 SF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 180.00 Subtotal $ 21,050.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET IMPROVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy $ 35.00 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000$ 8.50 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy $ 2.50 SY $ - $ - AC Removal/Disposal/Repair $ 60.00 SY $ - $ - Barricade, Type I $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade Type II $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade, Type III ( Permanent ) $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Conduit, 2" $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, rolled $ 20.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, vertical $ 15.00 LF 5 $ 75.00 $ - Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposa $ 20.00 LF 5 $ 100.00 $ - Curb, extruded asphalt $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb, extruded concrete $ 4.50 LF $ - 950 $ 4,275.00 Guard Rail $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth $ 3.50 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth $ 3.00 LF $ - $ - Sealant, asphalt $ 2.00 LF $ - $ - Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 4" thick $ 40.00 SY $ - 910 $ 36,400.00 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and dispos $ 36.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick, demolition and dispos $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Signs $ - LS $ - $ - Sign, Handicap $ 100.00 EACH $ - 3 $ 300.00 Striping, per stall $ 7.50 EACH $ - 75 $ 562.50 Street Light System $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal Modification $ - LS $ - $ - Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk ) $ 3.50 SF $ - $ - Striping, 4" reflectorized line $ 0.40 LF $ - $ - AC Patching/Trenching Restoration $ 100.00 TON $ - $ - Controlled Density Fill (CDF) $ 90.00 CY $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 175.00 Subtotal $ 41,537.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET SURFACING/PAVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Asphalt Overlay, 1.5" AC $ 12.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Overlay, 2" AC $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", First 2500 SY $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", Qty. over 2500SY $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 3", First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - 1525 $ 22,875.00 Asphalt Road 3", Qty. over 2500 SY $ 13.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", First 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", First 2500 SY $ 25.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 24.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Treated Base, 4" thick $ 14.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 2" $ 7.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 4" $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 6" $ 22.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 5", no base, over 2500 S$ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 6", no base, over 2500 $ 32.00 SY $ - $ - Thickened Edge $ 11.00 LF $ - $ - "" Gravel Base 9 $ 33.75 SY $ - 2435 $ 82,181.25 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 105,056.25 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET WATER SYSTEM Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Blowoff $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Connection to Existing Water Main $ 2,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Dia $ 65.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Dia $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Dia $ 103.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Dia. $ 125.00 LF 215 $ 26,875.00 $ - Gate Valve, 6 inch Dia $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 8 Inch Dia $ 380.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 10 Inch Dia $ 425.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 12 Inch Dia $ 500.00 EACH 1 $ 500.00 $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, with Guard Posts $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, without Guard Posts $ 2,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 8 Inch Dia $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac,10 Inch Dia $ 7,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 12 Inch Dia $ 12,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 8 In. Dia $ 3,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 10 In. D $ 4,200.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 12 In. D $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Valve Marker Post $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS Gate Valve 4" dia $ 200.00 $ - 2 $ 400.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 27,375.00 Subtotal $ 400.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET SANITARY SEWER Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Connection to Existing Sewer Main $ - EACH $ - $ - Clean Outs $ 500.00 EACH $ - 4 $ 2,000.00 Grease Interceptor, 500 gallon $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1000 gallon $ 10,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1500 gallon $ 15,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Dia $ 8.00 LF $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Dia $ 12.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Dia $ 33.00 LF $ - 163 $ 5,379.00 Sewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Dia $ 41.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Dia $ - LF $ - $ - Lift Station (Entire System) $ - LS $ - $ - Manhole, 48 Inch Dia $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - 1 $ 3,000.00 for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - 1 $ 532.00 Manhole, 54 Inch Dia $ 3,500.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 60 Inch Dia $ 3,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 72 Inch Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 96 Inch Dia $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo $ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Outside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Inside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Pipe, C-900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 10,911.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Street Trees $ 500.00 EACH $ - Root Barrier EACH $ - Median Landscaping $ - LS $ - Right-of-Way Landscaping $ - LS $ - Wetland Landscaping $ - LS $ - Private Landscaping $ - LS $ 75,000.00 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 75,000.00 (INCLUDES GENERAL, STREET, SURFACING, WATER, PUBLIC PRIVATE SEWER, LANDSCAPING) SUBTOTAL $ 102,730.00 $ 178,954.75 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ 10,273.00 $ 17,895.48 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ 15,409.50 $ 26,843.21 GRANDTOTAL: $ 128,412.50 $ 223,693.44 Rev 7/2017 CONTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE WORKSHEET Community & Economic Development Department 18204 59th Avenue NE City of Arlington   Arlington WA 98223  (360) 403-3551 This form is to be completed and submitted with Type I , Type II Type III Construction Permit Application. 1) Based on permit type requested (Type I, Type II or Type III), complete the form as follows:  Type I permits complete all sections.  Type II permits complete as follows: - Grading Only - Complete Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). - Stormwater Drainage Only - Complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Drainage Section for Public or Private  Type III permits complete the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC). 2) The developer shall enter the quantities shown on the construction drawings into the Construction Calculation Worksheet. This document is used to determine the amount of plan reivew and inspection fees due to the city. 3) Excel will auto-calculate the relevant fields and subtotals throughout the document. Only the 'Quantity' columns should be completed. 4) The summary page calculates the fees due at intake for Civil and Stormwater Drainage construction permits only. This does not include fees for Grading or those required by other departments or agencies. Grading fees are based on Cubic Yard Quantity and shall be calculated at time of permit submittal. Grading fees shall be paid at permit submittal. 5) If an item that is part of your project does not exist in the spreadsheet complete the Write-In-Items section with the item, quantity and associated unit cost. There are a few unit prices that are blank, please complete them accordingly. 6) Inspection fees shall be calculated for Private Development during the review process and shall be paid upon permit issuance. PROJECT COSTS PUBLIC TOTAL PRIVATE TOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 75,287.50 $ 244,793.44 $ 320,080.94 OK PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEES PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEE (6% of Project Value) $ 19,204.86 GRADING FEE (4) (Cubic Yard ) $ - Review fees due at time of submittal Total Review Fees Due $ 19,204.86 An Assurance Device such as a Performance Bond or Assignment of Funds needs to be on file with the City of Arlington prior to permit issuance. The Assurance Device shall be 150% of the Construction Calculation Worksheet which are as follows:  Road and Alley (Public)  Stormwater Drainage and Grading (Public)  Utilities (Public)  Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (Public and Private) ASSURANCE DEVICE Base Calculation of Performance Device $ 75,287.50 PERFORMANCE DEVICE 150% Amount Due $ 112,931.25 Base Calculation of Maintenance Device $ 75,287.50 MAINTENANCE DEVICE 20% Amount Due $ 15,057.50 1 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Reference # Backfill & compaction-embankment $ 6.50 CY $ - Check dams $ 78.00 EACH $ - BMP C207 Catch Basin Protection $ 35.50 EACH 28 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus $ 18.00 TON $ - WSDOT 9-03.9(3) Ditching $ 8.00 CY $ - Excavation-bulk $ 3.00 CY $ - Fence, silt $ 2.00 LF 462 BMP C233 Fence, Temporary (NGPA) $ 2.00 LF $ - Geotextile Fabric $ 2.50 SY $ - Hay Bale Silt Trap $ 0.50 EACH $ - Hydroseeding $ 4,200.00 ACRE $ - BMP C120 Interceptor Swale / Dike $ 1.00 LF $ - Jute Mesh $ 2.00 SY $ - BMP C122 Level Spreader $ 1.75 LF $ - Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C121 Piping, temporary, CPP, 6" $ 12.50 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - Piping, temporary, CPP, 12" $ 24.00 LF $ - Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged $ 3.00 SY $ - BMP C123 Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes $ 50.00 CY $ - WSDOT 9-13.1(2) Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1' $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1' $ 3,600.00 EACH $ - BMP C105 Sediment pond riser assembly $ 3,050.00 EACH $ - BMP C241 Sediment trap, 5' high berm $ 21.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section $ 79.00 LF $ - BMP C240 Seeding, by hand $ 1.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, level ground $ 8.00 SY $ - BMP C120 Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 9.50 SY $ - BMP C120 TESC Supervisor $ 84.00 HR 30 Water truck, dust control $ 130.00 HR 30 BMP C140 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL (TESC Only): MOBILIZATION 10%: $ - CONTINGENCY 15%: $ - TOTAL: $ - Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STORMWATER DRAINAGE Public Private Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Access Road, Retention / Detention $ 26.00 SY $ - $ - * (CBs include frame and lid) Beehive $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type I $ 1,650.00 EACH $ - $ - CB Type IL $ 1,850.00 EACH $ - 5 $ 9,250.00 CB Type II, 48" Dia $ 2,550.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 650.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 54" Dia $ 2,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 600.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 60" Dia $ 2,900.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 750.00 FT $ - $ - CB Type II, 72" Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4' $ 900.00 FT $ - $ - Through-curb Inlet Framework (Add) $ 550.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 4" $ 200.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 6" $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Cleanout, PVC, 8" $ 300.00 EACH $ - $ - Culvert, Box __ ft x __ ft $ - LS $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 4" $ 12.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 6" $ 17.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 8" $ 19.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 10" $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, PVC, 12" $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 8" $ 23.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 12" $ 35.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 15" $ 42.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 18" $ 47.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 24" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 30" $ 100.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 36" $ 150.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 48" $ 194.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 60" $ 310.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CMP, 72" $ 400.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 8" $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 12" $ 43.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 15" $ 52.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 18" $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 24" $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 30" $ 136.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 36" $ 165.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 42" $ 196.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, Concrete, 48" $ 210.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 6" $ 16.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 8" $ 22.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 12" $ 28.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 15" $ 34.00 LF $ - $ - Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Culvert, CPP, 18" $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 24" $ 49.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 30" $ 62.00 LF $ - $ - Culvert, CPP, 36" $ 69.00 LF $ - $ - Ditching $ 12.00 CY $ - $ - Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) $ 40.00 LF $ - $ - French Drain (3' depth) $ 39.00 LF $ - $ - Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene $ 5.00 SY $ - 170 $ 850.00 Infiltration pond testing $ 125.00 HR $ - $ - Mid-tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep $ 2,025.00 EACH $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, C900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pond Overflow Spillway $ 18.00 SY $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12" $ 1,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15" $ 1,550.00 EACH $ - $ - Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18" $ 1,680.00 EACH $ - $ - Riprap, placed $ 52.00 CY $ - $ - Tank End Reducer (36" Dia) $ 1,280.00 EACH $ - $ - Thru-Inlet at CB $ 150.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 12" $ 320.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 15" $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 18" $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - Trash Rack, 21" $ 375.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS 18" Concrete Yard Drain $ 250.00 EACH $ - 4 $ 1,000.00 infiltration trenches $ - $ 10,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - SUBTOTAL: $ - $ 21,100.00 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ - CONTINGENCY 15%: $ - TOTAL: $ - $ 21,100.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET GENERAL ITEMS Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Backfill & Compaction- embankment $ 8.00 CY $ - 750 $ 6,000.00 Backfill & Compaction- trench $ 11.00 CY 10 $ - Clear/Remove Brush, by hand (acre) $ 2,363.00 ACRE $ - $ - Bollards - fixed $ 325.00 EACH $ - $ - Bollards - removable $ 600.00 EACH $ - $ - Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal $ 6,000.00 ACRE $ - $ - Excavation - bulk $ 2.50 CY $ - 350 $ 875.00 Excavation - Trench $ 5.00 CY 10 10 $ 50.00 Fencing, cedar, 6' high $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, 4' $ 19.50 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high $ 18.00 LF $ - $ - Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 2 $ 1,563.00 EACH $ - $ - Fencing, split rail, 3' high $ 14.00 LF $ - $ - Fill & compact - common barrow $ 27.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - gravel base $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Fill & compact - screened topsoil $ 45.00 CY $ - $ - Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh $ 62.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh $ 86.00 SY $ - $ - Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh $ 152.00 SY $ - $ - Grading, fine, by hand $ 2.00 SY 10 2500 $ 5,000.00 Grading, fine, with grader $ 1.25 SY $ - 5500 $ 6,875.00 Guard Post $ 90.00 EACH $ - $ - Monuments $ 104.00 EACH $ - $ - Sensitive Areas Sign $ 20.00 EACH $ - $ - Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 10.00 SY $ - 225 $ 2,250.00 Topsoil Type A (imported) $ 30.00 CY $ - $ - Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers ) $ 98.00 HR $ - $ - Trail, 4" chipped wood $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" crushed cinder $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Trail, 4" top course $ 9.50 SY $ - $ - Wall, retaining, concrete $ 66.00 SF $ - $ - Wall, rockery $ 13.00 SF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 21,050.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET IMPROVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy $ 35.00 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000$ 8.50 SY $ - $ - AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy $ 2.50 SY $ - $ - AC Removal/Disposal/Repair $ 60.00 SY $ - $ - Barricade, Type I $ 36.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade Type II $ 25.00 LF $ - $ - Barricade, Type III ( Permanent ) $ 55.00 LF $ - $ - Conduit, 2" $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, rolled $ 20.00 LF $ - $ - Curb & Gutter, vertical $ 15.00 LF 5 $ 75.00 $ - Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposa $ 20.00 LF 5 $ - Curb, extruded asphalt $ 5.00 LF $ - $ - Curb, extruded concrete $ 4.50 LF $ - 950 $ 4,275.00 Guard Rail $ 30.00 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth $ 3.50 LF $ - $ - Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth $ 3.00 LF $ - $ - Sealant, asphalt $ 2.00 LF $ - $ - Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 4" thick $ 40.00 SY $ - 910 $ 36,400.00 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and dispos $ 36.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Sidewalk, 6" thick, demolition and dispos $ 45.00 SY $ - $ - Signs $ - LS $ - $ - Sign, Handicap $ 100.00 EACH $ - 3 $ 300.00 Striping, per stall $ 7.50 EACH $ - 75 $ 562.50 Street Light System $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal $ - LS $ - $ - Traffic Signal Modification $ - LS $ - $ - Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk ) $ 3.50 SF $ - $ - Striping, 4" reflectorized line $ 0.40 LF $ - $ - AC Patching/Trenching Restoration $ 100.00 TON $ - $ - Controlled Density Fill (CDF) $ 90.00 CY $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 75.00 Subtotal $ 41,537.50 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET STREET SURFACING/PAVEMENT Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Asphalt Overlay, 1.5" AC $ 12.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Overlay, 2" AC $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", First 2500 SY $ 10.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 2", Qty. over 2500SY $ 9.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 3", First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - 1525 $ 22,875.00 Asphalt Road 3", Qty. over 2500 SY $ 13.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", First 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 5", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", First 2500 SY $ 25.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Road 6", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 24.00 SY $ - $ - Asphalt Treated Base, 4" thick $ 14.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 2" $ 7.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 4" $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Base Course 6" $ 22.50 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 15.00 SY $ - $ - Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY $ 11.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 5", no base, over 2500 S$ 22.00 SY $ - $ - Concrete Road, 6", no base, over 2500 $ 32.00 SY $ - $ - Thickened Edge $ 11.00 LF $ - $ - "" Gravel Base 9 $ 33.75 SY $ - 2435 $ 82,181.25 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 105,056.25 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET WATER SYSTEM Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Blowoff $ 1,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Connection to Existing Water Main $ 2,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Dia $ 65.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Dia $ 85.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Dia $ 103.00 LF $ - $ - Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Dia. $ 125.00 LF 215 $ 26,875.00 $ - Gate Valve, 6 inch Dia $ 250.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 8 Inch Dia $ 380.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 10 Inch Dia $ 425.00 EACH $ - $ - Gate Valve, 12 Inch Dia $ 500.00 EACH 1 $ 500.00 $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, with Guard Posts $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Fire Hydrant Assembly, without Guard Posts $ 2,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 8 Inch Dia $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac,10 Inch Dia $ 7,500.00 EACH $ - $ - Air-Vac, 12 Inch Dia $ 12,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 8 In. Dia $ 3,800.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 10 In. D $ 4,200.00 EACH $ - $ - Pressure Reducing Valve Assembly, 12 In. D $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Valve Marker Post $ 350.00 EACH $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS Gate Valve 4" dia $ 200.00 $ - 2 $ 400.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 27,375.00 Subtotal $ 400.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET SANITARY SEWER Public Improvements Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Connection to Existing Sewer Main $ - EACH $ - $ - Clean Outs $ 500.00 EACH $ - 4 $ 2,000.00 Grease Interceptor, 500 gallon $ 6,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1000 gallon $ 10,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Grease Interceptor, 1500 gallon $ 15,000.00 EACH $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Dia $ 8.00 LF $ - $ - Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Dia $ 12.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Dia $ 33.00 LF $ - 163 $ 5,379.00 Sewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Dia $ 41.00 LF $ - $ - Sewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Dia $ - LF $ - $ - Lift Station (Entire System) $ - LS $ - $ - Manhole, 48 Inch Dia $ 3,000.00 EACH $ - 1 $ 3,000.00 for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - 1 $ 532.00 Manhole, 54 Inch Dia $ 3,500.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 60 Inch Dia $ 3,700.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 532.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 72 Inch Dia $ 4,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo$ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Manhole, 96 Inch Dia $ 5,000.00 EACH $ - $ - for additional depth over 4 feet/per foo $ 625.00 FEET $ - $ - Outside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Inside Drop $ - LS $ - $ - Pipe, C-900 $ 90.00 LF $ - $ - Pipe, High Density Water Pipe (HDWP) $ 160.00 LF $ - $ - WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ - Subtotal $ 10,911.00 Rev 7/2017 CONSTRUCTION CALCULATION WORKSHEET LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION Include Public Improvements & Private Development Description Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Street Trees $ 500.00 EACH 10 $ 5,000.00 Root Barrier EACH $ - Median Landscaping $ - LS $ - Right-of-Way Landscaping $ - LS $ - Wetland Landscaping $ - LS $ - Private Landscaping $ - LS $ 27,780.00 WRITE-IN-ITEMS $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal $ 32,780.00 (INCLUDES GENERAL, STREET, SURFACING, WATER, PUBLIC PRIVATE SEWER, LANDSCAPING) SUBTOTAL $ 60,230.00 $ 178,954.75 MOBILIZATION 10%: $ 6,023.00 $ 17,895.48 CONTINGENCY 15%: $ 9,034.50 $ 26,843.21 GRANDTOTAL: $ 75,287.50 $ 223,693.44 Rev 7/2017 ✔ ✔ PWD 2427 ✔ ✔ 17327 67th Ave NE (Centennial Park, Phase II, Building M) 31052300300800 ✔ ✔ Williams Investments 2515 Colby Ave Everett WA 98201 425.750.7926 ryan@williamsinvest.com Jared Underbrink 250 4th Ave S Edmonds WA 98020 4257788500 jaredu@cgengineering.com Building M on Centennial Park project. Multifamily w/ no commercial ✔ ✔ ✔ 2 19707 8.81 36627sf (0.841 ac)(Phase II) ✔ ✔ PWD 2427 ✔ ✔ 172nd Street NE & 67TH Ave NE 31052300300800 ✔ ✔ Williams Investments 2515 Colby Ave Everett WA 98201 425.750.7926 ryan@williamsinvest.com Jared Underbrink 250 4th Ave S Edmonds WA 98020 4257788500 jaredu@cgengineering.com 3 additional buildings for Phase II of the Centennial Park project. One building is mixed use, the other two are multifamily. ✔ ✔ ✔ 2 (all) 11380, 19707, 8.81 ac (whole site) 19707 sf 36627 sf (0.841 ac) (Phase II) ✔ ✔ PWD 2427 ✔ ✔ 17327 67th Ave NE (Centennial Park, Phase II, Building N) 31052300300800 ✔ Williams Investments 2515 Colby Ave Everett WA 98201 425.750.7926 ryan@williamsinvest.com Jared Underbrink 250 4th Ave S Edmonds WA 98020 4257788500 jaredu@cgengineering.com Building N on Centennial Park project. Multifamily with no commerical ✔ ✔ ✔ 2 19707 8.81 36627sf (0.841 ac)(Phase II) 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park II Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 3.2.2021 Contact: Michael Stevens Phone No.: 425-259-5242 Review Phase: Civil 1 Report Date: Storm – 9/16/2020 Reviewing Dept.: CED Applicant: Dykeman Architects DWG Issue Date: 1/29/2021 # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 1. NEH Mitigation Plan - Would like to utilize a smaller footprint that expands the deep water wetland and plant that area, instead of just planting the whole area. Looking to create a higher quality wetland area on a smaller footprint in order to improve water in Hayho Creek and provide future connectivity to similar improvements on adjacent property. 2. NEH Sidewalk must continue to road and put to east property line. 3. NEH Provide permanent fencing for wetland area. 4. NEH Show removal of invasive species within wetland area. 5. NEH What parts of the street improvements are planned with this project? It is unclear. 6. NEH With the proposed roundabout shown on all sheets it will be confusing for the contractor to know what to do in connection to the existing frontage that is out there. 7. NEH Drainage Clearly discuss and show that the area of Phase II Report going to Phase 1 infiltration trench was part of Phase 1 analysis. 8. NEH Describe buildings as residential, mixed use, and how that is divided up; # of each units. 9. NEH Describe each water and sewer service as residential or commercial. 10. NEH Construction Cost Worksheet is missing landscaping and water and sewer connections. 11. RRM Connect dead end main serving buildings M and N to main serving building #1 to create loop. Page 1 of 2 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park II Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 3.2.2021 Contact: Michael Stevens Phone No.: 425-259-5242 Review Phase: Civil 1 Report Date: Storm – 9/16/2020 Reviewing Dept.: CED Applicant: Dykeman Architects DWG Issue Date: 1/29/2021 # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 12. RRM No gate valves smaller than 6" allowed. Replace all 4" valves with 6" on a 12"x6" tee and then reduce after the valve. 13. RRM Residential portion of the building requires a separate 2” waterline and meter. 14. RRM Commercial portion of the building requires a separate 2” waterline and meter. 15. RRM Utility application needs to submitted for meter installation. Meter size and fees are determined by the number of fixtures. 16. BG There is a drainage outfall protection between the end of the sidewalk on the east end of the project and 172nd. That outfall protection needs to be moved to allow that sidewalk to be extended in the future without making alterations to the drainage. 17. BG Erosion control details show a construction entrance and an infiltration pond that are not shown on the erosion control plan sheet. Where are they being installed. 18. BG An ecology block wall is shown the plans that appears to cut through some electrical cabinets and a sidewalk on the east side of building M. 19. BG Confirm that the phase 1 drainage infiltration trenches can accommodate the added parking areas on the north side of buildings N and L. 20. LP Resubmittal Full size plan sets with landscaping – 2 copies Drainage Report – 2 copies Review Comments Form with Responses Electronic file of all submittal items - 1 Page 2 of 2 SW 1 / 4, SW 1 / 4, SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 31 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. . '\ " CITY OF ARLINGTON \ CONSTRUCTION DRAWING REVIEW ACKNOWLEDGMENT " . -.,Q ,.,,.,,.,.'"""·' ENGINEERING THIS PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED ANO EVALUATED FOR GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 CITY OF ARLINGTON CODES AND ORDINANCES. CONFORMANCE OF THE DESIGN WITH ALL i EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS IS THE FULL AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY OF •; PHONE (425) 778-8500 THE LICENSED DESIGN ENGINEER WHOSE STAMP AND SIGNATURE APPEAR ON THIS s-,;,a """' "'"''"'"" Q ' t FAX (425) 778-5536 SHEET. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWING REVIEW DOES NOT IMPLY 67TH AVE NE & 172ND STREET NE CITY APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES THAT REQUIRE OTHER COUNTY, STATE OR FEDERAL PERMIT REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE PROPERTY OWNER AND LICENSED DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACQUISITION AND COMPLIANCE OF \ ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS AND/OR AUTHORIZATION WHICH MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, WSDFW HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL (HPA), WSDOE NOTICE OF INTENT ARLINGTON, WA 98223 (NOi), ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS FILL PERMITS AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE (NOl),ENDANG T- _ / � BY LA" DATE • ft 13; ;J/ ' Nova Heaton, PE, Development Services Manager OWNER CONSULTANTS UTILITIES WILLIAMS INVESTMENTS ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER SOIL/GEOTECH ENGINEER WATER/SEWER/STORM NATURAL GAS THESE APPROVED CONSTRUCITON PLANS EXPIRE AFTER 18 MONTHS FROM THE DATE SHOWN ABOVE OR UPON EXPIRATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN RO SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 2515 COLBY AVE DYKEMAN ARCHITECTS CG ENGINEERING GEOTEST SERVICES, INC CITY OF ARLINGTON CASCADE NATURAL GAS .. ,.., EVERETT, WA 98201 1716 WEST MARINE VIEW DRIVE 250 4TH AVES, SUITE 200 20527 67TH AVENUE NE 238 N OLYMPIC AVE 03/26/21 425-750-7926 EVERETT, WA 98201 EDMONDS, WA 98020 ARUNGTON, WA 98223 ARLINGTON, WA 98223 CONTACT: RYAN KILBY 425.259.3161 425. 778.8500 FAX 778.5536 360.733.7318 FAX: 733.7418 CONTACT: DOUG HOFIUS CONTACT: JARED UNDERBRINK CONTACT: ED GARCIA LEGAL DESCRIPTION •• THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, VICINITY MAP WETLAND ECOLOGIST SURVEYOR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER POWER TELEPHONE TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 ENlT OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN; NTS *=PROJECT SITE SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS, LLC TRI -COUNTY LAND SURVEYING CO. CG ENGINEERING SNOHOMISH PUD COMCAST @ 2907 HARBORVIEW DR., SUITED 4610 200TH ST SW SUITE A 250 4TH AVES, SUITE 200 210 E DIVISION ST EXCEPT ANY PORTION THEREOF tYlt-JG WITHING 172ND STREET N.E.(KINNER TH AVENUE N.E.(M BRI GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 EDMONDS, WA 98020 ARLINGTON, WA 98223 GREENWOOD ROAD) AND 67 CKENMIER­ 253.514.8952 FAX: 514.8954 425.776.2926 FAX: 776.2850 425.778.8500 FAX 778.5536 STILLGUAMIXH ROAD); AND CONTACT: JON PICKETT CONTACT: JACKIE SIEBERT CONTACT: JOE GALUSHA TH STREE EXCEPT ANY PORTION THEREOF LYING SOUTH OF 17 T N.E.; AND BENCHMARK DATUM PARCEL NUMBER EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ARLINGTON BY DEED LEGEND RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE l·JO. 9610250370, RECORDS OF CONCRETE MON IN CASE WITH BRASS DISK NAVO 88 310523-003-008-00 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHlNGTO:'J DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED ABBREVIATIONS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF 67TH AVE. PROPERTY LINE ABN ABANDONED MIN MINIMUM N.E. AND 172ND ST. N.E. = . . SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BLDG BUILDING MJ MECHANICAL JOINT __ I, __ _ • • SSJK-£ ---_ m11-1J1.11 CENTERLINE BOW BOTTOM OF WALL MON MONUMENT l;t' i'"\oC NW IE-129,911 I I I 12" P\ol: S IEmH0.00 I SHEET INDEX I I I I CLEARING LIMITS CENTERLINE NTS NOT TO SCALE I '$ \ ' ' ---:t\I ·,a.,;1, \\ ' \ ' I Cl.1 COVER SHE_ET_ I "-..._ \ 6HH I --------------ll Sil T FENCE --- X---- X ---- --- x--- x--- CB CATCH BASIN oc ON CENTER ='·t'if'I I 0 '"' '"' • I __ / 1,,,.,, I ',, /, II Cl.2 GENERA\:. NOTES -----100----- @---- CMP CORRUGATED METAL. PIPE 'Pc POINT OF CURVATURE w N N N .................. -.. I I I :::::71t · • � CONTOUR LINE t- r--.. en \.0 I i I :::::::;r= \ / • C2.1 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN POIN <(.-INN I I i' FENCE co CLEANOUT Pl T OF INTERSECTION y '/, ' I 00)�� I \ :; ', I . '. I C2.2 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DETAILS S ----ss--+--ss-- ---ss----ss- CONC CONCRETE PIV POST INDICATOR VALVE 000 I ' I·, : . I ANITARY SEWER LINE I I C3.l OVERALL. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN I 11---1--- MANHOLE CONST CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY LINE • r;I/" I C3.2 GRADIN(. & DRAINAGE (SOUTHWEST QUADRANT} I It----+-- - STORM DRAIN MAIN - � --SD--+ --SO-- ---SD----SD- CP CONCRETE PIPE PT POINT OF TANGENCY I C3.3 GRADINC.& DRAINAGE (SOUTHEAST QUADRANT) I 1/) II---!--- STORM DRAIN PIPE - ----- ----,:,,. ' CU YD CUBIC YARD PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE �" C_3.4_ _G_R_AD_INC:&DRAIN_ AGEDETAILS DESIGN• DLL II- -I ROOF DRAIN __ _ R- __ R- _ - R- ---R---,--.. -1 DDCVA DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK PVI POINT Q,t ''/-ERTICAL • C4.1 OVERALL. WATER PLAN 1 VALVE ASSEMBLY INTERSECTION DRAWN• ATD 17' :-���7:;-N lf:•IJM5 ...) I (SOU -- --- ,,__c_4.2__,_wA_TE__R_ THWEST QUADRANT) 1-F_oo_T_IN__G_D_R_A_IN _____ +_ _ _r ____r ___ r _-_-+ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_::-,�_-_ -_ --=='===--�-DI DUCTILE IRON PIPE PVMT PAVEMENT JPU =l 1 -----, CHECK: I C4.3 WATER (SOUTHEAST QUADRANT) PRESSURE LINE - --P - - - I' - P - ---P---P--- DIA DIAMETER PVf POINT OF VERTICAL TANG. 11---+--- JOB NO• 18386.40 I �: C4.4 WATER [',------------11 ET AILS CATCH BASIN (TYPE 1) 0 • DIP DUCTILE IRON PIPE R RADIUS DATE• 09/17/2020 � I-C4_ .s_ w_ A__T_E_e_,:i_E_T_AI_L _s ___________ l -cA_T_ C_H_BA_ s_1N__(TY__PE_ _2) _ __ --jf--------'��-�·-----+---- EA EACH REINF REINFORCEMENT ' I -+ 111 -· CS.1 OVERALi. SEWER PLAN CLEANOUT 0 EJ EXPANSION JOIMT RJ RESTRAINED JOINT O -�-20!1- I C5.2 SEWER {SOUTHWEST QUADRANT) CLEANOUT AND WYE 'i , ELEV ELEVATION RET RETAINING 3-009 - R00-131.M I I 11---+---------------1111----------l-------'-----+ ------�-----I ���::.11�" C5.3 SEWER {SOUTHEAST QUADRANT) GRADE BREAK EOP EDGE OF PAVEMENT RT RIGHT G,\lt v,,,V.�•1J2.7S I l-1" CO�C. 1E-1:U.1& I CS.4 SEWER DETAILS SURFACE SWALE --->-- >- >- EX EXISTING SD STORM DRAIN 12' 1l" �\;�_g-;----..-_ PVCS&( PV(: M IE-ll(l.n ll,•130.87 I C6.1 STREET & SITE IMPROVEMENT PL.AN DRAINAGE ARROW FDC -!---FIRE DEPT. --CONNE-C--TION --j SECT SECTION z C6.2 STREET & SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN WATER LINE -- --- W,'.- - -- WA--- ---wr,---w--- FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE <( C6.3 STREET 8t SITE IMPROVEMENT DETAILS WATER METER m FH FIRE HYDRANT SIM SIMILAR __J FIRE HYDRANT FL FLANGE SQ SQUARE a_ 1 SITE TOFOGRAPHIC & HORIZ CONTROL PLAN FDC • FT FEET/FOOT 55 SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SEWER w tl!IVEWAY j PIV O e GV GATE VAL.VE SSMH M ' ANHOLE -I- BLDG 4 -MIXED USE; 9 UNITS SS!.H-C _G_AT_E_V_A_LV_ E __ ____ ll:__ -_-:.�1 HP HIGH POINT STA STATION mi,,-1�.oo BLDG M -RESIDENTIAL; 18 UNITS 11 ____ -+ _____ z ____ -+ __ T L,J (/) lt' PVC N E•1J1.0S BLDG N - RESIDENTIAL; 18 UNITS TEE e-I-1 i-,.1--1 HT HEIGHT STD STANDARD 11" PVC $.kW IE•1J1.15 z ° ID INSIDE DIAME ® 90 BEND ,...J .J TER STL STEEL L,J THRUST BLOCKING .. IE INVERT ELEVATION TB THRUST BLOCK en I­ 0 <( en t,f) z -1CA--P --------+-----��w --� L LENGTH/LINE TOC TOP OF CURB :::c N -.-1---�.----.�-<l --- LINED CORRUGATED a_ Cl N <( CONCRETE PAVEMENT <1 e LCPE POLYET TOW TOP OF WALL. I HYLENE PIPE z OJ I ASPHALT PAVEMENT LF --+----------, LINEAL FOOT TOP TOP ELEVATION ::.::: N m 1- _,''' LP LOW POINT TYP TYPICAL 0:: " w ,_c_Ru_ _s H_ E_ D_ _SU_R_ FA__C_IN_G ___ -+�-'-'----"-C...C..__"--=-'--'--'-+<�·-c...· ·.. cc···c...· ·�= · _c..._..__C---_::__,_,_::;__;:.:__: <( .... <( w ROCKERY LT LEFT vc VERTICAL CURVE a_ � SPOT ELEVATION _.r200 _.r200 MAX MAXIMUM W/ WITH I S$MH-tl ---T---T---T- ---T---T--- W _J Rt.l-tJ�c4-7 12• �VC N tt-lJl.78 TELEPHONE UNE MECH MECHANICAL WM ATER METER <( z (/) 11" PVC Sf. 1EwU1.&8 " POWER LINE ---E---E- --f:- ___ , ___ , ___ _ MH MANHOLE z > L,J 0 SSMI•-� RM-U!.25 PP GAS LINE ---G---G---·-G--·· ---G---G---- I­ 0::: z <( 11" PVC NW IE-IJ:!,t,� C:., W FVC E E-t3215 SIGN _[]_ L,J z w w-n.1 1- :::c > iu�t38.1aIE-1J5.ll<I z I- _J 0 L,J " 0:: u tO <( u I CAUTION I I SHEET• I CALL BEFORE YOU DIGI I BURIED UTILITIES EXIST IN THE AREA AND UTILITY [ Received ·'1 INFORMATION SHOWN MAY NOT BE COMPLETE. CONTACT THE ONE-CALL UTILITY LOCATE SERVICE A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION A.:� 05 2021 C1.1 '· G)1-,rc,�A!T1y.. =L�. :..:N _______________________________ -.""-=·--=-.---� 1-800-424-5555 J 'RMJ:242-1 ,::EE""i,P7'; ;"ii6.,; 100 PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING AGENDA Community and Economic Development City of Arlington • 18204 59th Avenue NE • Arlington, WA 98223 • Phone (360) 403 3551 Project Name: CENTENNIAL PARK II Project No.: PWD#2427 Date: June 15, 2021 Contractor: EXXELL PACIFIC Superintendent: MATT TILTON Ph. No.: 360-734-2972 The purpose of this meeting is to provide the most common inspections and noteworthy information. This meeting is not intended to be all-encompassing. It is the responsibility of the Owner, Developer and Contractor to adhere to the approved plans, verify compliance with the City of Arlington Municipal Code, Public Works Design and Construction Standards, International Code Council (ICC), applicable local, state and federal requirements or any order, proclamation, guidance or decision of the Governor. In addition, construction sites shall adhere to current COVID-19 Jobsite Safety Requirements as per local, state and federal regulations. INSPECTIONS – NO INSPECTIONS WILL OCCUR ON JULY 5TH • INSPECTIONS (360-403-3417) MUST BE CALLED IN BEFORE 3:30 PM TO BE ON THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY INSPECTION SCHEDULE • Inspections are Monday-Friday with exception of Local, State or Federal Holidays. Building, Storm and Civil Inspections - 8 am to 4:30 pm; Water or Sewer inspections - 8:00 am to 3:30 pm • To cancel or modify an inspection - Building, Storm or Civil call 360-403-3433; Water or Sewer call 360-403-3526 • It is the responsibility of the Owner, Developer and Contractor to call and arrange for appropriate inspections. Onsite tailgate meetings are advised with each individual inspector prior to installation of their related facilities with those persons who are actually performing the work. • Failure to call for inspection may result in work being left exposed and/or removed and reconstructed • Re-inspections may be charged at $127.00 per hour, ½ hour minimum for failure to call for inspection. Submittal Documents   Contractor contacts and 24 hr. emergency numbers:  Copies of other agency permits or proof that the MATT TILTON application is in progress:  Proof of insurance listing the City of Arlington as additional  One week prior to the pre-construction insured: meeting. Submittals for all materials and  subcontractor approvals: DISCUSS AT PRE-CON Performance Bond must be on file: #023217387 AS NECESSARY   City of Arlington Business License: # 1653 Contractor’s License: EXXELPI073KN Exp: 01/02/2023 Exp: 6/30/2021  Testing Company Name and Contact Information: CESCL Name: MATT TILTON  CESCL#: ECO-3-8301915 Exp.: 8/30/2022  Drafts of easements and dedications must be in for review: ~Need separate legal and exhibit map for City Council Approval – REQUIRED WITH AS-BUILT SUBMITTAL  Contact State Historical Preservation Officer and Stillaguamish Tribe if required per Land Use Permit Dept. of Archaeology Historic Preservation Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians - THPO@stillaguamish.com 360-586-3065 Kerry Lyste Ph.: 360-572-3072; klyste@stillaguamish,.com Stillaguamish Tribe requesting archaeological monitor for any ground disturbance within the Sam Barr Ph.: 360 -622-7055; sbarr@stillaguamish.com reduced buffer area g notification of ground disturbance. Do not issue the civil/grading permit until the conditions have been added to the permit.  City of Arlington Design and Construction Standards and Specifications. (Available online)  Construction Work Hours – Monday – Saturday 7 am to 7pm. No Sundays City recognized or Federal Holidays UPCOMING HOLIDAYS – SEE FULL LIST OF 2021 FEDERAL HOLIDAYS  Binders and approved plans shall be kept onsite  As-built plans will be required – submit contractor redlined plans with as-built submittal 1. Meeting Attendees: MISCELLANEOUS: 2. Bulk Hydrant Use – 360-403-3526 3. Call for Locates 4. Planting schedule and methods 5. Onsite inspection prior to and during planting 6. Inspect final grade for lawn installation (Hydro-seed/sod) 7. Verify root barrier installation 8. Planting methods & before planting mulch installation 9. Staking & top mulch installation GENERAL CIVIL AND STORM DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS: 10. Keep road clean and overall site. 11. Dust control required. 12. Maintain construction entrance – use railroad ballast – no spawls. 13. Silt fence as needed – contact for tailgate discussion. 14. All grouting shall be inspected inside and out. 15. Sand collars required unless otherwise specified. 16. All risers to be wet set and mudded inside and out. 17. All infiltration areas to be inspected before cover. 18. Provide protection for all infiltrating materials / amended soils, railroad ballast, drain rock 19. ECO Pans required for concrete clean up or approved wash down area with water tight containment. 20. CDF is required in right of way per R-140, up to the bottom of asphalt; no compaction required. Only for trenching within the roadway prism. 21. A Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to any work within the public Right of Way. 22. Landscaping – root barriers are required per Standard Detail R-270. 23. CALL INSPECTION LINES AND NOT INDIVIDUAL CELL PHONES!! 24. Right of Way site plan and TCP is required for any right of way work. WSDOT TCP is acceptable or TCP per MUTCD. GENERAL UTILITY REQUIREMENTS: 25. Do not cover without inspection. 26. Maintain survey staking. 27. All pipe in ground shall be inspected before cover. 28. Take pictures. 29. Call if you have any questions. 30. No pipe received on site without the ends covered; covers will remain in place until installation. 31. Signed set of approved construction drawings will be on site. 32. General site maintenance - No garbage in the ditch; no fittings/pipe in the mud; fitting assembly in a clean area. 33. Maintain horizontal and vertical clearance with other utilities. 34. Maximum amount of open trench shall not exceed 100 feet. 35. Dropped and/or damaged pipe will be removed from the site and replaced. Page 2 of 5 REV6.2021 36. High ground water a potential and dewatering plan may be required. De-watering pumps will need to be available and in good working condition if needed. 37. A Red Line copy of the construction drawings will be submitted to the COA at the project completion with the as-built plans. 38. Tracer Tape is required over side sewer pipes, stubs and any undetectable pipe at 24 to 48 inches below finished grade extending the full length. GENERAL WATER REQUIREMENTS: 39. Irrigation requires a separate tap for irrigation or a variance can be requested; send to Ryan Morrison rmorrison@arlingtonwa.gov. 40. CDF not required but compaction shall be met. 41. Inspectors shall be contacted and pictures will be taken. 42. All service lines shall be 2 inches and reduced at meter. 43. No 2 inches setters will be installed without restraint rods/spacer (Spud) in place. No wood spacers. 44. Pipe handling - Anticipate low water flows for flushing, keep the pipe/fittings clean. Water tight plug shall be used. 45. Once fittings arrive on site they need to be verified that they conform to approved submittals/COA STD. 46. Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly (RPBA) is required, preferably inside the building. The RPBA must be in line where the water enters the building. Placement of the RPBA is a minimum of 1 foot and a maximum of 5 feet from ground level. 47. Mega Lugs and Field Locks are required. 48. All valves to be in the closed position to prevent debris/water from entering pipe. 49. Heavy plastic (4 mil. min.) on all fittings prior the thrust blocking. 50. Pre-block and post-block inspections are required. An ecology block may be used with crushed rock backfill compacted to 95%, as needed. • Ecology ½ block - 2’x2’x3’ (1900 lbs.); or • Ecology full block – 2’x2’x6’ (3850 lbs.); or • Per standard detail W-160 thru W-175. 51. All Services will be flushed prior to testing or connecting to the check valve to prevent the check valve from damage. 52. What type of chlorination will you use? Disposal of the Super Chlorinated water? 53. Tie-in connections shall be less than 18 feet and swabbed with a chlorinated water solution of appropriate strength. 54. Water meter will not be set until connection fees have been paid. Contact the Permit Center for or apply online. 360-403-3551 or www.arlingtonwa.gov/254/Construction-Utility-Applications 55. Limited hydrant meters, PUD may supply. GENERAL SANITARY SEWER REQUIREMENTS 56. Inspectors will take pictures. 57. Side sewer pipe and stubs shall be 6 inches. 58. Bedding shall be 3/8 inch clean washed pea gravel or imported clean sand, 6 inches below pipe and 12 inches above pipe. 59. Cleanouts shall be placed 5 feet from the building where each sewer stub exits the building. Cleanouts are required every 100 feet, must be at grade with ring, cover and internal plug, not a cap. If a clean out is not located in a solid surface, it will require a concrete pad. 60. All grouting shall be inspected inside and out. 61. All risers to be wet set and mudded inside and out. Do not use Jet set. Page 3 of 5 REV6.2021 62. Sanitary Sewer Pipe shall be cleaned and tested after backfilling by either exfiltration or low pressure air method. 63. Sewer main will be CCTV and inspector shall be onsite. 64. Clean outs will be a “Y” at 45°. 65. Monitoring manhole (MMH) is required for each commercial use within the city. If multi-tenant, each unit needs to connect separately to a MMH. Maximum of three (3) units may connect to one (1) MMH. Detail SS-130. BUILDING REQUIREMENTS - Building Inspection will be performed by SAFEBUILT 66. Special Inspections 67. Wall/rockeries separate building permit 68. Field Revisions to Issued Permit – Level 1: Minor changes that Inspectors may add to the approved building permit file. The inspector may also determine that a level 2 requirement is necessary based on the extent and complexity of the changes proposed. “Minor Changes” would include small scale changes, such as: • Updates to floor plan with no increases in footprint, change of uses, or heights. • Minor structural changes from the engineer and/or designer of record; such as: o basic beam changes, o changes of covered porches, patios, o over framed areas from trusses to stick framed roofs w/50 psf. or less roof snow loads without roof pitch changes, o window changes without egress change, o minor footing/foundation adjustments). • All changes/modifications should be noted/documented on the permit file and as necessary within the permitting system. 69. Revisions to Issued Permit – Level 2 New applications may be required for minor revisions where staff review is necessary for proposed revisions. Only 1 revision is allowed to any issued building permit. • Types of potential changes may include but are not limited to: o Reallocation of floor area use if it would include and/or cause an increase in bedroom count(s). o Site plan changes in orientation or location on a site without any structural changes. o Roof pitch changes. o Structural changes and alterations that would then require some type of building plan review. o Slight increases and/or adjustments to previously permitted details and/or features which would increase the area and/or footprint square footage, including, but not limited to:  decks,  covered porches/decks,  existing room(s)/habitable space,  garage • Increases shall not exceed 10% of the existing detail/floor area up to a maximum total of 250 sq. ft. • Increases and/or adjustments shall not create a nonconforming structure (e.g. setbacks, floodplain, critical area, shoreline, ADU limitations, or would create other type of nonconforming use). Page 4 of 5 REV6.2021 70. Revisions to Issued Permit – Level 3 Requirements for new Permit application and full review of Substantial Changes: Changes in the scope and scale of the structure and/or structural design that would necessitate a new permit. • “Substantial Changes” would include changes, such as: o Changing from wood to reinforced concrete or other change in the type of construction. o Changes in occupancy that require extensive changes to the construction and life safety design of the structure. o Altered projects resulting in a totally new configuration/layout. o A completely new design, new elements, and/or features not part of the original prior approved building permit. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 71. Permit numbers shall be added to all required reports and emailed to the following: • Nova Heaton – nheaton@arlingtonwa.gov 360-403-3437 • Kevin Olander – kolander@arlingtonwa.gov 360-403-3433 • Brian Grieve- bgrieve@arlingtonwa.gov 360-403-3438 / 360-913-1396 (cell) • Permit Center – ced@arlingtonwa.gov 360-403-3551 72. Utility General Contact Information: 360-403-3526 • Water Department Contact: o Gus Tararan – gtararan@arlingotnwa.gov 425-754-7438 o Inspections – 360-403-3526 • Wastewater Department Contact: o Joe Wilson – jwilson@arlingotnwa.gov 425-754-7442 o Inspections – 360-403-3508 73. Plan Revisions shall be submitted via hard copy to CED Department for review. • Two (2) copies of revised plans shall be required along with an electronic copy Page 5 of 5 REV6.2021 City of Arlington Community & Economic Development May 26, 2021 Centennial Park SJ, LLC 2517 Colby Avenue Everett, WA 98201 RE: Pre-Construction Requirements Project Name: Centennial Park, Phase II Project Address: 17327 67th Avenue NE, Arlington, WA 98223 Project No.: PWD-2427 Dear Jari, In order for work to commence at the Centennial Park, Phase II project site, the following items need to be submitted to the City of Arlington. 1. A performance bond on city approved form will need to be on file with the City of Arlington. This bond is to insure completion of the following and shall be indicated on the security: All public infrastructure relating to the water systems, right of way improvements and private landscaping. Performance Bond Estimated Cost of Construction is $138,835.00 x 150% = $208,252.50 2. Material submittals: The Owner/Applicant and Contractor are aware that material submittals were approved with permit PWD#1860, Centennial Park, Phase I. All material specifications and details are available on the City of Arlington’s website at http://www.arlingtonwa.gov/254/Construction-Utility-Applications. The City of Arlington will be held harmless for installation of unapproved materials and the reinstallation of approved materials. Once the items above have been received and approved, a pre-construction meeting will be scheduled. Project closeout information The performance bond shall be released when inspection and approval of all work has been completed, as-built plans, 20 foot water system easement, and bills of sale for the water system has 18204 59th Avenue NE, #B - Arlington, WA, 98223 - 360-403-3551 – www.arlingtonwa.gov been approved and a two-year, 20% maintenance bond is on file with the City of Arlington. The maintenance bond consists of following and shall be indicated on the security: All public infrastructure relating to the water systems, right of way improvements and private landscaping. Maintenance Bond Estimated Cost of Construction $128,412.50 x 20% = $25,682.50 Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 360.403.3527 or lpeterson@arlingtonwa.gov. Sincerely, Launa Peterson Permit Technician II Community & Economic Development CENTENNIAL PARK PHASE II - HAUL ROUTE/TRAFFIC PLAN FOR CIVIL, CONCRETE, AND MAJOR DELIVERY OPERATIONS. trucks yellow hatch entering & indicates haul leaving route roadway road work ahead flagger SUBMITTAL SHEET Page 1 Your Logo Here Exxel Pacific, Inc. 323 Telegraph Road Bellingham 98226 360-734-2872 Job: Centennial Park Spec Section Num: N/A Submittal: 310000-01310000-04 Revision: Package No: Package Revision: Date Submitted: 11/20/199/18/19 Response Required: 11/23/199/20/19 Utilities - Water, Sewer, Storm - Piping & Submittal Title: Accessories. Submittal Detail: Contractor: Contractor’s Stamp Project:Centennial Park Exxel Pacific Reviewed By: Matt Tilton Date Submitted: 10/17/19 Submittal #: 310000-03 ✘ Reviewed Revise & Resubmit Make Corrections Noted Rejected This submittal/shop drawing has been reviewed by Exxel Pacific for general conformance with design concept only and does not relieve this subcontractor or supplier of the responsibility for conformance with the Contract Documents, all of which have priority over this submittal. Subcontractor/Supplier is responsible for all dimensions and fabrication to be confirmed at the jobsite. Design Team Architect/Engineer Stamp Dykeman Architects CG Engineering H.B. Jaeger, a division of Iconix Waterworks JOB NAME: Centennial Park ADDRESS: 172nd St SE & 67th Ave NE Arlington, Wa 98223 CONTRACTOR: Taylors Excavators SUPPLIER: HB Jaeger, a division of Iconix Waterworks Snohomish, Washington 98290 CONTACT: AARON OLSON 425-293-3336 Line No. No. Description Quantity 1 *** STORM *** 2 3 STORM MAIN 4 NOTE: STORM STRUCTURES BY OTHERS. 5 24" ADS ALREADY SHIPPED AND ON SITE 6 SPU351214 12 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 378 7 SF445120 12 SDR35 SANDED MH ADAPTER GASKETED 9 8 SFSW406120 12 SDR35 SW SHORT TURN 90 HXH 1 9 SV-FREIGHT-VENDOR APPROX. FREIGHT ON NON-STOCK PVC FITTING 1 10 AMCOF124525SET 20X24 C.I. VANED LCKNG F&G SM60 5 11 12 ROOF DRAIN NOTE: PER DTL 1, SHEET C3.6. QUOTING ROOF DRAIN ON 13 ALL BUILDINGS. QTY TBV. 14 SPU350614 6 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 5,292 15 SF445060 6 SDR35 SANDED MH ADAPTER GASKETED 33 16 SFSW406060 6 SDR35 SW SHORT TURN 90 HXH 240 17 SFSW417060 6 SDR35 SW 45 HXH 1 18 SFSW416060 6 SDR35 SW 22 1/2 HXH 1 19 SFSW401060 6X6 SDR35 SW TEE 21 20 SFSW475060 6 SDR35 SW WYE HXHXH 4 21 22 FOOTING DRAIN NOTE: PER DTL 1, SHEET C3.6. QUOTING FOOTING DRAIN 23 MATERIALS FOR EACH BUILDING. QTYS TBV. 24 SPPU350410 4 SDR35 D3034 SW PERF WHITE PVC PIPE 10' 4,960 25 HBJAMO4545-5X360 5' X 360' AMOCO 4545 NON WOVEN 1 26 NOTE: PRICE PER EACH. QTY TBV. 27 SFSW406040 4 SDR35 SW SHORT TURN 90 HXH 246 28 29 YARD DRAIN 30 NOTE: PER DTL 7, SHEET C3.6. 31 CPN121820 18 ADS AASHTO N-12 WATERTIGHT SOLID PIPE 20' 100 NOTE: QUOTING ADS N-12 PIPE AS ALTERNATIVE TO 32 CONCRETE FOR YARD DRAIN. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 33 AMCOF101800 18" C.I. GRATE FOR ADS PIPE 21 34 35 OWS BASIN (13) NOTE: PER COA DTL SD-120. STRUCTURES AND VENT 36 HOLE BY OTHERS. 37 SFSW401060 6X6 SDR35 SW TEE 13 38 SF449060 6 SDR35 PLUG 13 39 AMCOF124525SET 20X24 C.I. VANED LCKNG F&G SM60 13 40 41 INFILTRATION DRAIN 42 NOTE: PER DTL 8, SHEET C3.6. 43 SPU350814 8 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 28 44 SPU350614 6 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 1,050 45 SPPU3506 6 SDR35 D3034 SW PERF WHITE PVC PIPE 20' 4,540 46 HBJAMO4547 GEO 451-15'X360' NON WOVEN 140N 1 47 NOTE: PRICE PER EACH. QTY TBV. 48 SF445080 8 SDR35 SANDED MH ADAPTER GASKETED 1 49 SF445060 6 SDR35 SANDED MH ADAPTER GASKETED 20 50 SFSW429585 8X6 SDR35 SW CONCENTRIC REDUCER HXH 1 51 SFSW406060 6 SDR35 SW SHORT TURN 90 HXH 66 52 SFSW417060 6 SDR35 SW 45 HXH 9 53 SFSW420060 6" S/W CROSS 226-0066 (4) 5 54 SFSW401060 6X6 SDR35 SW TEE 95 55 SFSW475060 6 SDR35 SW WYE HXHXH 1 56 SFSW447060 6 SDR35 SW CAP 2 57 AMCOF124525SET 20X24 C.I. VANED LCKNG F&G SM60 1 58 59 6" INFILTRATION CLEANOUT (146) NOTE: PER COA DTL SS-080. QUOTING ONE CLEANOUT PER EACH 90 DEGREE BEND AND PIPE CONNECTION. QTY 60 TBV. 61 SFSW475060 6 SDR35 SW WYE HXHXH 146 62 SFSW419060 6 SDR35 SW 45 HXS 146 63 PLTT06 6 IPS CORP TWIST-TITE MECH TEST PLUG 146 64 AMCOF146251SET 11 X 8 LOCKING CLEANOUT R&C 146 65 NOTE: QTY TBV. 66 67 OVERFLOW PIPE 68 SPU351214 12 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 84 69 SF445120 12 SDR35 SANDED MH ADAPTER GASKETED 1 70 AMCOF124525SET 20X24 C.I. VANED LCKNG F&G SM60 1 71 72 WALL DRAIN NOTE: NO WALL DRAIN DETAIL AVAILABLE. QUOTING PER 73 DTL 1, SHEET C3.6. ALL MATERIALS TBV. 74 SPPU3506 6 SDR35 D3034 SW PERF WHITE PVC PIPE 20' 1,350 75 HBJAMO4545-5X360 5' X 360' AMOCO 4545 NON WOVEN 1 76 NOTE: PRICE PER ROLL. QTY TBV. 77 SFSW406060 6 SDR35 SW SHORT TURN 90 HXH 1 78 NOTE: PRICE PER EACH. QTY TBV. 79 SFSW417060 6 SDR35 SW 45 HXH 1 80 NOTE: PRICE PER EACH. QTY TBV. 81 SFSW416060 6 SDR35 SW 22 1/2 HXH 1 82 NOTE: PRICE PER EACH. QTY TBV. 83 84 *** SEWER *** 85 86 SEWER MAIN 87 NOTE: SEWER STRUCTURES BY OTHERS. 88 SPU350814 8 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 1,232 89 CTAPE06DETSW 6 DETECTABLE TAPE GREEN SEWER 2,000 90 AMCOF112910ASET MH30DT 24" LKG R&C MRKD SEWER 9 91 92 SEWER SIDE 93 SPU350814 8 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 728 94 SPU350614 6 SDR35 D3034 GSK PVC GREEN PIPE 14' 154 95 CTAPE06DETSW 6 DETECTABLE TAPE GREEN SEWER 1,000 96 HBJCBKNS6 6" KOR-N-SEAL BOOT (S106-12B) 1 97 NOTE: FOR CONNECTION TO EXISTING SSMH. 98 SF447080 8 SDR35 GSK CAP 14 99 SF475060 6X6 SDR35 GSK WYE 1 100 SF447060 6 SDR35 GSK CAP 2 101 102 8" SEWER CLEANOUT (12) 103 NOTE: PER COA DTL SS-080. 104 SF475080 8X8 SDR35 GSK WYE 12 105 SF419080 8 SDR35 45 BXS 12 106 PLTT08 8 IPS CORP TWIST-TITE MECH TEST PLUG 12 107 AMCOF146251SET 11 X 8 LOCKING CLEANOUT R&C 12 108 109 6" SEWER CLEANOUT 110 NOTE: PER COA DTL SS-080. 111 SF475060 6X6 SDR35 GSK WYE 1 112 SF419060 6 SDR35 45 BXS 1 113 PLTT06 6 IPS CORP TWIST-TITE MECH TEST PLUG 1 114 AMCOF146251SET 11 X 8 LOCKING CLEANOUT R&C 1 115 116 *** WATER *** 117 118 CONNECTION TO EXISTING WATER (2) 119 ZFTG0003519 12X12 HOT TAP SS 1 120 ZFTG0003520 12X6 HOT TAP SS 1 NOTE: HOT TAP COST INCLUDES TAPPING SLEEVE, GATE 121 VALVE, CONNECTING MATERIALS AND LABOR. 122 HBJVBBASE24 VALVE BOX 24" BASE ONLY 2 123 HBJVB94018TOP 940 18" VLV.BOX TOP ONLY W/ EARS 2 124 HBJVB940LID 940 VALVE BOX LID ONLY ("WATER") 2 125 126 WATER MAIN 127 DITJMD12052 12 MCWANE TYTON CL52 DI PIPE 1,602 128 HBJIFACCLOCKGSK12 12" FIELD LOCK GASKET 89 129 WWIMJ9012 12 MJ 90 ELL IMP 3 130 WWIMJ4512 12 MJ 45 ELL IMP 2 131 WWIMJT1212 12X12 MJ TEE IMP 3 132 WWIMJCP12 12 MJ SOLID CAP IMP 1 133 WWIMJFT1206 12X6 MJXFLG TEE IMP 18 134 RSSTARIDI120 12 STAR STARGRIP 3000P DI RESTRAINT KIT IMP 56 135 136 2" FIRELINE 137 VGVEJFL060FMNL 6 EJ FLOWMASTER FLGXFLG NRS AWWA C515 OL GV 14 138 HBJVBBASE24 VALVE BOX 24" BASE ONLY 14 139 HBJVB94018TOP 940 18" VLV.BOX TOP ONLY W/ EARS 14 140 HBJVB940LID 940 VALVE BOX LID ONLY ("WATER") 14 141 WWIFLTPT060020 6X2 DI TAPT FLANGE IMP 14 142 WWC8477QNL 2 FORD MIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 30 143 CBAY6133T20 2 AY CTS PE INSERT 44 144 HBJPEP2CTS100 2" X 100' CTS POLY PIPE 800 145 WCUW10THHNSOBLU #10 THHN COPPER WIRE SOLID BLUE 1,000 146 PLBR408020NL 2 BRASS 90 IMP NL 8 147 WWC1477QNL 2 FORD FIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 14 148 450020 2 SCH40 PLUG MIP 14 149 HBJIFFLPACK6S 6" FLG PACK W/SEAL-TITE RING 28 150 NOTE: SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 151 152 HYDRANT ASSEMBLY (6) 153 NOTE: PER COA DTL W-010. 154 VGVEJMF060FML 6 EJ FLOWMASTER MJXFLG NRS AWWA C515 OL GV 5 155 HBJVBBASE24 VALVE BOX 24" BASE ONLY 5 156 HBJVB94018TOP 940 18" VLV.BOX TOP ONLY W/ EARS 5 157 HBJVB940LID 940 VALVE BOX LID ONLY ("WATER") 5 158 DITJMD06052 6 MCWANE TYTON CL52 DI PIPE 126 159 HBJIFACCLOCKGSK6 6" FIELD LOCK GASKET 4 160 NBROD07120 3/4 X 10'0 ALL THREAD ROD PLATED 24 161 HBJIFACCEYEBOLT 3/4" X 3-1/2" MJ EYEBOLT W/NUT 24 162 NBWA007 3/4 PLATED WASHER 24 163 NBNUT007 3/4 PLATED HEX NUT 24 164 NBRC07 3/4 ROD COUPLING PLATED 14 165 HBJPB12X12X4 HYDRANT BLOCK 12"X12"X4" 6 166 HWWEJ5CD250MJ54YSA EJ WATERMASTER HYD 4'6 BRY 6 MJ SAFETY YELLOW 6 167 NOTE: BURY DEPTH TBV. COST VARIES. 168 HBJSTORZ412NSTX5 4-1/2" NST X 5" STORZ NZL-CAP 6 169 RSSTARIDI060 6 STAR STARGRIP 3000P DI RESTRAINT KIT IMP 12 170 HBJIFFLPACK6S 6" FLG PACK W/SEAL-TITE RING 5 171 NOTE: SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 172 173 2" WATER SERVICE (14) 174 NOTE: PER COA DTL W-050. 175 WWSDLFCD2021439CC7 12X2CC FORD FCD202 SDL 1262-1439 14 176 WWFB1000Q20NL 2 FORD CCXQJ CTS BALLCORP NL 14 177 CBAY6133T20 2 AY CTS PE INSERT 71 178 HBJPEP2CTS100 2" X 100' CTS POLY PIPE 900 179 WCUW10THHNSOBLU #10 THHN COPPER WIRE SOLID BLUE 1,000 180 WWC8477QNL 2 FORD MIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 44 181 WWVBH8712B1177NL 2 FORD VBH87-12B-11-77 COPPERSETTER NL 14 182 887170 2X17 SCH80 PVC NIPPLE TBE 14 183 SV-FREIGHT-VENDOR APPROX. FREIGHT ON NON-STOCK PVC FITTINGS 1 184 VBW17302520 CARSON HW 1730-18 BLACK BOX W/MSHL 14 185 HBJMIDST1730RLIDT 1730 DI RDR LID W/2" AMR (4"X4") 14 NOTE: QUOTING 2" AMR AS ALTERNATIVE TO 1-3/4" 186 AMR. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 187 PLBR408020NL 2 BRASS 90 IMP NL 8 188 WWC1477QNL 2 FORD FIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 14 189 450020 2 SCH40 PLUG MIP 14 190 191 1" WATER SERVICE 192 NOTE: PER COA DTL W-040. 193 WWSDLFCD2021439CC4 12X1CC FORD FCD202 SDL 1262-1439 1 194 WWFB1000Q10NL 1 FORD CCXQJ CTS BALLCORP NL 1 195 CBAY6133T10 1 AY CTS PE INSERT 6 196 HBJPEP1CTS100 1" X 100' CTS SIZE POLY PIPE 200 197 WCUW10THHNSOBLU #10 THHN COPPER WIRE SOLID BLUE 500 198 WWBA43444WQNL 1 FORD QJ CTS X MTR ANG BV NL 1 199 ZFTG0003521 1 FORD QJ CTS X MTR ANG CV NL 1 200 VBW13242520 CARSON HW 1324-18 BLACK BOX W/MSHL 1 201 HBJMIDST1324RLID4 1324 DI RDR LID W/2" AMR (4"X4") 1 NOTE: QUOTING 2" AMR AS ALTERNATIVE TO 1-3/4" 202 AMR. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 203 WWC4444QNL 1 FORD QJ CTS X QJ CTS CPLG NL 1 204 WWC1444QNL 1 FORD FIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 1 205 450010 1 SCH40 PLUG MIP 1 206 207 1" IRRIGATION SERVICE 208 NOTE: PER COA DTL W-040. 209 WWSDLFCD2021439CC4 12X1CC FORD FCD202 SDL 1262-1439 1 210 WWFB1000Q10NL 1 FORD CCXQJ CTS BALLCORP NL 1 211 CBAY6133T10 1 AY CTS PE INSERT 4 212 HBJPEP1CTS100 1" X 100' CTS SIZE POLY PIPE 100 213 WCUW10THHNSOBLU #10 THHN COPPER WIRE SOLID BLUE 500 214 WWBA43444WQNL 1 FORD QJ CTS X MTR ANG BV NL 1 215 ZFTG0003522 1 FORD QJ CTS X MTR ANG CV NL 1 216 VBW17302520 CARSON HW 1730-18 BLACK BOX W/MSHL 1 217 HBJMIDST1324RLID4 1324 DI RDR LID W/2" AMR (4"X4") 1 NOTE: QUOTING 2" AMR AS ALTERNATIVE TO 1-3/4" 218 AMR. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL. 219 WWC1444QNL 1 FORD FIP X QJ CTS CPLG NL 1 220 450010 1 SCH40 PLUG MIP 1 ***STORM*** Heritage Plasticsâ„¢ PVC Gasketed Sewer Pipe • ASTM D 3034 SDR 35 • Gasketed bells • 14 and 20-foot lay lengths • OD bevel on spigot • Green in color Average Approximate Weight Standard Crate Trade Part Length O.D. per 100’ Quantity Size Number (feet) (inches) (lbs) (feet) 3040014G 14 1,176 4 4.215 107 3040020G 20 1,680 3060014G 14 490 6 6.275 244 3060020G 20 700 3080014G 14 280 8 8.400 445 3080020G 20 400 10 30100014G 14 10.500 699 154 12 30120014G 14 12.500 1,003 154 15 30150014G 14 15.300 1,491 112 NOTE: Special orders are non-cancelable, non-returnable and non-refundable. heritageplastics.com 14 4" - 27" GASKETED SEWER FITTINGS Fittings are manufactured to ASTM D 3034 SDR 35, ASTM F 679 and ASTM F 1336 specifications. PART LB/ PART LB/ SIZE NUMBER 100 (J) (L) (L1) SIZE NUMBER 100 (J) (L) (L1) 8x4* 988-0084 926 6.18 6.30 10.00 FULL 24x8 115-0248 14000 23.87 24.62 23.00 8x6* 988-0086 997 6.18 6.32 10.00 & 27x4 115-0274 16600 24.25 24.00 20.50 10x4 713-0104 1420 7.50 9.75 11.00 REDUCING 27x6 115-0276 17600 25.25 25.50 22.50 10x6 713-0106 1660 9.00 11.63 13.00 DOUBLE WYE 27x8 115-0278 19500 27.25 27.00 26.50 12x4 713-0124 1940 7.50 12.25 11.00 GxGxGxG 12x6 713-0126 2230 9.00 12.63 13.00 (L) (S) (SD) 15x4 713-0154 3010 8.25 12.00 12.50 4 125-0004 88 .75 4.50 2.75 15x6 713-0156 3360 9.75 14.00 14.50 6 125-0006 199 1.00 3.75 3.75 18x4 713-0184 5370 9.37 13.75 14.75 8 125-0008 426 1.63 4.50 4.38 18x6 713-0186 5910 10.87 15.75 16.75 10 125-0010 725 1.75 5.25 5.00 21x4 713-0214 7970 9.00 15.50 14.00 12 125-0012 1114 2.00 6.25 5.00 PSM G 21x6 713-0216 8530 10.50 17.50 16.00 15 125-0015 2030 2.75 8.00 5.25 X 24x4 713-0244 11470 10.50 16.75 17.00 18 125-0018 3300 3.00 9.12 7.00 SCH40 H 24x6 713-0246 12130 12.00 18.75 19.00 21 125-0021 5400 3.25 10.25 8.50 T-Y 27x4 713-0274 16570 12.25 18.50 20.50 ADAPTER SxG 24 125-0024 8330 4.00 13.50 9.00 27x6 713-0276 17430 13.75 20.25 22.50 27 125-0027 11600 4.50 14.75 10.00 (J) (L) (L1) 6x4 115-0064 600 7.38 8.75 8.75 (L) (L1) 6x6 115-0066 935 9.88 10.13 13.50 4 116-0004 105 8.00 .75 8x4 115-0084 970 9.38 10.25 10.25 6 116-0006 225 8.00 1.00 8x6 115-0086 1285 10.38 11.75 12.25 8* 116-0008 375 7.85 .38 8x8 115-0088 1870 12.38 13.13 16.25 10 116-0010 595 8.00 1.25 10x4 115-0104 1425 10.75 11.75 11.00 12 116-0012 850 8.00 1.25 10x6 115-0106 1800 11.75 13.25 13.00 15 116-0015 1290 8.00 1.25 10x8 115-0108 2535 13.75 14.63 17.00 18 116-0018 1600 8.00 2.00 10x10 115-1010 3975 15.25 16.88 20.00 21 116-0021 2300 8.00 2.00 12x4 115-0124 2010 11.75 13.00 11.00 24 116-0024 3000 8.00 2.00 12x6 115-0126 2325 12.75 14.50 13.00 27 116-0027 4000 8.00 3.00 MANHOLE 12x8 115-0128 3135 14.75 15.88 17.00 ADAPTER 12x10 115-1210 4200 16.25 18.13 20.00 12x12 115-1212 5400 17.75 20.63 23.00 (C) (H) (D) 15x4 115-0154 3000 14.00 15.00 12.50 6x4 126-0064 500 7.00 5.88 3.25 15x6 115-0156 3500 15.00 16.50 14.50 6x6 126-0066 725 8.00 5.75 4.25 15x8 115-0158 4360 17.00 17.88 18.50 8x4 126-0084 875 8.50 7.00 4.13 15x10 115-1510 5675 18.50 20.13 21.50 8x6 126-0086 1115 9.50 7.00 5.13 15x12 115-1512 6875 20.00 22.63 24.50 8x8 126-0088 1600 11.00 7.75 6.63 15x15 115-1515 8775 22.50 25.00 29.50 10x4 126-0104 1310 9.50 8.00 4.50 18x4 115-0184 5400 16.70 17.50 14.75 10x6 126-0106 1800 10.50 8.25 5.50 18x6 115-0186 6000 17.70 19.00 16.75 10x8 126-0108 2535 11.50 8.38 6.50 18x8 115-0188 7200 19.70 20.37 20.75 10x10 126-1010 3975 12.50 8.75 7.50 FULL FULL 21x4 115-0214 7900 18.00 19.75 14.00 12x4 126-0124 2010 9.50 9.00 4.50 & & 21x6 115-0216 8700 19.00 21.25 16.00 12x6 126-0126 2325 10.50 9.75 5.50 REDUCING REDUCING 21x8 115-0218 10100 21.00 22.62 20.00 12x8 126-0128 3135 11.50 10.38 6.50 DOUBLE WYE CROSS 24x4 115-0244 11700 20.87 21.75 17.00 12x10 126-1210 4200 12.50 9.75 7.50 GxGxGxG GxGXGXG 24x6 115-0246 12400 21.87 23.25 19.00 12x12 126-1212 3905 13.50 10.75 8.50 *DENOTES MOLDED FITTING. ALL OTHERS ARE FABRICATED. 410 13 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 GPK PVC Sewer Fittings shall be manufactured in accordance with either ASTM D 3034, F1336 or F 679. The PVC material shall have a minimum cell classification of 12454, 13343 or 12364 as defined in ASTM D 1784. 2.0 The purpose of GPK in-line fittings is to convey municipal sanitary and industrial wastes, storm water runoff and many other related applications. They are designed to be used in gravity flow and low pressure applications not to exceed 10.8 psi. (74.5 kPa). 3.0 Injection Molded Fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 12” (300mm) diameter. Fabricated Fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 36” (973mm) diameter. A fabricated fitting is considered any fitting made from pipe or a combination of pipe and molded components. 4.0 Chemical Resistance GPK fittings resist attack from certain alcohols, alkalies, salt solutions, acids and other types of chemicals. Refer to chemical resistant chart for suitability. 5.0 Marking. GPK fittings shall be marked with applicable size, “PVC”, company name or logo, PSM and the ASTM specification number (D 3034, F 1336 or F679). The fittings and/or packaging shall include the manufacturer’s date and shIft code. 6.0 Testing. A test after installation of either low pressure air (Uni-B-6) or a water infiltration-exfiltration test is recommended. 7.0 Deflection Test. The maximum allowable pipe fitting deflection should be 7 ½% of base ID as shown in table X1.1 of D 3034, and X2.1 of F 679. 8.0 Backfilling and Tamping. Backfilling should follow closely after assembly of pipe and fittings. 8.1 Backfilling. with proper material is important to achieve desired density in haunching area which enables pipe, fitting and soil to work together to meet designed load requirements. This eliminates excess deflection and shear breaks due to heavy loads. Approved material shall be used properly, compacted continuously above and around the pipe and fittings as well as between fitting and trench wall. A cushion of approved material up to a minimum of 12” (305mm) over the fittings and between the trench walls shall be applied in accordance with the engineers’ specifications. 8.2 Tamping. This shall be done by hand tamping of the embedment material between the trench wall of the service line fitting and riser connection. Tamping can also be done by mechanical tampers or by using water to consolidate the embedment material. Extreme unstable ground conditions may require wider trenches to enable you to compact a larger area around the pipe and fittings to the density consistent of the original ground surface conditions. 9.0 Service Lines. Normally, service lines from the property line to the collection sewer should be a minimum depth of 3 feet (1 meter) at the property line and should be laid in straight alignment and uniform slope of not less than ¼” per foot (20.8mm/meter) for 4” (100mm) nominal pipe and 1/8” (10.4mm/meter) per foot for 6” (150mm) pipe. Where collection sewers are deeper than 7 feet (2 meters) a vertical standpipe or stack is permitted but not recommended, consult the project engineer for proper installation details. Deep sewer chimney and risers necessitate extreme care during backfilling. Where surface loading is 1 | P a g e 811 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS anticipated the final backfill must be compacted to a density compatible with those surface loads to be encountered. 9.1 Backfilling around pipe service laterals on slope. Extra attention should be given on slopes to prevent the newly backfilled trench from becoming a “French Drain”. Before backfilling completely there is a tendency for ground and surface water to follow the direction of the looser soil. This flow may wash out soil from under or around pipe and branch line fittings, reducing or eliminating the support needed. To avoid this problem the backfilling should be of greater compaction. Tamping should be done in 4” (100mm) layers and continued in this manner all the way up to the ground or surface line of the trench. Concrete collars or other concrete poured around the fitting to stabilize unwanted movement is recommended to prevent water from undercutting the underside of the pipe and fittings. Summary: Due to various ground conditions and different situations, installation techniques vary widely. We warranty our products to be free of manufacturer’s defects. We will not replace the products that are installed or used incorrectly. The design of the systems that our product is used in is a factor that cannot be overlooked. Intro: GPK manufactures PVC sewer fittings in accordance with either ASTM D 3034, F 1336 or F 679 to be used in gravity flow or low pressure applications. Injection molded fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 12” (300mm) diameter. Fabricated fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 36” (973mm) diameter. Material: Fabricated fittings are manufactured from PVC pipe and molded components meeting the requirements of either ASTM D 3034, F 1336 or F 679 for workmanship, extrusion quality, stiffness, impact resistance, dimensions and structural performance. Extruded pipe components are made from PVC material with a minimum cell classification of 12454, 13343 or 12364 as defined in ASTM D1784. Injection molded fittings are made from PVC material with a minimum cell classification of 12454 or 13343 as defined in ASTM D 1784. Extrusion Quality: Extruded components are tested in accordance with and meet the requirements of ASTM D 2152 for properly fused PVC. Impact Resistance: Extruded Components are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2444 using a 20 lb (9.07kg). Tup A and a Flat Plate Holder B. The strength shall equal or exceed the values shown below: 4” – 5” 150 Ft-Lbs 6” – 8” 210 Ft-Lbs 10” – 36” 220 Ft-Lbs (100mm – 125mm 203 J) (150mm – 200mm 284 J) (250mm – 973mm 299 J) Impact Resistance: Injection molded fittings are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2444 using a 20 lb (9.07kg). Tup A and a Flat Plate Holder B. The strength shall equal or exceed the values shown below: 4” 50 Ft-Lbs 6” – 8” 75 Ft-Lbs 10” – 12” 90 Ft-Lbs (100mm 68 J) (150mm – 200mm 102 J) (250mm – 300mm 122 J) Pipe Stiffness: Extruded Components are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2412. The stiffness equals or exceeds the requirements of ASTM D 3034 and F 679. 2 | P a g e 811 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS Pipe Flattening: Extruded components are flattened as described in ASTM D 3034 and F 679 until the distance between the plates is 40% of the outside diameter of the pipe. There shall be no splitting, cracking or breaking. Pressure/Pressure Deflection: Gasketed joints are tested in accordance with ASTM D 3212. Pressure: 10 minutes @ 10.8 psi (74.5 kPa) + 10 minutes deflected @ 10.8 psi (74.5 kPa). Vacuum: 10 minutes @ 22 in. Hg (74 kPa) + 10 minutes deflected @ 22 in. Hg (74kPa). Branch Bending: The chemically fused areas around the fabricated branches of tee, wye and tee-wye fittings are tested to ASTM F 1336 to verify their strength and integrity. Pipe Stop Support: Tee and tee-wye fittings are tested to requirements of ASTM F 1336 for pipe stop load support. No cracking or splitting shall occur and pipe spigot shall not protrude into waterway of the fitting. Joining Methods: Chemically Fused Solvent Weld Joints Solvent cement is handled and tested in accordance with ASTM D 2564 and D 2855. The Lap Shear Strength shall equal or exceed 900 psi (6205 kPa) @ 72 hours. Heat Fusion Welded Joints (Butt Fusion Welds) Elastomeric Seals (Gaskets) Must meet all requirements of ASTM F 477 and D 3212. Saddles: Injection Molded saddle tees and saddle wyes shall have skirts with a minimum of 80 square inches (516 square cm) surface area which can be bonded to pipe. Fabricated saddle tees and saddle wyes shall have skirts with a minimum of 160 square inches (1032 square cm) surface area which can be bonded to pipe. The worm drive saddle straps used to fasten the saddles are manufactured with corrosion resistant 300 series AISI stainless steel. GPK does not recommend gasket skirts where air tests are required. Epoxy Reinforced Welds. Threads: Threads shall be American National Standard Taper Pipe Threads (ANSI B1.20.1) which shall be gauged in accordance with ASTM Method D-2122. 3 | P a g e 811 ® SDR 35 PVC Sewer Pipe Solvent Weld Sewer Pipe (Perforated or Solid) Conforms to ASTM D 3034 & ASTM D 1784, cell class 12454 or 12364 Solid-wall pipe conforms to ASTM D 3034, “Standard Specification for PVC Sewer Pipe and Fittings”. Perforated SDR 35 sewer pipe meets the requirements of ASTM D 3034 prior to perforation. Proper hole positioning is assured by centering pipe printline at top. Product manufactured with one integral solvent-weld bell standard per length. Plain end may be available. All pipe is produced in 20-foot lengths. 10-foot lengths may be available. Minimum Approximate Standard Part Number Dimensions (inches) Wall Weight Crate Solid Perforated Size Length OD (Avg) ID (Approx) (inches) per 100’ Quantity 3040010 3040010F 4” 10’ 4.215 3.95 0.120 100 630 3040020 3040020F 4” 20’ 4.215 3.95 0.120 100 1,260 3060010 3060010F 6” 10’ 6.275 5.88 0.180 222 260 3060020 3060020F 6” 20’ 6.275 5.88 0.180 222 520 LOCATION OF PRINT LINE AND PERFORATIONS PRINT LINE 120° HOLE 120° Perforation Specifications: Two rows of ½” diameter holes with hole spacing of 5” center-to-center. Rows are 120° apart. 2220 Nugget Way - Eugene, OR 97403 - Phone (877) 811-7473 - Fax (541) 746-6111 I-805 (06/12) SSttyyllee 44554455 Propex 4545 is a polypropylene nonwoven needlepunched fabric. This engineered geotextile is stabilized to resist degradation due to ultraviolet exposure. It is resistant to commonly encountered soil chemicals, mildew and insects, and is non-biodegradable. Polypropylene is stable within a pH range of 2 to 13, making it one of the most stable polymers available for geotextiles today. We wish to advise that Propex 4545 meets the following minimum average roll values: Property Test Method Minimum Average Minimum Average Roll Value Roll Value (English) (Metric) Grab Tensile ASTM-D-4632 90 lbs 0.400 kN Grab Elongation ASTM-D-4632 50 % 50 % Mullen Burst ASTM-D-3786 185 psi 1275 kPa Puncture ASTM-D-4833 55 lbs 0.240 kN Trapezoidal Tear ASTM-D-4533 40 lbs 0.175 kN UV Resistance ASTM-D-4355 70 % at 500 hrs 70 % at 500 hrs AOS(1) ASTM-D-4751 70 sieve 0.212 mm Permittivity ASTM-D-4491 1.8 sec-1 1.8 sec-1 Flow Rate ASTM-D-4491 130 gal/min/ft2 5290 L/min/m2 (1). max. average roll value Propex Fabrics Inc. manufacturers the nonwoven fabric indicated above. The values listed are a result of testing conducted in on-site laboratories. DATE ISSUED: 03/04/05 Propex Fabrics Inc. 260 The Bluffs Austell, GA 30168 PH: 770-944-4569 PH: 800.445.7732 FX: 770.944.4584 (Quotes) FX: 770.944.4678 (Technical) www.geotextile.com Exclusion of Liability This publication should not be construed as engineering advice. While information contained in this publication is accurate to the best of our knowledge, Propex Fabrics Inc. does not warrant its accuracy or completeness. The only warranty made by Propex Fabrics for its products is set forth in our Certificate of Compliance that accompanies our shipment of the product, or such other written warranty as may be agreed by Propex Fabrics and individual customers. Propex Fabrics specifically disclaims all other warranties, express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, or arising from provision of samples, a course of dealing or usage of trade. ADS, Inc. Drainage Handbook Specifications ♦ 1-9 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ ® ADS N-12 WT IB PIPE (per AASHTO) SPECIFICATION Scope This specification describes 4- through 60-inch (100 to 1500 mm) ADS N-12 WT IB pipe (per AASHTO) for use in gravity-flow applications. Pipe Requirements N-12 WT IB pipe (per AASHTO) shall have a smooth interior and annular exterior corrugations. • 4- through 10-inch (100 to 250 mm) shall meet AASHTO M252, Type S. • 12- through 60-inch (300 to 1500 mm) shall meet AASHTO M294, Type S or ASTM F2306. • Manning’s “n” value for use in design shall be 0.012. Joint Performance Pipe shall be joined with the N-12 WT IB joint meeting the requirements of AASHTO M252, AASHTO M294, or ASTM F2306. 4- through 60-inch (100 to 1500 mm) shall be watertight according to the requirements of ASTM D3212. Gaskets shall meet the requirements of ASTM F477. Gaskets shall be installed by the pipe manufacturer and covered with a removable, protective wrap to ensure the gasket is free from debris. A joint lubricant available from the manufacturer shall be used on the gasket and bell during assembly. 12- through 60-inch (300 to 1500 mm) diameters shall have a reinforced bell with a polymer composite band. The bell tolerance device shall be installed by the manufacturer. Fittings Fittings shall conform to AASHTO M252, AASHTO M294, or ASTM F2306. Bell and spigot connections shall utilize a spun-on or welded bell and valley or saddle gasket meeting the watertight joint performance requirements of AASHTO M252, AASHTO M294 or ASTM F2306. Field Pipe and Joint Performance To assure watertightness, field performance verification may be accomplished by testing in accordance with ASTM F2487. Appropriate safety precautions must be used when field-testing any pipe material. Contact the manufacturer for recommended leakage rates. Material Properties Virgin material for pipe and fitting production shall be high-density polyethylene conforming with the minimum requirements of cell classification 424420C for 4- through 10-inch (100 to 250 mm) diameters, and 435400C for 12- through 60-inch (300 to 1500 mm) diameters, as defined and described in the latest version of ASTM D3350, except that carbon black content should not exceed 4%. The 12- through 60-inch (300 to 1500 mm) virgin pipe material shall comply with the notched constant ligament-stress (NCLS) test as specified in Sections 9.5 and 5.1 of AASHTO M294 and ASTM F2306 respectively. Installation Installation shall be in accordance with ASTM D2321 and ADS recommended installation guidelines, with the exception that minimum cover in trafficked areas for 4- through 48-inch (100 to 1200 mm) diameters shall be one foot. (0.3 m) and for 54- and 60-inch (1350 and 1500 mm) diameters, the minimum cover shall be 2 ft. (0.6 m) in single run applications. Backfill for minimum cover situations shall consist of Class 1, Class 2 (minimum 90% SPD) or Class 3 (minimum 90%) material. Maximum fill heights depend on embedment material and compaction level; please refer to Technical Note 2.01. Contact your local ADS representative or visit our website at www.ads-pipe.com for a copy of the latest installation guidelines. Pipe Dimensions Nominal Diameter, in (mm) Pipe I.D. 4 6 8 10 12 15 18 24 30 36 42 48 54* 60 in (mm) (100) (150) (200) (250) (300) (375) (450) (600) (750) (900) (1050) (1200) (1350) (1500) Pipe O.D.** 4.8 6.9 9.1 11.4 14.5 18 22 28 36 42 48 54 61 67 in (mm) (122) (175) (231) (290) (368) (457) (559) (711) (914) (1067) (1219) (1372) (1549) (1702) Perforations All diameters available with or without perforations *Check with sales representative for availability by region. **Pipe O.D. values are provided for reference purposes only, values stated for 12- through 60-inch are ± 1 inch. Contact a sales representative for exact values. © ADS, Inc., October 2009 ADS, Inc. Drainage Handbook Specifications ♦ 1-10 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ ® N-12 WT IB (per AASHTO) JOINT SYSTEM (Joint configuration & availability subject to change without notice. Product detail may differ slightly from actual product appearance.) © ADS, Inc., October 2009 NOTES: OLYMPIC FOUNDRY INC. 18" ADS YARD DRAIN GRATE MATL: Cast Iron ASTM A48, CL30 RATING: N/A PART NO. 10-1800 APPROX WT: 59 Lbs REV: A DATE: 6/23/2003 New border REV A DOCUMENT APPROVED DWN: CL DATE: 6/23/2003 TOLERANCE REV: DATE: XX +- .1 BY: DATE: XXX +- .06 CHKD: CL DATE: 6/23/2003 DWG #: 18 ADS YARD DRAIN SCALE: N/A SHEET: 1 OF 1 XXXX +- .030 < +- 2 DEG ***SEWER*** Heritage Plasticsâ„¢ PVC Gasketed Sewer Pipe • ASTM D 3034 SDR 35 • Gasketed bells • 14 and 20-foot lay lengths • OD bevel on spigot • Green in color Average Approximate Weight Standard Crate Trade Part Length O.D. per 100’ Quantity Size Number (feet) (inches) (lbs) (feet) 3040014G 14 1,176 4 4.215 107 3040020G 20 1,680 3060014G 14 490 6 6.275 244 3060020G 20 700 3080014G 14 280 8 8.400 445 3080020G 20 400 10 30100014G 14 10.500 699 154 12 30120014G 14 12.500 1,003 154 15 30150014G 14 15.300 1,491 112 NOTE: Special orders are non-cancelable, non-returnable and non-refundable. heritageplastics.com 14 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 GPK PVC Sewer Fittings shall be manufactured in accordance with either ASTM D 3034, F1336 or F 679. The PVC material shall have a minimum cell classification of 12454, 13343 or 12364 as defined in ASTM D 1784. 2.0 The purpose of GPK in-line fittings is to convey municipal sanitary and industrial wastes, storm water runoff and many other related applications. They are designed to be used in gravity flow and low pressure applications not to exceed 10.8 psi. (74.5 kPa). 3.0 Injection Molded Fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 12” (300mm) diameter. Fabricated Fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 36” (973mm) diameter. A fabricated fitting is considered any fitting made from pipe or a combination of pipe and molded components. 4.0 Chemical Resistance GPK fittings resist attack from certain alcohols, alkalies, salt solutions, acids and other types of chemicals. Refer to chemical resistant chart for suitability. 5.0 Marking. GPK fittings shall be marked with applicable size, “PVC”, company name or logo, PSM and the ASTM specification number (D 3034, F 1336 or F679). The fittings and/or packaging shall include the manufacturer’s date and shIft code. 6.0 Testing. A test after installation of either low pressure air (Uni-B-6) or a water infiltration-exfiltration test is recommended. 7.0 Deflection Test. The maximum allowable pipe fitting deflection should be 7 ½% of base ID as shown in table X1.1 of D 3034, and X2.1 of F 679. 8.0 Backfilling and Tamping. Backfilling should follow closely after assembly of pipe and fittings. 8.1 Backfilling. with proper material is important to achieve desired density in haunching area which enables pipe, fitting and soil to work together to meet designed load requirements. This eliminates excess deflection and shear breaks due to heavy loads. Approved material shall be used properly, compacted continuously above and around the pipe and fittings as well as between fitting and trench wall. A cushion of approved material up to a minimum of 12” (305mm) over the fittings and between the trench walls shall be applied in accordance with the engineers’ specifications. 8.2 Tamping. This shall be done by hand tamping of the embedment material between the trench wall of the service line fitting and riser connection. Tamping can also be done by mechanical tampers or by using water to consolidate the embedment material. Extreme unstable ground conditions may require wider trenches to enable you to compact a larger area around the pipe and fittings to the density consistent of the original ground surface conditions. 9.0 Service Lines. Normally, service lines from the property line to the collection sewer should be a minimum depth of 3 feet (1 meter) at the property line and should be laid in straight alignment and uniform slope of not less than ¼” per foot (20.8mm/meter) for 4” (100mm) nominal pipe and 1/8” (10.4mm/meter) per foot for 6” (150mm) pipe. Where collection sewers are deeper than 7 feet (2 meters) a vertical standpipe or stack is permitted but not recommended, consult the project engineer for proper installation details. Deep sewer chimney and risers necessitate extreme care during backfilling. Where surface loading is 1 | P a g e 811 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS anticipated the final backfill must be compacted to a density compatible with those surface loads to be encountered. 9.1 Backfilling around pipe service laterals on slope. Extra attention should be given on slopes to prevent the newly backfilled trench from becoming a “French Drain”. Before backfilling completely there is a tendency for ground and surface water to follow the direction of the looser soil. This flow may wash out soil from under or around pipe and branch line fittings, reducing or eliminating the support needed. To avoid this problem the backfilling should be of greater compaction. Tamping should be done in 4” (100mm) layers and continued in this manner all the way up to the ground or surface line of the trench. Concrete collars or other concrete poured around the fitting to stabilize unwanted movement is recommended to prevent water from undercutting the underside of the pipe and fittings. Summary: Due to various ground conditions and different situations, installation techniques vary widely. We warranty our products to be free of manufacturer’s defects. We will not replace the products that are installed or used incorrectly. The design of the systems that our product is used in is a factor that cannot be overlooked. Intro: GPK manufactures PVC sewer fittings in accordance with either ASTM D 3034, F 1336 or F 679 to be used in gravity flow or low pressure applications. Injection molded fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 12” (300mm) diameter. Fabricated fittings are produced in sizes 4” (100mm) through 36” (973mm) diameter. Material: Fabricated fittings are manufactured from PVC pipe and molded components meeting the requirements of either ASTM D 3034, F 1336 or F 679 for workmanship, extrusion quality, stiffness, impact resistance, dimensions and structural performance. Extruded pipe components are made from PVC material with a minimum cell classification of 12454, 13343 or 12364 as defined in ASTM D1784. Injection molded fittings are made from PVC material with a minimum cell classification of 12454 or 13343 as defined in ASTM D 1784. Extrusion Quality: Extruded components are tested in accordance with and meet the requirements of ASTM D 2152 for properly fused PVC. Impact Resistance: Extruded Components are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2444 using a 20 lb (9.07kg). Tup A and a Flat Plate Holder B. The strength shall equal or exceed the values shown below: 4” – 5” 150 Ft-Lbs 6” – 8” 210 Ft-Lbs 10” – 36” 220 Ft-Lbs (100mm – 125mm 203 J) (150mm – 200mm 284 J) (250mm – 973mm 299 J) Impact Resistance: Injection molded fittings are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2444 using a 20 lb (9.07kg). Tup A and a Flat Plate Holder B. The strength shall equal or exceed the values shown below: 4” 50 Ft-Lbs 6” – 8” 75 Ft-Lbs 10” – 12” 90 Ft-Lbs (100mm 68 J) (150mm – 200mm 102 J) (250mm – 300mm 122 J) Pipe Stiffness: Extruded Components are tested in accordance with ASTM D 2412. The stiffness equals or exceeds the requirements of ASTM D 3034 and F 679. 2 | P a g e 811 SDR35 D 3034 / PS46 F 679 FITTING SPECIFICATIONS Pipe Flattening: Extruded components are flattened as described in ASTM D 3034 and F 679 until the distance between the plates is 40% of the outside diameter of the pipe. There shall be no splitting, cracking or breaking. Pressure/Pressure Deflection: Gasketed joints are tested in accordance with ASTM D 3212. Pressure: 10 minutes @ 10.8 psi (74.5 kPa) + 10 minutes deflected @ 10.8 psi (74.5 kPa). Vacuum: 10 minutes @ 22 in. Hg (74 kPa) + 10 minutes deflected @ 22 in. Hg (74kPa). Branch Bending: The chemically fused areas around the fabricated branches of tee, wye and tee-wye fittings are tested to ASTM F 1336 to verify their strength and integrity. Pipe Stop Support: Tee and tee-wye fittings are tested to requirements of ASTM F 1336 for pipe stop load support. No cracking or splitting shall occur and pipe spigot shall not protrude into waterway of the fitting. Joining Methods: Chemically Fused Solvent Weld Joints Solvent cement is handled and tested in accordance with ASTM D 2564 and D 2855. The Lap Shear Strength shall equal or exceed 900 psi (6205 kPa) @ 72 hours. Heat Fusion Welded Joints (Butt Fusion Welds) Elastomeric Seals (Gaskets) Must meet all requirements of ASTM F 477 and D 3212. Saddles: Injection Molded saddle tees and saddle wyes shall have skirts with a minimum of 80 square inches (516 square cm) surface area which can be bonded to pipe. Fabricated saddle tees and saddle wyes shall have skirts with a minimum of 160 square inches (1032 square cm) surface area which can be bonded to pipe. The worm drive saddle straps used to fasten the saddles are manufactured with corrosion resistant 300 series AISI stainless steel. GPK does not recommend gasket skirts where air tests are required. Epoxy Reinforced Welds. Threads: Threads shall be American National Standard Taper Pipe Threads (ANSI B1.20.1) which shall be gauged in accordance with ASTM Method D-2122. 3 | P a g e 811 ***WATER*** BI: 60, 61, 62 MCWANE DUCTILE IRON PIPE Boltless restrained joint systems • Multiple design options available from 3”–36” • Fast and easy installation • 350 psi pressure rating • Independently tested mcwaneductile.com SURE STOP® GASKET FOR TYTON® JOINT JOINT DEFLECTION CHART Size In. Rating psi Deflection Degrees 3 350 5 4 350 5 6 350 5 8 350 5 10 350 5 PUSH-ON JOINT PIPE 12 350 5 Maximum Allowable Joint Deflection 14 350 4 Pipe Y-Maximum X Deflection Approximate Radius in ft. of 16 350 4 Size Joint Deflection in Inches Curve Produced by Succession 18 350 4 In. in Degrees 18 ft. Length of Joints 18 ft. Length 20 350 2.5 3 5° 19 205 24 350 2.5 4 5° 19 205 SURE STOP 350® GASKETS are SURE STOP 350® GASKETS 6 5° 19 205 available in sizes 3 in. – 24 in., and are NSF 61 approved, UL listed, 8 5° 19 205 with a rating of 350 psi they will and FM approved. 10 5° 19 205 meet or exceed the capabilities of 12 5° 19 205 ductile iron pipe, valves, and fittings. FM Rating: 4 in. – 6 in. = 250 psi 18 in. –24 in. = 200 psi 14 5° 19 205 16 5° 19 205 APPLICATION NOTES 18 5° 19 205 1. For ductile iron applications utilizing TYTON® pipe, vales, and fittings made to 20 5° 19 205 AWWA specifications. 24 5° 19 205 2. In cold weather assembly maintain the temperature of the gasket above 40° F. 30 5° 19 205 3. The socket of the joint should be clean and free of debris or significant corrosion. 36 4° 15 260 4. Gasket should be properly seated in the bell socket. 5. Keep the pipe and joint in alignment during assembly. If installed out of alignment, MAXIMUM DEFLECTION FOR FULL LENGTH PIPE the gasket can be pushed out of position, creating the potential for leaks or failure. 6. If deflection is wanted in the joint, deflect before fully inserting the joint. 7. Some extension of the joint will occur when pressurized. To avoid this, the joint should be pulled out after assembly to “set” the stainless steel teeth in the inserted pipe. 8. Once assembled, the joint can be disassembled using steel shims. MECHANICAL JOINT PIPE Maximum Allowable Joint Deflection 9. When cut pipe is used, the following steps are required: Approximate Radius in a. Ensure that the spigot end is properly beveled Pipe Y-Maximum X Deflection ft. of Curve Produced by b. Mark the joint depth on the spigot so it is clear when the joint is fully inserted. Size Joint Deflection in Inches Succession of Joints In. in Degrees 18 ft. Length c. Ensure that the pipe meets the required dimensional tolerances. 18 ft. Length 10. Do not reuse SURE STOP 350® GASKETS, as they may have been damaged during 6 7°–7’ 27 145 any previous installation or during removal. 8 5°–21’ 20 195 11. Do not use SURE STOP 350® GASKETS to conduct electricity through the pipe 10 5°–21’ 20 195 joint, as they could be damaged and fail. 12 5°–21’ 20 195 ® 14 3°–35’ 13.5 285 12. Do not use SURE STOP 350 GASKETS in above ground applications. 16 3°–35’ 13.5 285 13. Do not use SURE STOP 350® GASKETS with thick coating on the pipe exterior. 18 3°–0’ 11 340 14. If SURE STOP 350® GASKETS are used in straight casings, you must pull the pipe 20 3°–0’ 11 340 through the casing. Do not push the pipe. 24 2°–23’ 9 450 TABLE 1: SUITABLE PIPE DIAMETERS FOR FIELD CUTS AND RESTRAINED JOINT FIELD CUT PIPE FIELD FABRICATION When pipe is cut in the field, the cut end may be readily conditioned so that it can be used to Pipe Size Min. Pipe Max. Pipe Min. Pipe Max. Pipe In. Diameter In. Diameter In. Circumference In. Circumference In. make up the next joint. The outside of the cut end should be beveled about 1/4 –inch at an 3 3.9 4.02 12-1/4 12-5/8 angle of about 30 degrees (Figure 1). This can be 4 4.74 4.86 14-29/32 15-9/32 quite easily done with a coarse file or a portable 6 6.84 6.96 21-1/2 21-7/8 8 8.99 9.11 28-1/4 28-5/8 grinder. The operation removes any sharp, rough Figure 1 10 11.04 11.16 34-11/16 35-1/16 edges which otherwise might damage the gasket. 12 13.14 13.26 41-9/32 41-21/32 14 15.22 15.35 47-13/16 48-7/32 When ductile iron pipe 14 in. and larger is to be cut in the field, the material should 16 17.32 17.45 54-13/32 54-13/16 be ordered as “GAUGED FULL LENGTH”. Pipe that is “gauged full length” is specially 18 19.42 19.55 61 61-13/32 marked to avoid confusion. The ANSI/AWWA standard for ductile iron pipe requires 20 21.52 21.65 67-19/32 68 factory gauging of the spigot end. Accordingly, pipe selected for field cutting should 24 25.72 25.85 80-13/16 81-7/32 also be field gauged in the location of the cut and found to be within the tolerances 30 31.94 32.08 100-11/32 100-25/32 shown in Table 1. In the field, a mechanical joint gland can be used as a gauging device. 36 38.24 38.38 120-1/8 120-9/16 Above Table Based on ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51 Guidelines for Push-On Joints. THE BACKHOE METHOD OF ASSEMBLY A backhoe may be used to assemble pipe of intermediate and larger sizes. The plain end of the pipe should be carefully guided by hand into the bell of the mcwaneductile.com previously assembled pipe. The bucket of the backhoe may then be used to push the pipe until fully seated. A timber header should be used between the pipe and backhoe bucket to avoid damage to the pipe. TYTON® JOINT PIPE MECHANICAL JOINT PIPE Tyton® Joint Pipe Outside Pipe Size *Dimensions In. Thickness In. Diameter In. From To In. A B Pipe Gland** Outside 3 .25 .40 3.96 5.80 3.00 Pipe Thickness *Dimensions In. Bolts Bell Bolts Diameter 4 .25 .41 4.80 7.10 3.15 Size In. Weight Gasket 6 .25 .43 6.90 8.63 3.38 In. Lb. Weight Size Length 8 .25 .45 9.05 10.94 3.69 From To In. B J K1 K2 No. Lb. In. In. 10 .26 .47 11.10 13.32 3.75 3 .25 .40 3.96 2.50 6.19 7.62 7.69 4 5/8 3 11 7 12 .28 .49 13.20 15.06 3.75 14 .28 .51 15.30 17.80 5.00 4 .26 .41 4.80 2.50 7.50 9.06 9.12 4 3/4 3-1/2 16 10 16 .30 .52 17.40 19.98 5.00 6 .25 .43 6.90 2.50 9.50 11.06 11.12 6 3/4 3-1/2 18 16 18 .31 .53 19.50 22.00 5.00 8 .27 .45 9.05 2.50 11.75 13.31 13.37 6 3/4 4 24 25 20 .33 .54 21.60 24.12 5.25 10 .29 .47 11.10 2.50 14.00 15.62 15.62 8 3/4 4 31 30 24 .33 .56 25.80 28.43 5.50 30 .34 .63 32.00 35.40 6.55 12 .31 .49 13.20 2.50 16.25 17.88 17.88 8 3/4 4 37 40 36 .38 .73 38.30 41.84 7.00 14 .33 .51 15.30 3.50 18.75 20.25 20.25 10 3/4 4-1/2 61 45 *Nominal laying length is 18 ft. 16 .34 .52 17.40 3.50 21.00 22.50 22.50 12 3/4 4-1/2 74 55 18 .35 .53 19.50 3.50 23.25 24.75 24.75 12 3/4 4-1/2 85 65 20 .36 .54 21.60 3.50 25.50 27.00 27.00 14 3/4 4-1/2 98 85 24 .38 .56 25.80 3.50 30.00 31.50 31.50 16 3/4 5 123 105 * Nominal laying length is 18 ft. ** Weight shown for regular grey cast iron follower gland, corton bolts and rubber gasket. STANDARD DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS OF BALL AND SOCKET JOINT PIPE 3” THROUGH 36” PUSH-ON JOINT DUCTILE IRON PIPE Pipe Pressure Nominal Wt. of Tyton® Joint Size Class Thickness OD* Barrel Wt. Per Avg. Wt. In. Per Ft. Wt. of Lgth.† Per Ft.‡ In. psi In. Bell Lb. † Lb. Lb. Lb. 15° Max. T 3 350 0.25 3.96 8.90 7.00 185 9.20 4 350 0.25 4.80 10.90 9.00 225 11.30 A 6 350 0.25 6.90 16.00 11.00 300 16.60 B 8 350 0.25 9.05 21.10 17.00 395 22.00 10 350 0.26 11.10 27.10 24.00 510 28.40 Thickness A B Full Length Weight - Lb.** Safe 12 350 0.28 13.20 34.80 29.00 655 36.40 Pipe End 250 0.28 15.30 40.40 45.00 770 42.90 Size Under Water Class Pipe Retainer As Pull 14 300 0.30 15.30 43.30 45.00 825 45.80 In. T (A21.51) O.D. O.D. Shipped Full of Full of Lb. 350 0.31 15.30 44.70 45.00 850 47.20 Air Water 250 0.30 17.40 49.30 54.00 940 52.30 6 55 .40 6.90 13.88 545 240 465 50,000 16 300 0.32 17.40 52.50 54.00 1000 55.50 8 55 .42 9.05 16.63 770 240 655 70,000 350 0.34 17.40 55.80 54.00 1060 58.80 10 55 .44 11.10 19.13 1005 220 860 95,000 250 0.31 19.50 57.20 59.00 1090 60.50 12 55 .46 13.20 22.00 1270 155 1080 120,000 18 300 0.34 19.50 62.60 59.00 1185 65.90 14 56 .51 15.30 24.50 1655 160 1410 145,000 350 0.36 19.50 66.20 59.00 1250 69.50 16 56 .52 17.40 27.00 1990 45 1685 165,000 250 0.33 21.60 67.50 74.00 1290 71.60 56 .53 2375 -70 2015 20 300 0.36 21.60 73.50 74.00 1395 77.60 18 19.50 30.00 195,000 58* .59 2560 110 2170 350 0.38 21.60 77.50 74.00 1470 81.60 56 .54 2810 -200 2375 200 0.33 25.80 80.80 95.00 1550 86.10 20 21.60 32.75 210,000 59* .63 3110 100 2635 250 0.37 25.80 90.50 95.00 1725 95.80 24 56 .56 3700 -620 3110 300 0.40 25.80 97.70 95.00 1855 103.00 24 25.80 38.25 260,000 62* .74 4415 95 3715 350 0.43 25.80 104.90 95.00 1985 110.20 58 .71 5855 -900 4920 150 0.34 32.00 103.50 139.00 2000 111.20 30 32.00 46.25 335,000 61* .83 6435 -180 5360 200 0.38 32.00 115.50 139.00 2220 123.20 57 .78 8145 -1300 6880 30** 250 0.42 32.00 127.50 139.00 2435 135.20 36 38.30 54.25 400,000 59* .88 8725 -725 7330 300 0.45 32.00 136.50 139.00 2595 144.20 350 0.49 32.00 148.40 139.00 2810 156.10 * Thickness required to overcome buoyancy. 150 0.38 38.30 138.50 184.00 2675 148.70 ** Weights listed are for 18’– 0” laying lengths. Nominal full lengths vary by size. 200 0.42 38.30 152.90 184.00 2935 163.10 Pipe, Bell, Ball and Retainer are ductile iron. 36** 250 0.47 38.30 170.90 184.00 3260 181.10 Dimensions and weights are subject to manufacturing tolerances. 6 in. – 24 in. pressure rating: 350 psi 300 0.51 38.30 185.30 184.00 3520 195.50 30 in. – 36 in. pressure rating: 250 psi 350 0.56 38.30 203.20 184.00 3840 213.40 † Including bell; calculated weight of pipe rounded off to the nearest 5 lb. ‡ Including bell; average weight per foot, based on calculated weight of pipe before rounding. * Tolerances of OD of spigot end: 3 –12 in. = +0.06 in. & -0.06 in. ; 14–24 in. = +0.05 in. & -0.08 in. ; 30 – 36 in. = +0.08 in. & -0.06 in. ** Fastite® Joint TR FLEX® RESTRAINED JOINT PIPE THRUST-LOCKâ„¢ BOLTLESS RESTRAINED JOINT PIPE C B A C B A 4”–24” Thrust-Lockâ„¢ Boltless Restrained Joint *Pressure Deflection A B C Pipe Size In. Rating Inches Spigot psi Degrees Pipe O.D. Bell O.D. in 18ft Socket C 6 350 4 15 6.90 10.187 5.01 BA 30”–36” 8 350 4 15 9.05 13.187 5.57 10 350 4 15 11.10 15.187 5.88 C 12 350 4 15 13.20 17.250 6.13 BA A B C # of 14 350 4 15 15.30 20.625 7.63 *Pressure # of D.I. Max Pipe Rating Locking Rubber Deflection Pullout 16 350 4 15 17.40 22.375 7.88 Size In. PIPE Segments psi In. In. In. Segments Degrees 18 350 4 15 19.50 25.125 8.13 Retainers 20 350 4 15 21.60 27.250 8.38 4 350 4.80 7.25 4.84 2 1 5 0.03 24 350 4 15 25.80 31.562 8.63 6 350 6.90 9.52 5.27 2 1 5 0.04 30 250 2 7 32.00 39.06 10.53 8 350 9.05 11.93 5.82 2 1 5 0.04 *The THRUST-LOCKâ„¢ Restrained Joint has a working pressure rating equivalent to the working 10 350 11.10 14.37 6.03 2 1 5 0.05 pressure rating of the parent pipe with a maximum working pressure rating of 350 psi for 6 in. 12 350 13.20 16.68 6.30 4 2 5 0.06 through 24 in. and 250 psi for 30 in. 14 350 15.30 19.16 7.75 4 2 3-1/4 0.05 NOTE: These deflections are based on joints with nominal dimensions. 16 350 17.40 21.46 7.95 4 2 3-1/4 0.05 18 350 19.50 23.76 8.19 4 2 3 0.05 RATED WORKING PRESSURE AND MAXIMUM DEPTH OF COVER 20 350 21.60 26.04 8.40 4 2 2-1/2 0.05 Laying Conditions 24 350 25.80 30.61 8.86 8 4 2-1/4 0.05 Pipe *Pressure Nominal 30 250 32.00 36.88 10.28 8 4 1-3/4 0.05 Size Rating Thickness Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 36 250 38.30 43.85 10.87 8 4 1-1/2 0.05 In. psi In. Trench Trench Trench Trench Trench *The TR FLEX® Restrained Joint has a working pressure rating equivalent to the working Maximum depth of cover ‡–ft pressure rating of the parent pipe with a maximum working pressure rating of 350 psi for 4 in. 3 350 0.25 78 88 99 100§ 100§ through 24 in. and 250 psi for 30 in. through 36 in. 4 350 0.25 53 61 69 85 100§ NOTE: These deflections are based on joints with nominal dimensions. 6 350 0.25 26 31 37 47 65 8 350 0.25 16 20 25 34 50 SUPER-LOCK® RESTRAINED JOINT PIPE 10 350 0.26 11** 15 19 28 45 12 350 0.28 10** 15 19 28 44 250 0.28 †† 11** 15 23 36 TYTON® JOINT PIPE 14 300 0.30 †† 13 17 26 42 Sizes 6”–24” 350 0.31 †† 14 19 27 44 FASTITE® JOINT PIPE 250 0.30 †† 11** 15 24 34 30” Size 16 300 0.32 †† 13 17 26 39 350 0.34 †† 15 20 28 44 250 0.31 †† 10** 14 22 31 18 300 0.34 †† 13 17 26 36 350 0.36 †† 15 19 28 41 B 250 0.33 †† 10 14 22 30 A 6”–30” 20 300 0.36 †† 13 17 26 35 350 0.38 †† 15 19 28 38 200 0.33 †† 8** 12 17 25 Deflection A B 250 0.37 †† 11 15 20 29 *Pressure 24 Pipe Rating 300 0.40 †† 13 17 24 32 Size In. Inches Pipe Retainer psi Degrees 350 0.43 †† 15 19 28 37 in 18ft O.D. O.D. 150 0.34 †† -- 9 14 22 6 350 4 15 6.90 11.75 200 0.38 †† 8** 12 16 24 8 350 4 15 9.05 14.38 30 250 0.42 †† 11 15 19 27 10 350 4 15 11.10 16.75 300 0.45 †† 12 16 21 29 12 350 4 15 13.20 19.13 350 0.49 †† 15 19 25 33 14 350 3 11 15.30 21.75 150 0.38 †† -- 9 14 21 16 350 3 11 17.40 24.00 200 0.42 †† 8** 12 15 23 18 350 3 11 19.50 26.38 36 250 0.47 †† 10 14 18 25 20 350 3 11 21.60 28.63 300 0.51 †† 12 16 20 28 24 350 3 11 25.80 33.75 350 0.56 †† 15 19 24 32 30 250 3 11 32.00 40.13 ‡ An allowance for a single H-20 truck with 1.5 impact factor is included for all depths of cover. * In the 14 in. and larger sizes, pressure rating is limited to the rating of the pipe barrel § Calculated maximum depth of cover exceeds 100 ft. (30.5 m). ** Minimum allowable depth of cover is 3 ft. (0.9 m). thickness selected. †† For pipe 14 in. (350 mm) and larger, consideration should be given to the use of laying Dimensions subject to manufacturing tolerances. conditions other than Type 1. TYTON® AND FASTITE® PUSH-ON JOINTS TR FLEX® RESTRAINED JOINT ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS Step 1. Thoroughly clean out the bell with special attention to the gasket Step 1. (4”– 10”) Lay pipe such that one of the bell slots is accessible. recess. Remove any foreign material or excess paint. Clean the spigot (12”– 20”) Lay pipe such that both of the bell slots are accessible, in the horizontal or beveled plain end and remove any sharp edges with a standard file. position if possible. (24”– 36”) Lay pipe such that all four of the bell slots are accessible, in the diagonal Step 2. After making sure that the correct gasket is being used, insert it into position if possible. the recess in the bell with the small end of the gasket facing the bell face. Step 2. Clean the bell socket and insert gasket. Step 3. Apply lubricant to the inside surface of the gasket, making sure that Step 3. Clean the spigot end to the assembly stripes. the entire surface is coated. Apply a generous coating of lubricant to the beveled portion of the plain end. Step 4. Lubricate the exposed surface of the gasket and pipe spigot end back to the weld bead. Step 4. Guide the plain end into the bell and, while maintaining straight Step 5. Make a normal push-on joint assembly, completely homing the pipe until the first alignment, push the plain end into the bell socket. Once the joint assembly strip is in the bell socket. Keeping the joint in straight alignment during the is assembled, necessary deflection can be accomplished. When assembly process. assembly is complete, the bell face should be aligned between the Step 6. (4”– 10”) Insert the right-hand locking segment into a bell slot and slide the segment two white depth rings, for Tyton® Joints. Fastite® Joints have only 1 clockwise around the pipe. assembly stripe. (12”– 36”) Insert lower locking segment into a bell slot and slide the segment around the MECHANICAL JOINT pipe. ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS Step 7. (4”– 10”) Insert left-hand locking segment into the bell slot and slide the segment counter- Step 1. Clean the bell socket and spigot or plain end. Lubricate both the clockwise around the pipe. gasket and plain end by brushing an approved pipe lubricant. (12”– 36”) Insert upper locking segment into the same bell slot and rotate around the pipe. Step 2. Place the gland on the plain end with the lip extension toward the Step 8. (4”– 10”) Hold the segments apart and wedge the rubber retainer into the slot between plain end. Place the gasket on the plain end with the narrow edge the two locking segments. facing the plain end. (12”– 36”) Hold the upper segment in place and wedge the rubber retainer into the slot Step 3. Insert the plain end into the bell and press the gasket into the bell between the two locking segments. recess. Push the gland toward the socket and center it around the Step 9. (4”– 10”) None. pipe with the gland lip against the gasket. (12”– 20”) Repeat steps 6–8 for other slot. Make sure that all 4 locking segments and 2 Step 4. Insert and tighten the bolts. It is important to maintain the same rubber retainers are securely in place. distance between the gland and the bell face at all times. This is best (24”– 36”) Repeat steps 6–8 for other slot. Make sure that all 8 locking segments and 4 done by alternating side to side and top to bottom, while tightening the rubber retainers are securely in place. bolts. Step 10. Extend the joint to remove the slack in the locking segment cavity. Joint extension is Note: Achieving the recommended bolt torque, particularly with large necessary to attain the marked laying length on the pipe and to minimize growth or diameter pipe, may require repeating the process up to 5 times or extension of the line as it is pressurized. more. Recommended bolt torque ranges are as follows: Step 11. Set the joint deflection as required. Pipe Bolt Nut Across Wrench Torque Range THRUST-LOCKâ„¢ RESTRAINED JOINT Size In. Diameter In. Flats In. Length In. Foot Lbs. ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS 3 5/8 1-1/16 8 45 to 60 Step 1. Ring Installation. Put lock ring on the spigot end of the pipe. Pry the lock ring over the 4–24 3/4 1-1/14 10 75 to 90 weldment. Use the hammer to tap the cover. Lock ring installation is complete. Step 2. Clean the Bell and Spigot. Thoroughly clean out the bell with special attention to the NOMINAL THICKNESS FOR STANDARD gasket recess. Remove any foreign material or excess paint. Clean the spigot end and PRESSURE CLASSES OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE remove any sharp edges. Pressure Class* Step 3. Insert the gasket into the recess in the bell with the small end of the gasket facing the bell Outside face. Size Diameter 150 200 250 300 350 In. In. Normal Thickness — in. Step 4. Lubricate the Bell and Spigot. Apply lubricant to the inside surface of the gasket. Apply a generous coating of lubricant to the spigot end. 3 3.96 — — — — 0.25** 4 4.80 — — — — 0.25** Step 5. Insert Pipe. Guide the spigot end into the bell and, while maintaining straight alignment, 6 6.90 — — — — 0.25** push the pipe into the bell socket. 8 9.05 — — — — 0.25** Step 6. Insert Lock Ring. Push lock ring into the bell. 10 11.10 — — — — 0.26 12 13.20 — — — — 0.28 Step 7. Rotate the lock ring until the lugs align. Use a hammer to tap the ring if required. Install the 14 15.30 — — 0.28 0.30 0.31 anti-rotation wedges at 3 and 9 o’clock if the pipe is being used inside of a casing. Deflect 16 17.40 — — 0.30 0.32 0.34 the joint if desired. 18 19.5 — — 0.31 0.34 0.36 20 21.60 — — 0.33 0.36 0.38 SUPER-LOCK® 24 25.80 — 0.33 0.37 0.40 0.43 ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS 30 32.00 0.34 0.38 0.42 0.45 0.49 Step 1. Remove hook bolts securing retainer to plain end. Clean plain end of pipe. Clean out any 36 38.30 0.38 0.42 0.47 0.51 0.56 dirt behind retainer lugs. Lubricant should be applied to the beveled nose. * Pressure Classes are defined as NOTE: Per ANSI/AWWA C150/A21.50 Step 2. Assemble the joint in accordance with Clow Assembly Instructions (See Table A on page the rated water pressure of the the thicknesses above include the 13). Make certain that the bell is clean prior to gasket insertion. Be sure that the correct pipe in psi. The thicknesses shown 0.08 in. service allowance and the gasket is used. are adequate for the rated water casting tolerance listed below by size working pressure plus a surge ranges: Step 3. Guide plain end into Super-Lock® bell and provide reasonably straight alignment. “Make” allowance of 100 psi. Calculations joint by pushing the plain end into the bell. A jack or come-a-long may also be used to pull are based on a minimum yield the plain end into the bell. Position retainer so that the recesses line up with the lugs on strength of 42,000 and a 2.0 CASTING the bell. Slide retainer over bell and rotate until the lugs on the bell and the retainer line safety factor times the sum of the SIZE TOLERANCES up. working pressure and 100 psi surge (Inches) (Inches) allowance. 3–8 -0.05 Step 4. At drilled hole on retainer O.D., insert retainer lock in recess formed by lugs on bell and **Calculated thicknesses for these 10–12 -0.06 retainer. Insert roll pin in drilled hole and drive flush with retainer O.D. sizes and pressure ratings are 14–36 -0.07 Step 5. Take any necessary deflection after joint is completely assembled. less than those shown above. Presently, these are the lowest Caution: do not over deflect the joint beyond the maximum deflection column specified nominal thicknesses available in on page 2 or subject the joint to bending stress to obtain additional deflection. these sizes. DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS FOR SPECIAL CLASSES OF PUSH-ON DUCTILE IRON PIPE LAYING CONDITIONS Pipe Nominal Wt. of Tyton® Joint Thickness OD* Size Class Thickness In. Barrel Wt. of Wt. Per Avg. Wt. In. In. Per Ft. † Lb. Bell Lb. Lgth.†Lb. Per Ft.‡ Lb. 3 52 0.28 3.96 9.9 7 185 10.3 3 54 0.34 3.96 11.8 7 220 12.2 3 56 0.40 3.96 13.7 7 255 14.1 4 51 0.26 4.80 11.3 9 210 11.8 4 52 0.29 4.80 12.6 9 235 13.1 4 53 0.32 4.80 13.8 9 255 14.3 4 54 0.35 4.80 15 9 280 15.5 Type 1* Type 2 Type 3 4 56 0.41 4.80 17.3 9 320 17.8 Flat-bottom trench.† Loose backfill. Flat-bottom trench.† Backfill lightly Pipe bedded in 4 in. (100 mm) consolidated to centerline of pipe. minimum of loose soil.++ Backfill 6 50 0.25 6.90 16 11 300 16.6 lightly consolidated to top of pipe. 6 51 0.28 6.90 17.8 11 330 18.4 6 52 0.31 6.90 19.6 11 365 20.2 6 53 0.34 6.90 21.4 11 395 22.0 * For 14 in. (355-mm) and 6 54 0.37 6.90 23.2 11 430 23.8 larger pipe, consideration 6 55 0.40 6.90 25 11 460 25.6 should be given to the use 6 56 0.43 6.90 26.7 11 490 27.3 of laying conditions other 8 50 0.27 9.05 22.8 17 425 23.7 than Type 1. 8 51 0.30 9.05 25.2 17 470 26.1 8 52 0.33 9.05 27.7 17 515 28.6 † ”Flat-bottom” is defined as 8 53 0.36 9.05 30.1 17 560 31.0 undisturbed earth. 8 54 0.39 9.05 32.5 17 600 33.4 Type 4 Type 5 Pipe bedded in sand, gravel, or Pipe bedded in compacted ++ ”Loose soil” or “select 8 55 0.42 9.05 34.8 17 645 35.7 crushed stone to depth of 1/8 pipe granular material to centerline material” is defined as 8 56 0.45 9.05 37.2 17 685 38.1 diameter, 4 in. (100 mm) minimum. of pipe. Compacted granular native soil excavated from 10 50 0.29 11.10 30.1 24 565 31.4 Backfill compacted to top of or select material++ to top of the trench, free of rocks, 10 51 0.32 11.10 33.2 24 620 34.5 pipe. (Approximately 80 percent pipe. (Approximately 90 percent foreign materials, and 10 52 0.35 11.10 36.2 24 675 37.5 Standard Proctor, AASHTO T-99.) Standard Proctor, AASHTO T-99.) frozen earth. 10 53 0.38 11.10 39.2 24 730 40.5 10 54 0.41 11.10 42.1 24 780 43.4 Notes: 10 55 0.44 11.10 45.1 24 835 46.4 Consideration of the pipe-zone embedment 10 56 0.47 11.10 48 24 890 49.3 conditions included in this figure may be 12 50 0.31 13.20 38.4 29 720 40.0 American Association of State Highway and influenced by factors other than pipe strength. 12 51 0.34 13.20 42 29 785 43.6 For additional information on pipe bedding and Transportation Officials, 444 N. Capitol St. N.W., 12 52 0.37 13.20 45.6 29 850 47.2 backfill, see ANSI/AWWA C600. Suite 225, Washington, DC 20001. 12 53 0.40 13.20 49.2 29 915 50.8 12 54 0.43 13.20 52.8 29 980 54.4 12 55 0.46 13.20 56.3 29 1040 57.9 STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO DUCTILE IRON PIPE AND FITTINGS 12 56 0.49 13.20 59.9 29 1105 61.5 14 50 0.33 15.30 47.5 45 900 50.0 THICKNESS DESIGN OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE ANSI/AWWA C150/A21.50 14 51 0.36 15.30 51.7 45 975 54.2 DUCTILE IRON PIPE FOR WATER AND OTHER LIQUIDS ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51 14 52 0.39 15.30 55.9 45 1050 58.4 FEDERAL WWP421D, Grade C 14 53 0.42 15.30 60.1 45 1125 62.6 DUCTILE IRON PIPE FOR GRAVITY FLOW SERVICE ANSI/ASTM A746 14 54 0.45 15.30 64.2 45 1200 66.7 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS FOR WATER AND OTHER LIQUIDS 14 55 0.48 15.30 68.4 45 1275 70.9 3 in. through 36 in. ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 14 56 0.51 15.30 72.5 45 1350 75.0 16 50 0.34 17.40 55.8 54 1060 58.8 DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTINGS 16 51 0.37 17.40 60.6 54 1145 63.6 3 in. through 24 in. ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 16 52 0.40 17.40 65.4 54 1230 68.4 FLANGED FITTINGS ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 16 53 0.43 17.40 70.1 54 1315 73.1 ANSI B16.1 16 54 0.46 17.40 74.9 54 1400 77.9 DUCTILE IRON PIPE WITH THREADED FLANGES ANSI/AWWA C115/21.15 16 55 0.49 17.40 79.7 54 1490 82.7 16 56 0.52 17.40 84.4 54 1575 87.4 COATINGS AND LININGS 18 50 0.35 19.50 64.4 59 1220 67.7 Asphaltic ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51 18 51 0.38 19.50 69.8 59 1315 73.1 ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 18 52 0.41 19.50 75.2 59 1415 78.5 ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 18 53 0.44 19.50 80.6 59 1510 83.9 Cement Lining ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4 18 54 0.47 19.50 86 59 1605 89.3 18 55 0.50 19.50 91.3 59 1700 94.6 Various Epoxy Linings and Coatings MANUFACTURER’S STANDARD 18 56 0.53 19.50 96.7 59 1800 100.0 Exterior Polyethylene Encasement ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.5 20 50 0.36 21.60 73.5 74 1395 77.6 JOINTS – PIPE AND FITTINGS 20 51 0.39 21.60 79.5 74 1505 83.6 Push-On and Mechanical Rubber-Gasket Joints ANSI/AWWA C111/A21.11 20 52 0.42 21.60 85.5 74 1615 89.6 FEDERAL WWP421D 20 53 0.45 21.60 91.5 74 1720 95.6 Flanged ANSI/AWWA C115/A21.15 20 54 0.48 21.60 97.5 74 1830 101.6 ANSI B16.1 20 55 0.51 21.60 103.4 74 1935 107.5 20 56 0.54 21.60 109.3 74 2040 113.4 Grooved and Shouldered ANSI/AWWA C606 24 50 0.38 25.80 92.9 95 1765 98.2 PIPE THREADS ANSI B2.1 24 51 0.41 25.80 100.1 95 1895 105.4 INSTALLATION ANSI/AWWA C600 24 52 0.44 25.80 107.3 95 2025 112.6 24 53 0.47 25.80 114.4 95 2155 119.7 24 54 0.50 25.80 121.6 95 2385 126.9 24 55 0.53 25.80 128.8 95 2415 134.1 24 56 0.56 25.80 135.9 95 2540 141.2 30 50 0.39 32.00 118.5 139 2270 126.2 30 51 0.43 32.00 130.5 139 2490 138.2 30 52 0.47 32.00 142.5 139 2705 150.2 30 53 0.51 32.00 154.4 139 2920 162.1 30 54 0.55 32.00 166.3 139 3130 174.0 NEW JERSEY OHIO UTAH CANADA 30 55 0.59 32.00 178.2 139 3345 185.9 183 Sitgreaves St. 2266 S. 6th St. 1401 E 2000 S. 1757 Burlington St. E 30 56 0.63 32.00 190.0 139 3560 197.7 Phillipsburg, NJ 08865 Coshocton, OH 43812 Provo, UT 84603 Hamilton, ON L8N-3R5 36 50 0.43 38.30 156.5 184 3000 166.7 908-454-1161 740-622-6651 801-373-6910 905-547-3251 36 51 0.48 38.30 174.5 184 3325 184.7 mcwaneductile.com mcwaneductile.com mcwaneductile.com canadapipe.com 36 52 0.53 38.30 192.4 184 3645 202.6 36 53 0.58 38.30 210.3 184 3970 220.5 36 54 0.63 38.30 228.1 184 4290 238.3 36 55 0.68 38.30 245.9 184 4610 256.1 NSF 61 ISO 9001 DIPRA 36 56 0.73 38.30 263.7 184 4930 273.9 †Including bell; calculated weight of pipe rounded off to the nearest 5 lb. ‡Including bell; average weight per foot, based on calculated weight of pipe before rounding. *Tolerances of OD of spigot end; 3–12 in. ±0.06 in., 14–24 in. +0.05 in., -0.08 in., 30–36 in. +0.08 in., -0.06 in. Utility Pipe Fittings and Accessories Compact MJ Fittings ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 WATER MAIN A A A T A T A T A A A A A A T T A T A T A MJ x MJ 90º MJ x MJ 60º MJ x MJ 45º MJ x MJ 30º MJ x MJ 22 ½º MJ x MJ 11 ¼º MJ x MJ 5 ⅝º MJ x MJ BENDS BENDS (¼) BENDS (1/6) BENDS (â…›) BENDS (1/12) BENDS (1/16) BENDS (1/32) BENDS (1/64) NOM. WT WT WT WT WT WT WT T A A A A A A A SIZE (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) 2 0.30 3.25 14 - - 1.80 13 - - 1.00 9 1.00 8 - - 3 0.33 3.50 23 - - 1.50 21 - - 1.00 16 1.00 14 - - 4 0.34 4.00 27 - - 2.00 23 - - 1.50 18 1.25 16 1.25 16 6 0.36 5.00 39 - - 3.00 32 - - 2.00 32 1.50 30 1.50 27 8 0.38 6.50 57 - - 3.50 46 3.00 44 2.50 46 1.75 42 1.75 38 10 0.40 7.50 89 - - 4.50 70 - - 3.00 64 2.00 58 2.00 56 12 0.42 9.00 108 - - 5.50 86 - - 3.50 84 2.25 74 2.25 73 14 0.47 11.50 180 - - 5.00 145 - - 3.75 140 2.50 128 - - 16 0.50 12.50 264 - - 5.50 202 - - 3.75 178 2.50 148 2.50 150 18 0.54 14.00 335 - - 6.00 250 - - 4.50 255 3.00 205 - - 20 0.57 15.00 400 - - 7.00 305 - - 4.50 262 3.00 245 3.00 239 24 0.61 17.00 565 10.50 479 7.50 405 6.00 385 4.50 412 3.00 315 3.00 317 30 0.66 21.50 1005 13.50 843 11.50 798 9.75 692 6.75 665 4.75 568 4.75 568 36 0.74 24.50 1562 17.00 1350 11.50 1164 11.00 1080 7.75 960 5.00 840 5.00 825 42 0.82 29.25 2506 19.00 2150 14.00 1792 12.00 1465 9.00 1350 6.00 1319 6.00 1125 48 0.90 33.25 3045 21.00 2650 15.00 2390 13.25 2075 10.00 1886 6.50 1700 6.50 1600 B B B T B B B B A T A TT A A T A T A A T T MJ x PE 90º MJ x PE 60º MJ x PE 45º MJ x PE 30º MJ x PE 22 ½º MJ x PE 11 ¼º MJ x PE 5 5/8º MJ x PE BENDS BENDS (¼) BENDS (1/6) BENDS (â…›) BENDS (1/12) BENDS (1/16) BENDS (1/32) BENDS (1/64) NOM. WT WT WT WT WT WT WT T A B A B A B A B A B A B A B SIZE (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) (LBS.) 3 0.33 3.50 8.50 16 - - - 1.50 7.00 13 - - - 1.00 6.50 12 1.00 6.50 12 - - - 4 0.34 4.00 9.50 22 - - - 2.00 7.50 19 - - - 1.50 7.00 18 1.25 6.25 17 - - - 6 0.36 5.00 12.00 40 - - - 3.00 8.50 31 - - - 2.00 7.50 29 1.50 7.00 27 - - - 8 0.38 6.50 12.50 61 - - - 3.50 9.00 46 - - - 2.50 8.00 43 1.75 7.25 39 - - - 10 0.40 7.50 13.00 83 - - - 4.50 10.00 68 - - - 3.00 8.50 61 2.00 7.50 52 - - - 12 0.42 9.00 14.50 114 - - - 5.50 11.00 95 - - - 3.50 9.00 81 2.25 7.75 70 - - - 14 0.47 11.50 19.50 197 - - - 5.00 13.00 148 - - - 3.75 11.25 133 2.50 10.50 122 - - - 16 0.50 12.50 20.50 248 - - - 5.50 13.50 184 - - - 3.75 11.75 166 2.50 10.50 148 - - - 18 0.54 14.00 21.00 325 - - - 6.00 13.00 235 - - - 6.00 13.00 235 6.00 13.00 235 - - - 20 0.57 15.00 22.50 390 - - - 7.00 14.00 300 - - - 7.00 14.00 300 7.00 14.00 300 - - - 24 0.61 17.00 25.00 575 - - - 7.50 14.50 390 - - - 7.50 14.50 395 7.50 14.50 400 - - - 30 0.66 22.75 31.75 865 13.50 22.50 846 10.50 19.50 715 9.75 18.75 762 6.75 15.75 600 4.75 13.75 535 4.75 13.75 505 36 0.74 24.50 33.50 1355 - - - 12.00 21.00 1040 - - - 7.75 16.75 865 5.00 14.00 725 - - - 42 0.82 29.25 38.25 2055 - - - 14.00 23.00 1460 - - - 9.00 18.00 1200 6.00 15.00 1030 - - - 48 0.90 33.25 4225 2805 - - - 15.00 24.00 1905 - - - 10.00 19.00 1575 6.50 15.50 1290 - - - UCAT.15.01 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 4 Utility Pipe Fittings and Accessories Compact MJ Fittings ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 T1 J T H H MJ x FE TEES MJ x FE TEES (Con’t) NOM. WT NOM. WT T T1 H J T T1 H J SIZE (LBS.) SIZE (LBS.) 3 x 3 0.33 0.33 3.00 5.50 30 30 x 16 0.66 0.50 12.50 23.00 909 4 x 2 0.52 0.39 4.80 4.80 53 30 x 24 0.66 0.61 16.00 25.00 1290 4 x 3 0.34 0.33 3.50 6.50 34 30 x 30 0.66 0.66 20.00 25.00 1355 4 x 4 0.34 0.34 4.00 6.50 40 36 x 6 0.74 0.36 8.00 26.00 980 6 x 3 0.36 0.33 3.50 8.00 50 36 x 14 0.74 0.47 11.10 26.00 1160 6 x 4 0.36 0.34 4.00 8.00 65 36 x 16 0.74 0.50 12.50 26.00 1241 6 x 6 0.36 0.36 5.00 8.00 62 36 x 20 0.74 0.57 15.00 26.00 1381 8 x 4 0.38 0.34 4.00 9.00 65 42 x 6 0.82 0.36 9.00 30.00 1384 8 x 6 0.38 0.36 5.00 9.00 78 42 x 24 0.82 0.61 20.00 30.00 2130 8 x 8 0.38 0.38 6.50 9.00 88 42 x 42 0.82 0.82 30.00 31.00 3878 10 x 4 0.40 0.34 4.00 11.00 90 48 x 20 0.90 0.57 22.00 34.00 2706 10 x 6 0.40 0.36 5.00 11.00 106 48 x 30 0.90 0.66 23.00 34.00 2872 10 x 8 0.40 0.38 6.50 11.00 114 48 x 48 0.90 0.90 33.50 34.00 4038 10 x 10 0.40 0.40 7.50 11.00 126 12 x 4 0.42 0.34 4.00 12.00 118 L 12 x 6 0.42 0.36 5.00 12.00 133 12 x 8 0.42 0.38 6.50 12.00 134 T1 12 x 10 0.42 0.40 7.50 12.00 145 12 x 12 0.42 0.42 8.75 12.00 170 J 14 x 6 0.47 0.36 6.50 14.00 185 14 x 8 0.47 0.38 7.50 14.00 206 T 14 x 10 0.47 0.40 8.50 14.00 244 H H 14 x 12 0.47 0.42 9.50 14.00 284 14 x 14 0.47 0.47 10.50 14.00 305 MJ x SWIVEL PARALLEL TEE W/ SWIVEL GLAND 16 x 6 0.50 0.36 6.50 15.00 207 NOM. WT T T1 H J L 16 x 8 0.50 0.38 7.50 15.00 260 SIZE (LBS.) 16 x 10 0.50 0.40 8.50 15.00 287 6 x 6 0.36 0.36 8.00 12.50 10.00 83 16 x 12 0.50 0.42 9.50 15.00 312 8 x 6 0.38 0.36 9.00 13.50 11.00 105 16 x 14 0.50 0.47 10.50 15.00 348 10 x 6 0.40 0.36 11.00 14.00 13.00 125 16 x 16 0.50 0.50 11.50 15.00 374 12 x 6 0.42 0.36 12.00 16.00 14.00 235 18 x 6 0.54 0.36 6.50 15.50 325 18 x 8 0.54 0.38 7.50 15.50 351 18 x 12 0.54 0.42 9.50 15.50 358 B B 18 x 18 0.54 0.54 12.50 16.50 445 20 x 4 0.57 0.34 6.50 17.00 321 20 x 6 0.57 0.36 6.50 17.00 360 20 x 8 0.57 0.38 8.00 17.00 339 T1 20 x 10 0.57 0.40 9.00 17.00 370 A T 24 x 6 0.61 0.36 7.00 19.00 432 24 x 8 0.61 0.38 8.00 19.00 472 24 x 12 0.61 0.42 10.00 19.00 542 MJ x MJ TRUE WYES 24 x 16 0.61 0.50 12.00 19.00 622 NOM. WT T T1 A B 24 x 18 0.61 0.54 13.00 22.00 680 SIZE (LBS.) 24 x 24 0.61 0.61 16.00 22.00 950 20 x 20 x 20 0.57 0.57 7.50 15.00 550 30 x 6 0.66 0.36 8.00 23.00 692 24 x 14 x 14 0.61 0.47 9.00 11.50 395 30 x 8 0.66 0.38 8.50 23.00 719 30 x 24 x 24 0.66 0.61 8.00 17.00 815 30 x 10 0.66 0.40 9.50 23.00 764 30 x 30 x30 0.66 0.66 10.00 21.50 1380 30 x 12 0.66 0.42 10.00 23.00 796 (Con’t) UCAT.15.01 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 7 Utility Pipe Fittings and Accessories Full Body MJ Fittings ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 T1 J T H H MJ x MJ TEES MJ x MJ TEES (Con’t) NOM. WT NOM. WT T T1 H J T T1 H J SIZE (LBS.) SIZE (LBS.) 2 x 2 0.39 0.39 3.25 3.25 20 24 x 12 0.89 0.75 15.00 19.00 1030 3 x 2 0.48 0.39 3.50 3.50 43 24 x 14 0.89 0.66 15.00 19.00 1055 3 x 3 0.48 0.48 5.50 5.50 55 24 x 16 0.89 0.70 15.00 19.00 1075 4 x 2 0.52 0.39 4.00 4.00 57 24 x 18 0.89 0.75 22.00 22.00 1400 4 x 3 0.52 0.48 6.50 6.50 75 24 x 20 0.89 0.80 22.00 22.00 1450 4 x 4 0.52 0.52 6.50 6.50 80 24 x 24 0.89 0.89 22.00 22.00 1535 4 x 4 x 6 0.52 0.55 8.00 8.00 115 30 x 6 1.03 0.55 18.00 23.00 1730 6 x 2 0.55 0.39 8.00 8.00 78 30 x 8 1.03 0.60 18.00 23.00 1745 6 x 3 0.55 0.48 8.00 8.00 110 30 x 10 1.03 0.68 18.00 23.00 1760 6 x 4 0.55 0.52 8.00 8.00 115 30 x 12 1.03 0.75 18.00 23.00 1780 6 x 6 0.55 0.55 8.00 8.00 125 30 x 16 1.03 0.70 18.00 23.00 1820 6 x 6 x 8 0.55 0.60 9.00 9.00 185 30 x 18 1.03 0.75 18.00 23.00 1845 8 x 2 0.60 0.39 9.00 9.00 125 30 x 20 1.03 0.80 18.00 23.00 1875 8 x 3 0.60 0.48 9.00 9.00 155 30 x 24 1.03 0.89 25.00 25.00 2400 8 x 4 0.60 0.52 9.00 9.00 165 30 x 30 1.03 1.03 25.00 25.00 2595 8 x 6 0.60 0.55 9.00 9.00 175 36 x 6 1.15 0.55 20.00 26.00 2500 8 x 8 0.60 0.60 9.00 9.00 185 36 x 8 1.15 0.60 20.00 26.00 2520 8 x 8 x 12 0.60 0.75 12.00 12.00 280 36 x 10 1.15 0.68 20.00 26.00 2535 10 x 4 0.68 0.52 11.00 11.00 235 36 x 12 1.15 0.75 20.00 26.00 2550 10 x 6 0.68 0.55 11.00 11.00 250 36 x 14 1.15 0.66 20.00 26.00 2570 10 x 8 0.68 0.60 11.00 11.00 260 36 x 16 1.15 0.70 20.00 26.00 2585 10 x 10 0.80 0.80 11.00 11.00 310 36 x 18 1.15 0.75 20.00 26.00 2610 12 x 4 0.75 0.52 12.00 12.00 315 36 x 20 1.15 0.80 20.00 26.00 2635 12 x 6 0.75 0.55 12.00 12.00 325 36 x 24 1.15 0.89 20.00 26.00 2690 12 x 8 0.75 0.60 12.00 12.00 340 36 x 30 1.15 1.03 28.00 28.00 3545 12 x 10 0.87 0.80 12.00 12.00 390 36 x 36 1.15 1.15 28.00 28.00 3745 12 x 12 0.87 0.87 12.00 12.00 410 42 x 12 1.28 0.75 23.00 30.00 3555 14 x 6 0.66 0.55 14.00 14.00 435 42 x 14 1.28 0.66 23.00 30.00 3575 16 x 4 0.70 0.52 15.00 15.00 525 42 x 16 1.28 0.70 23.00 30.00 3595 16 x 6 0.70 0.55 15.00 15.00 540 42 x 18 1.28 0.75 23.00 30.00 3615 16 x 8 0.70 0.60 15.00 15.00 550 42 x 20 1.28 0.80 23.00 30.00 3640 16 x 10 0.70 0.68 15.00 15.00 570 42 x 24 1.28 0.89 23.00 30.00 3690 16 x 12 0.70 0.75 15.00 15.00 590 42 x 30 1.28 1.03 31.00 31.00 4650 16 x 16 0.70 0.70 15.00 15.00 650 42 x 36 1.78 1.58 31.00 31.00 6075 18 x 6 0.75 0.55 13.00 15.50 590 42 x 42 1.78 1.78 31.00 31.00 6320 18 x 8 0.75 0.60 13.00 15.50 605 48 x 12 1.42 0.75 26.00 34.00 4870 18 x 12 0.75 0.75 13.00 15.50 640 48 x 14 1.42 0.66 26.00 34.00 4885 18 x 18 0.75 0.75 16.50 16.50 820 48 x 16 1.42 0.70 26.00 34.00 4905 20 x 6 0.80 0.55 14.00 17.00 725 48 x 18 1.42 0.75 26.00 34.00 4925 20 x 8 0.80 0.60 14.00 17.00 735 48 x 20 1.42 0.80 26.00 34.00 4950 20 X 10 0.80 0.68 14.00 17.00 755 48 x 24 1.42 0.89 26.00 34.00 4995 20 x 12 0.80 0.75 14.00 17.00 775 48 x 30 1.42 1.03 26.00 34.00 5140 20 x 16 0.80 0.70 18.00 18.00 945 48 x 36 1.42 1.15 34.00 34.00 6280 20 x 20 0.80 0.80 18.00 18.00 1020 48 x 42 1.96 1.78 34.00 34.00 8130 24 x 6 0.89 0.55 15.00 19.00 985 48 x 48 1.96 1.96 34.00 34.00 8420 24 x 8 0.89 0.60 15.00 19.00 1000 48 x 36 x 48 1.42 1.15 34.00 34.00 6275 (Con’t) UCAT.15.01 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 24 Utility Pipe Fittings and Accessories Full Body MJ Fittings ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 L1 L2 T T1 J H S T T MJ x PE x MJ TEES MJ SOLID SLEEVES NOM. WT NOM. SHORT SLEEVES LONG SLEEVES T T1 H J S T SIZE (LBS.) SIZE L1 WT (LBS.) L2 WT (LBS.) 4 x 4 0.52 0.52 6.50 6.50 14.50 75 2 0.39 7.50 12 12.00 18 6 x 6 0.55 0.55 8.00 8.00 16.00 120 3 0.48 7.50 25 12.00 30 8 x 6 0.60 0.55 9.00 9.00 17.00 170 4 0.52 7.50 35 12.00 45 8 x 8 0.60 0.60 9.00 9.00 17.00 180 6 0.55 7.50 45 12.00 65 10 x 10 0.80 0.80 11.00 11.00 19.00 310 8 0.60 7.50 65 12.00 85 12 x 4 0.75 0.52 12.00 12.00 20.00 315 10 0.68 7.50 85 12.00 115 12 x 6 0.75 0.55 12.00 12.00 20.00 325 12 0.75 7.50 110 12.00 145 12 x 8 0.75 0.60 12.00 12.00 20.00 340 14 0.66 9.50 150 15.00 195 12 x 10 0.87 0.80 12.00 12.00 20.00 390 16 0.70 9.50 180 15.00 235 12 x 12 0.87 0.87 12.00 12.00 20.00 410 18 0.75 9.50 215 15.00 285 20 0.80 9.50 240 15.00 325 24 0.89 9.50 320 15.00 425 30 1.03 15.00 635 24.00 885 T T 36 1.15 15.00 855 24.00 1190 42 1.28 15.00 1115 24.00 1550 48 1.42 15.00 1385 24.00 1940 2" - 24" 2" - 24" T T SHORT LONG L L2 30" - 48" 30" - 48" CAPS PLUGS ID ID MJ CAPS & PLUGS (SOLID OR TAPPED) T T NOM. WT (LBS.) T MAX. TAP MJ DUAL PURPOSE SLEEVES W/ OVERSIZE GLANDS SIZE CAPS PLUGS 2 0.39 1 ½ 5 5 NOM. SHORT LONG PIPE SIZE (I.D.) T 3 0.50 2 12 10 SIZE L1 WT (LBS.) L2 WT (LBS.) 4 0.60 3 15 15 4 4.80 - 5.00 5.10 0.52 7.50 35 12.00 35 6 0.65 4 25 25 6 6.90 - 7.10 7.20 0.55 7.50 45 12.00 65 8 0.70 4 45 45 8 9.05 - 9.30 9.40 0.60 7.50 65 12.00 86 10 0.75 4 60 65 10 11.10 - 11.40 11.50 0.68 7.50 85 12.00 115 12 0.75 4 80 85 12 13.20 - 13.50 13.60 0.75 7.50 110 12.00 145 14 0.82 5 120 115 16 17.40 - 17.80 17.94 0.70 --- --- 15.00 236 16 0.89 6 155 145 18 0.96 6 195 185 20 1.03 6 240 225 24 1.16 6 345 335 30 1.03 6 590 573 36 1.15 6 850 815 42 1.28 6 1180 1110 48 1.42 6 1595 1455 *Threads in Accordance with ANSI/ASME B1.20.1 UCAT.15.01 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 26 Utility Pipe Fittings and Accessories Flanged Fittings ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 T T FE CONCENTRIC & ECCENTRIC REDUCERS (Con’t) T1 NOM. WT T T1 L SIZE (LBS.) 20 x 18 0.80 0.75 20.00 410 24 x 10 0.89 0.68 24.00 450 T1 24 x 12 0.89 0.75 24.00 480 L L 24 x 14 0.89 0.66 24.00 490 24 x 16 0.89 0.70 24.00 525 FE CONCENTRIC & ECCENTRIC REDUCERS 24 x 18 0.89 0.75 24.00 550 24 x 20 0.89 0.80 24.00 590 NOM. WT SIZE T T1 L (LBS.) 30 x 8 1.03 0.60 30.00 700 30 x 12 1.03 0.75 30.00 730 2 x 1 ½ 0.31 0.31 5.50 10 30 x 14 1.03 0.66 30.00 752 2 ½ x 2 0.31 0.31 5.50 14 30 x 16 1.03 0.70 30.00 770 3 x 2 0.48 0.31 6.00 16 30 x 18 1.03 0.75 30.00 810 3 x 2 ½ 0.48 0.31 6.00 21 30 x 20 1.03 0.80 30.00 870 4 x 2 0.52 0.31 7.00 25 30 x 24 1.03 0.89 30.00 970 4 x 2 ½ 0.52 0.31 7.00 28 36 x 16 1.15 0.70 36.00 1105 4 x 3 0.52 0.48 7.00 30 36 x 20 1.15 0.80 36.00 1230 5 x 2 0.50 0.31 8.00 34 36 x 24 1.15 0.89 36.00 1345 5 x 2 ½ 0.50 0.31 8.00 35 36 x 30 1.15 1.03 36.00 1555 5 x 3 0.50 0.48 8.00 37 42 x 20 1.28 0.80 42.00 1712 5 x 4 0.50 0.50 8.00 41 42 x 24 1.28 0.89 42.00 1820 6 x 1 ½ 0.55 0.31 9.00 33 42 x 30 1.28 1.03 42.00 2060 6 x 2 0.55 0.31 9.00 35 42 x 36 1.28 1.15 42.00 2345 6 x 2 ½ 0.55 0.31 9.00 38 48 x 30 1.42 1.03 48.00 2625 6 x 3 0.55 0.48 9.00 40 48 x 36 1.42 1.15 48.00 2950 6 x 4 0.55 0.52 9.00 45 48 x 42 1.42 1.28 48.00 3320 6 x 5 0.55 0.52 9.00 52 54 x 24 0.90 0.89 32.00 1820 8 x 3 0.60 0.48 11.00 60 54 x 30 0.90 0.61 32.00 1625 8 x 4 0.60 0.52 11.00 65 54 x 36 0.90 0.66 28.00 1680 8 x 5 0.60 0.52 11.00 70 54 x 42 0.90 0.76 25.00 1800 8 x 6 0.60 0.55 11.00 75 54 x 48 0.90 0.80 18.00 1695 10 x 3 0.68 0.48 12.00 81 60 x 54 0.94 0.90 15.00 2055 10 x 4 0.68 0.52 12.00 85 Q V Q 10 x 6 0.68 0.55 12.00 90 10 x 8 0.68 0.60 12.00 110 12 x 4 0.75 0.52 14.00 120 V I I 12 x 5 0.75 0.50 14.00 126 O O 12 x 6 0.75 0.55 14.00 130 3"-10" 12"-54" 12 x 8 0.75 0.60 14.00 145 12 x 10 0.75 0.68 14.00 170 BLIND FLANGES (SOLID OR TAPPED) 14 x 6 0.66 0.55 16.00 155 NOM. WT O Q V I 14 x 8 0.66 0.60 16.00 175 SIZE (LBS.) 14 x 10 0.66 0.68 16.00 190 3 7.50 0.75 0.69 3.00 9 14 x 12 0.66 0.75 16.00 220 4 9.00 0.94 0.88 4.00 16 16 x 6 0.70 0.55 18.00 190 6 11.00 1.00 0.94 6.00 25 16 x 8 0.70 0.60 18.00 210 8 13.50 1.12 1.06 8.00 42 16 x 10 0.70 0.68 18.00 235 10 16.00 1.19 1.12 10.00 63 16 x 12 0.70 0.75 18.00 265 12 19.00 1.25 0.81 12.00 85 16 x 14 0.70 0.66 18.00 280 14 21.00 1.38 0.88 14.00 120 18 x 8 0.75 0.60 19.00 240 16 23.50 1.44 1.00 16.00 145 18 x 10 0.75 0.68 19.00 265 18 25.00 1.56 1.06 18.00 164 18 x 12 0.75 0.75 19.00 295 20 27.50 1.69 1.12 20.00 245 18 x 14 0.75 0.66 19.00 310 24 32.00 1.88 1.25 24.00 318 18 x 16 0.75 0.70 19.00 340 30 38.75 2.12 1.44 30.00 500 20 x 8 0.80 0.60 20.00 290 36 46.00 2.38 1.62 36.00 960 20 x 10 0.80 0.68 20.00 310 42 53.00 2.62 1.81 42.00 1300 20 x 12 0.80 0.75 20.00 345 48 59.50 2.75 2.00 48.00 1740 20 x 14 0.80 0.66 20.00 355 54 66.25 3.00 2.25 54.00 2233 20 x 16 0.80 0.70 20.00 390 60 73.00 3.12 2.38 60.00 2845 (Con’t) 64 80.00 3.38 2.56 64.00 3744 UCAT.15.01 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 49 Joint Restraint Submittal Form Stargrip® series 3000 Mechanical Joint Wedge Action Restraint for Ductile Iron Pipe Patent #5,772,252 SUBMITTAL INFORMATION PROJECT NAME: ENGINEER: CONTRACTOR: SPEC. SECTION: Stargrip® series 3000 for Ductile Iron Pipe MEMBER FEATURES & ADVANTAGES • The Wedge Assembly is designed with a Break-Off Torque Control Nut that will only break off in one direction, ensuring proper installation. • The Stargrip® offers a full 5° deflection through 12" size, 3° on 14"-24", 2° on 30"-36" and 1° on 42"-48". • Minimum safety factor of 2:1 • Stargrip® sizes 3"-36" are listed with Underwriters Laboratories Inc. and sizes 3"-12" are approved by Factory Mutual Research. • The Wedge Assembly is designed to fit specific pipe sizes and is field repairable. • No special tools are required for installation of the Stargrip®. • Stargrip® eliminates tie rods and thrust blocks. • Stargrip® may also be used on steel pipe* up to 12" (*transition gasket required on 12" and under). For 14" and larger steel applications, contact Star Pipe. MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS: • Gland: Ductile Iron per ASTM A536, Grade 65-45-12 • Wedges: Ductile Iron per ASTM A536, Grade 65-45-12 heat treated to a minimum of 370 BHN â—† Wedge Finish: Thermally cured fluoropolymer epoxy coating GLAND FINISH OPTIONS (Please check one): HARDWARE OPTIONS (Please check one): Standard: alkyd enamel coating Standard: T-bolts are high strength low alloy steel manufactured in accordance with ANSI/AWWA Optional: StarbondTM TGIC polyester powder coating C111/A21.11-00 applied by an electrostatic spray process Optional: T-bolts and nuts alloy SS 304 per ASTM F593 Optional: Other (specify) _____________________________ Optional: T-bolts and nuts alloy SS 316 per ASTM F593 Optional: T-bolts and nuts Fluoropolymer Star-Blue COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OPTION (Please check one): coated high strength low alloy steel manufactured in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C111/A21.11-00 Import 100% Domestic1 Domestic gland with import components1 (1Please see Domestic Restraint Options Available on our website.) REV.13-1 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 1 Joint Restraint Submittal Form Stargrip® series 3000 Mechanical Joint Wedge Action Restraint for Ductile Iron Pipe Patent #5,772,252 TECHNICAL INFORMATION 0.75 0.12 STARGRIP® 3000 SPECIFICATIONS* MAX F W/NUTS APPROX NOM. PRESSURE NO. OF NO. OF Please A B C D E F TWISTED G WT. SIZE RATING WEDGES T-BOLTS check sizes: OFF (LBS) (PSI) 3 350 4.84 2.40 4.06 6.19 3/4 9.85 8.78 8.13 2 4 6 4 350 5.92 2.40 4.90 7.50 7/8 11.06 9.62 9.12 2 4 8 6 350 8.02 2.40 7.00 9.50 7/8 13.06 11.72 11.12 3 6 12 8 350 10.17 2.51 9.15 11.75 7/8 15.25 13.84 13.37 4 6 17 10 350 12.22 2.51 11.20 14.00 7/8 17.25 15.88 15.62 6 8 24 12 350 14.32 2.51 13.30 16.25 7/8 19.50 17.98 17.88 8 8 34 14 350 16.40 2.91 15.44 18.75 7/8 21.25 20.12 20.90 10 10 49 16 350 18.50 2.91 17.54 21.00 7/8 23.34 22.22 23.00 12 12 56 18 250 20.60 2.91 19.64 23.25 7/8 26.40 24.90 25.25 12 12 59 20 250 22.70 2.67 21.74 25.50 7/8 28.56 27.00 27.50 14 14 75 24 250 26.90 3.50 25.94 30.00 7/8 33.86 32.34 31.54 16 16 139 30 250 33.29 3.49 32.17 36.88 1-1/8 40.12 38.62 39.12 20 20 199 36 250 39.59 3.49 38.47 43.75 1-1/8 46.42 44.92 46.00 24 24 232 42 250 45.79 5.15 44.75 50.62 1-3/8 54.86 53.32 53.12 28 28 400 48 250 52.09 5.15 51.05 57.50 1-3/8 61.16 59.62 60.00 32 32 488 *All dimensions in inches except where indicated. Notes: • Stargrips® must be adequately wrapped or protected if they are covered by concrete to ensure that concrete does not enter the wedge pocket. • For applications exceeding the maximum pressure ratings listed, please contact Star Pipe Products for recommendations (see Tandem Stargrip®). • For applications on existing pipe, the pipe needs to be structurally sound and the surface needs to be relatively free of any corrosive by-products in order for the wedges to function properly. Please contact Star Pipe Products for technical assistance. • Sizes 42" & 48" require extra long 1 ¼" x 8 ½" T-bolts. REV.13-1 ® REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF STAR PIPE PRODUCTS STAR® PIPE PRODUCTS HOUSTON CORPORATE TOLL FREE 1-800-999-3009 FAX 281-558-9000 www.starpipeproducts.com Page 2 Red Rubber Flange Gaskets UNITED ANSI B16.1 - 125# BRAND Full Face Type Ring Type O.D. B.C. I.D. I.D. O.D. A Bolt A Notes: holes Red Rubber Flange Gaskets: Full Face and Ring Type to fit ANSI B16.1, Class 125 Flanges Reference Standard: ANSI B16.1 - Flange Dimensions - Class 125 Material Standard: Red Rubber - ASTM D1330, Grade II, SBR/Durometer 75+/-5 Shore A/Red Color No. of Nominal Part No. Part No. OD OD Box Qty. Box Qty. ID A BC Bolt Size (Full Face) (Ring) (Full Face) (Ring) (Full Face) (Ring) Holes 1 FFF-025-100 FRG-025-065 1.31 4.25 2.63 1/8 3.12 4 25 25 15-1/4 F0FF-030-11 F6RG-030-08 12.6 40.6 38.0 10/ 34.5 255 2 1-1/2 FFF-040-125 FRG-040-085 1.91 5.00 3.38 1/8 3.62 4 25 25 20F0FF-050-15 F0RG-050-10 20.1 60.0 38.9 15/ 44 5.7 252 2-1/2 FFF-065-175 FRG-065-120 2.60 7.00 4.70 1/8 5.50 4 25 25 38F2FF-080-18 F0RG-080-13 30.1 75.5 58.1 10/ 64.0 255 2 4 FFF-100-210 FRG-100-162 4.10 9.00 6.30 1/8 7.50 8 25 25 50F4FF-125-25 F0RG-125-19 50.1 100.0 78.6 10/ 88 5.5 252 6 FFF-150-275 FRG-150-218 6.10 11.00 8.50 1/8 9.50 8 25 25 80F2FF-200-34 F0RG-200-27 80.1 103.5 180.6 15/ 18 51.7 252 10 FFF-250-400 FRG-250-328 10.10 16.00 12.80 1/8 14.25 12 25 25 152 F8FF-300-47 F0RG-300-37 102.1 159.0 184.7 10/ 127.0 10101 14 FFF-350-525 FRG-350-445 14.20 21.00 17.15 1/8 18.75 12 10 10 186 F0FF-400-58 F0RG-400-51 106.2 203.5 189.9 15/ 261.2 10101 18 FFF-450-625 FRG-450-542 18.20 25.00 21.15 1/8 22.75 16 10 10 280 F6FF-500-68 F0RG-500-60 200.2 207.5 283.6 10/ 205.0 20101 24 FFF-600-800 FRG-600-717 24.20 32.00 27.95 1/8 29.50 20 10 10 350 F-FF-750-98 350.00 3-8.7 10/8 386.0 25 - 36 FFF-900-1165 - 36.00 46.00 - 1/8 42.75 32 5 - 452 F-FF-1000-134 402.00 5-3.0 10/8 469.5 35 - 48 FFF-1200-1510 - 48.00 59.50 - 1/8 56.00 44 5 - Dimensions in inches Napac, Inc. 310 229 Southbridge Street, Worcester, MA 01608 Tel: (800) 807-2215 • Fax: (800) 807-2214 NOTES: OLYMPIC FOUNDRY INC. 24", 30" 36" VALVE BOX BASE MATL: Cast Iron ASTM A48, CL30 RATING: H-20 PART NO. 940 APPROX WT: 35 Lbs REV: A DATE: 7/16/2003 New border REV A DOCUMENT APPROVED DWN: CL DATE: 7/16/2003 TOLERANCE REV: DATE: XX +- .1 BY: DATE: XXX +- .06 CHKD: CL DATE: 7/16/2003 DWG #: 940 24 BOTTOM SCALE: N/A SHEET: 1 OF 1 XXXX +- .030 < +- 2 DEG NOTES: OLYMPIC FOUNDRY INC. 18" VALVE BOX TOP MATL: Cast Iron ASTM A48, CL30 RATING: H-20 PART NO. 940 APPROX WT: 33 Lbs REV: A DATE: 7/16/2003 New border REV A DOCUMENT APPROVED DWN: CL DATE: 7/16/2003 TOLERANCE REV: DATE: XX +- .1 BY: DATE: XXX +- .06 CHKD: CL DATE: 7/16/2003 DWG #: 940 18 TOP SCALE: N/A SHEET: 1 OF 1 XXXX +- .030 < +- 2 DEG NOTES: Also available with 2" skirt OLYMPIC FOUNDRY INC. VALVE BOX COVER MATL: Cast Iron ASTM A48,CL30 RATING: H-20 PART NO. 940 APPROX WT: 9 Lbs REV: A DATE: 7/21/2003 New border REV A DOCUMENT APPROVED DWN: CL DATE: 7/21/2003 TOLERANCE REV: DATE: XX +- .1 BY: DATE: XXX +- .06 CHKD: CL DATE: 7/21/2003 DWG #: 940 SHALLOW LID SCALE: N/A SHEET: 1 OF 1 XXXX +- .030 < +- 2 DEG CAT NO. PARTS LIST MATERIAL 1 OPERATING NUT BRONZE 2 HOLD DOWN NUT BRONZE 3 WEATHER SEAL "O" RING BUNA-N 4 TOP BONNET D.I. 5 THRUST WASHER DELRIN 6 OPERATING STEM TOP 24 1/4" STEEL 7 HOSE NOZZLE "O" RING ** BUNA-N 8 HOSE NOZZLE ** BRONZE 9 HOSE NOZZLE GASKET ** RUBBER 10 HOSE NOZZLE CAPS ** C.I. 11 PUMPER NOZZLE "O" RING BUNA-N 12 PUMPER NOZZLE GASKET RUBBER 13 PUMPER NOZZLE BRONZE 14 PUMPER NOZZLE CAP C.I. 15 * BRASS COLLAR` BRASS 16 RESERVOIR "O" RING BUNA-N 17 "QUAD" SEAL RING BUNA-N 18 TOP BONNET BOLTS & NUTS ZN. PL. STL. 19 DRIVE-LOC PIN STN. STL. 20 NOZZLE STANDPIPE D.I. 21 SAFETY FLG. BOLTS & NUTS ZN. PL. STL. 22 SWIVEL FLANGES (FRANGIBLE) C.I. 23 STEM COUPLING (FRANGIBLE) GALV. STL. 24 COUPLING PIN & COTTER KEY STN. STL. 25 STANDPIPE LOWER SECTION D.I. 26 OPERATING STEM LOWER STEEL 27 DRIP SHUT OFF BRONZE 28 INSERTS RUBBER 29 VALVE SEAT BRONZE 30 * BRONZE LINER BRONZE 31 VALVE SEAT "O" RING BUNA-N 32 BRASS DRAIN HOLE BUSHING ** BRASS 33 INLET FLANGE "O" RING BUNA-N 34 SEATING VALVE RUBBER RUBBER 35 VALVE WASHER D.I./EPOXY 36 BOTTOM INLET D.I./EPOXY 37 INLET FLG. BOLTS & NUTS ** STN. STL. 38 CHAINS ** ZN. PL. STL. 39 SET SCREW (1/4 - 20 SS CONE PT) ** STN. STL. 40 PIPE PLUG 1/4 NPTF SS HX STN. STL. 41 DUST CAP D.I. 42 DUST CAP BOLT STN. STL. * NOT A REPLACEMENT PART ** NOT SHOWN SUBMITTAL INFORMATION Iron Service Saddles - (FCD202-xxx-TAP style) DUAL BAND EPOXY COATING IRON SERVICE SADDLES FOR USE ON DUCTILE IRON AND A/C PIPE 5" Finish: Epoxy Coating Threads- CC or IP per AWWA C800 Nylatron Coated Stainless Washers Steel Nuts (both sides) EPDM Gasket Closed Lug Stainless Stainless Steel Studs Stainless Steel Bands Steel Washers (open lug side) Nom. Pipe O.D. Approx. Catalog  Submitted Size Range Wt. Lbs. Number Item(s) 2" 2.35 - 2.50 2.8 FCD202-250-TAP * Saddles with this pipe range are not available with 2" CC 2-1/2" 2.75 - 2.90 2.8 FCD202-290-TAP (CC7) or 2-1/2" IP (IP8) threads. *3.46 - 3.80 4.8 FCD202-380-TAP 3" ** These saddles with 1-1/4" through 2-1/2" taps fit the top of *3.80 - 4.25 5.5 FCD202-425-TAP the listed range only. Example FCD202-480-CC7 fits 4.80" **4.26 - 4.80 5.4 FCD202-480-TAP pipe O.D. only. â–²4.74 - 5.00 5.4 FCD202-500-TAP 4" *4.74 - 5.26 5.4 FCD202-526-TAP â–² This saddle is only available with 2" CC (CC7) or â–²4.97 - 5.26 5.4 FCD202-526-TAP 2-1/2" IP (IP8) threads. *4.50 - 5.40 5.4 FCD202-540-TAP 5.94 - 6.69 5.7 FCD202-669-TAP 6.63 - 6.90 5.7 FCD202-690-TAP 6" 6.84 - 7.60 6.7 FCD202-760-TAP 6.63 - 7.61 6.7 FCD202-761-TAP 7.93 - 8.71 6.8 FCD202-871-TAP Outlet Tap Code 8.63 - 9.05 8.2 FCD202-905-TAP 8" 8.99 - 9.79 8.4 FCD202-979-TAP CC (AWWA) Thread 8.63 - 9.80 8.4 FCD202-980-TAP Thread Code Number  Submitted Item(s) 10.00 - 10.75 9.4 FCD202-1075-TAP 3/4" CC CC3 10.75 - 11.10 9.0 FCD202-1110-TAP 1" CC CC4 10" 11.10 - 12.12 10.8 FCD202-1212-TAP 1-1/4" CC ∆ CC5 10.64 - 12.13 10.8 FCD202-1213-TAP 1-1/2" CC CC6 12.00 - 12.75 11.0 FCD202-1275-TAP 2" CC CC7 12.75 - 13.20 9.0 FCD202-1320-TAP 12" IP Thread 13.20 - 14.38 12.8 FCD202-1438-TAP Thread Code Number  Submitted Item(s) 12.62 - 14.39 12.8 FCD202-1439-TAP 15.30 - 16.25 11.9 FCD202-1625-TAP 3/4" IP IP3 14" 16.30 - 17.25 12.9 FCD202-1725-TAP 1" IP IP4 17.40 - 18.40 13.1 FCD202-1840-TAP 1-1/4" IP ∆ IP5 16" 18.50 - 19.25 12.3 FCD202-1925-TAP 1-1/2" IP IP6 18" 19.50 - 20.50 13.1 FCD202-2050-TAP 2" IP IP7 21.20 - 22.20 13.2 FCD202-2220-TAP 20" 2-1/2" IP IP8 22.50 - 23.50 13.3 FCD202-2350-TAP 23.80 - 24.80 13.4 FCD202-2480-TAP ∆ Contact factory for availability 24" 25.60 - 26.50 13.9 FCD202-2650-TAP 30" 31.74 - 32.74 14.8 FCD202-3274-TAP FEATURES • Body made of high strength ductile iron per ASTM A536 • Each dual band and 5/8" UNC threaded studs are 18-8 type 304 stainless steel. For saddles 3" or smaller, studs are 1/2" • Gasket is EPDM rubber per ASTM D2000 • Finish on saddle body is fusion-bonded epoxy coating • UL Classified to ANSI/NSF Standard 61 The Ford Meter Box Company considers the information in this submittal form to be correct at the time of publication. Item and option availability, including specifications, are subject to change without notice. Please verify that your product information is current. The Ford Meter Box Company, Inc. Submitted By: P.O. Box 443, Wabash, Indiana U.S.A. 46992-0443 Phone: 260-563-3171 / Fax: 800-826-3487 Overseas Fax: 260-563-0167 www.fordmeterbox.com 01/22/18 SUBMITTAL INFORMATION Ballcorp Corporation Stops - (FB1000-xx-Q-NL style) AWWA/CC TAPER THREAD INLET BY QUICK JOINT FOR COPPER OR PLASTIC TUBING (CTS) OUTLET External Nut Stop EPDM O-ring Solid one piece tee-head and stem Molded EPDM rubber seat with reinforcing ring supports the ball Dual EPDM O-rings in the stem Body Outlet Threads AWWA/CC Threads Quick Joint Nut Stainless Steel Gripper Inlet Outlet Molded Spring Tip Gasket provides Hydraulic Seal Length External Nut Stop Fluorocarbon-coated brass ball Image shown above is an FB1000-4-Q-NL V I O V B O A. P ✓ S S S S L T W. L N I() 3/4" 3/4" 3/4" 4-19/64" 3/4" Flare Copper 1.6 FB1000-3-Q-NL 1" 1" 1" 4-31/64" 1" Flare Copper 2.6 FB1000-4-Q-NL 1" 1" 1-1/4" 4-5/16" 1-1/4" Special Thread 3.4 FB1000-45-Q-NL 1-1/4" 1-1/4" 1-1/4" 5-21/32" 1-1/4" Special Thread 4.3 FB1000-5-Q-NL 1-1/2" 1-1/2" 1-1/2" 5-45/64" 1-1/2" Special Thread 5.4 FB1000-6-Q-NL 2" 2" 2" 7-1/16" 2" Special Thread 8.2 FB1000-7-Q-NL Note: Ford recommends using insert stiffeners with plastic pipe or tubing. FEATURES • All brass that comes in contact with potable water conforms to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B584, UNS C89833) • The product has the letters “NL” cast into the main body for lead-free identification • Certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 61 and NSF/ANSI Standard 372 where applicable • Brass components that do not come in contact with potable water conform to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B62 and ASTM B584, UNS C83600, 85-5-5-5) • Ends are integral or secured with adhesive to prevent unintentional disassembly • 300 PSI working pressure The Ford Meter Box Company considers the information in this submittal form to be correct at the time of publication. Item and option availability, including specifications, are subject to change without notice. Please verify that your product information is current. The Ford Meter Box Company, Inc. Submitted By: P.O. Box 443, Wabash, Indiana U.S.A. 46992-0443 Phone: 260-563-3171 / Fax: 800-826-3487 Overseas Fax: 260-563-0167 www.fordmeterbox.com 08/23/18 SUBMITTAL INFORMATION Quick Joint Coupling - (C84-xx-Q-NL style) MALE IRON PIPE THREAD BY QUICK JOINT FOR COPPER OR PLASTIC TUBING (CTS) Male Iron Pipe Threads External Nut Stop Molded Spring Tip Stainless Steel Gripper Quick Joint Nut Gasket Provides Hydraulic Seal Iron Pipe Size Quick Joint Size Length D A. P 3 S L M I P Q.J. CTS W. L N I() 1/2" 1/2" 2" 0.5 C84-11-Q-NL 3/4" 1/2" 2-7/32" 0.5 C84-31-Q-NL 3/4" 5/8" 2-1/4" 0.6 C84-32-Q-NL 3/4" 3/4" 2-1/4" 0.6 C84-33-Q-NL 3/4" 1" 2-3/8" 0.7 C84-34-Q-NL 1" 3/4" 2-19/32" 0.7 C84-43-Q-NL 1" 1" 2-9/16" 0.8 C84-44-Q-NL 1" 1-1/4" 2-15/32" 1.3 C84-45-Q-NL 1" 1-1/2" 2-9/16" 1.5 C84-46-Q-NL 1-1/4" 1-1/4" 2-5/8" 1.4 C84-55-Q-NL 1-1/2" 1-1/2" 3" 1.8 C84-66-Q-NL 2" 2" 3-1/4" 2.3 C84-77-Q-NL Note: Ford recommends insert stiffeners when using plastic pipe or tubing. FEATURES • All brass that comes in contact with potable water conforms to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B584, UNS C89833) • The product has the letters “NL” cast into the main body for lead-free identification • Certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 61 and NSF/ANSI Standard 372 where applicable • Brass components that do not come in contact with potable water conform to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B62 and ASTM B584, UNS C83600, 85-5-5-5) • Body design provides octagonal wrench flats for proper installation The Ford Meter Box Company considers the information in this submittal form to be correct at the time of publication. Item and option availability, including specifications, are subject to change without notice. Please verify that your product information is current. The Ford Meter Box Company, Inc. Submitted By: P.O. Box 443, Wabash, Indiana U.S.A. 46992-0443 Phone: 260-563-3171 / Fax: 800-826-3487 Overseas Fax: 260-563-0167 www.fordmeterbox.com 06/26/19 SUBMITTAL INFORMATION Quick Joint Coupling - (C14-xx-Q-NL style) FEMALE IRON PIPE THREAD BY QUICK JOINT FOR COPPER OR PLASTIC TUBING (CTS) Iron Pipe Threads External Nut Stop Quick Joint Nut Stainless Steel Gripper for Axial Restraint FIP Size Quick Joint Size Length Molded Spring Tip Gasket Provides Hydraulic Seal D A. P 3 S L F I P Q.J. CTS W. L N I() 1/2" 1/2" 1-9/16 0.4 C14-11-Q-NL 3/4" 3/4" 1-1/4" 0.6 C14-33-Q-NL 3/4" 1" 1-3/4" 0.9 C14-34-Q-NL 1" 3/4" 1-3/4" 0.7 C14-43-Q-NL 1" 1" 2-1/8" 0.9 C14-44-Q-NL 1-1/4" 1-1/4" 2-3/16" 1.5 PJA4-45-C14-55-Q-NL 1-1/2" 1-1/2" 2-7/16" 2.3 C14-66-Q-NL 2" 2" 2-5/8" 2.8 C14-77-Q-NL Note: Ford recommends insert stiffeners when using plastic pipe or tubing FEATURES • All brass that comes in contact with potable water conforms to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B584, UNS C89833) • The product has the letters “NL” cast into the main body for lead-free identification • Certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 61 and NSF/ANSI Standard 372 where applicable • Brass components that do not come in contact with potable water conform to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B62 and ASTM B584, UNS C83600, 85-5-5-5) • Sleeve design provides hexagonal wrench flats for proper installation The Ford Meter Box Company considers the information in this submittal form to be correct at the time of publication. Item and option availability, including specifications, are subject to change without notice. Please verify that your product information is current. The Ford Meter Box Company, Inc. Submitted By: P.O. Box 443, Wabash, Indiana U.S.A. 46992-0443 Phone: 260-563-3171 / Fax: 800-826-3487 Overseas Fax: 260-563-0167 www.fordmeterbox.com 09/06/18 SUBMITTAL INFORMATION 80 Series Coppersetter - (VBH87-xxB-11-77-NL style) FLANGED ANGLE BALL VALVE BY FLANGED ANGLE CHECK VALVE WITH BY-PASS (2" METER) FEMALE IRON PIPE THREAD VERTICAL INLET AND OUTLET 17" Meter Spacing Flanged Angle Flanged Angle Ball Valve Check Valve Meter Support Bracket Height Copper Tube By-Pass Ball Valve 2-1/8" 1-1/8" FIP Inlet FIP Outlet SERVICE LINE CONNECTION A. C 3S H FIP I FIP O W. L. N I() 12" 32.0 VBH87-12B-11-77-NL 15" 33.0 VBH87-15B-11-77-NL 18" 34.0 VBH87-18B-11-77-NL 2" 2" 21" 36.0 VBH87-21B-11-77-NL 24" 37.0 VBH87-24B-11-77-NL 27" 39.0 VBH87-27B-11-77-NL FEATURES • All brass that comes in contact with potable water conforms to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B584, UNS C89833) • The product has the letters “NL” cast into the main body for lead-free identifi cation • Brass components that do not come in contact with potable water conform to AWWA Standard C800 (ASTM B62 and ASTM B584, UNS C83600, 85-5-5-5) • Constructed with Type K copper conforms to ASTM B88, UNS C12200 • All Ford Meter Setters are assembled with lead-free solder • Meter support brackets are standard • Padlock wing is standard on all angle meter ball valves or key valves • Drop-in rubber gaskets are included with all meter flanges • Optional High By-pass. Add "HB" following the height. Example: VBH87-12HB-11-77-NL The Ford Meter Box Company considers the information in this submittal form to be correct at the time of publication. Item and option availability, including specifications, are subject to change without notice. Please verify that your product information is current. The Ford Meter Box Company, Inc. Submitted By: P.O. Box 443, Wabash, Indiana U.S.A. 46992-0443 Phone: 260-563-3171 / Fax: 800-826-3487 Overseas Fax: 260-563-0167 www.fordmeterbox.com 06/26/17 ADS, Inc. Drainage Handbook Specifications ♦ 1-1 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ ADS POTABLE WATER SERVICE PIPE (IPS) PIPE SPECIFICATIONS Scope This specification describes ADS Potable Water Service Pipe (IPS) pipe SIDR 19, SIDR 15, SIDR 11.5, SIDR 9, and SIDR 7 for use in potable water service applications. Pipe Requirements ADS potable water service pipe shall meet the requirements of ASTM D2239, AWWA C901 and NSF Standards 14 and 61. Pipe dimensions shall meet Iron Pipe Size (IPS) standards. Material Properties Pipe material shall be high-density polyethylene conforming to the minimum requirements of cell classification 445574C as defined and described in ASTM D3350, except that carbon black content should not exceed 3.0%. The resin shall have a material designation code of PE4710 by the Plastic Pipe Institute. Disinfection/Maintenance The active chlorine content of disinfecting solutions shall not exceed 12%. All disinfecting solution must be flushed from all lines within the system. Industry accepted procedures, like ANSI/AWWA C651 Disinfecting Water Mains, should be followed for both new and repaired potable water lines. Installation Installation is similar to other flexible pipe products. Methods including direct bury, plowing or pulling are applicable per local, state or federal guidelines for the application. Pipe Properties 1/2" 3/4" 1" 1 1/4" 1 1/2" 2" Inside Diameter 0.622 ±0.01 0.824 ±0.015 1.049 ±0.02 1.380 ±0.02 1.610 ±0.02 2.067 ±0.02 in (mm) (15.8 ±0.25) (20.9 ±0.38) (26.6 ±0.51) (35.1 ±0.51) (40.9 ±0.51) (52.5 ±0.51) Wall Thickness 0.060 +0.02 0.060 +0.02 0.060 +0.02 0.073 +0.02 0.085 +0.02 0.109 +0.020 9 in (mm) (1.5 +0.51) (1.5 +0.51) (1.5 +0.51) (1.9 +0.51) (2.2 +0.51) (2.8 +0.51) Pressure Rating 100 100 100 100 100 100 SIDR 1 @ 730F psi (kPa) (689) (689) (689) (689) (689) (689) Weight gm/ft 28 ±2 38 ±2 47 ±2 80 ±3 96 ±3 190 ±5 (gm/m) (92 ±7) (125 ±7) (154 ±7) (262 ±10) (315 ±10) (623 ±16) Inside Diameter 0.622 ±0.01 0.824 ±0.015 1.049 ±0.02 1.380 ±0.02 1.610 ±0.02 2.067 ±0.02 in (mm) (15.8 ±0.25) (20.9 ±0.38) (26.6 ±0.51) (35.1 ±0.51) (40.9 ±0.51) (52.5 ±0.51) Wall Thickness 0.060 +0.02 0.060 +0.02 0.070 +0.02 0.092 +0.02 0.107 +0.02 0.138 +0.020 in (mm) (1.5 +0.51) (1.5 +0.51) (1.8 +0.51) (2.3 +0.51) (2.7 +0.51) (3.5 +0.51) Pressure Rating 125 125 125 125 125 125 SIDR 15@ 730F psi (kPa) (862) (862) (862) (862) (862) (862) Weight gm/ft 30 ±2 39 ±2 56 ±2 97 ±3 129 ±3 200 ±5 (gm/m) (98 ±7) (128 ±7) (184 ±7) (318 ±10) (423 ±10) (656 ±16) Inside Diameter 0.622 ±0.01 0.824 ±0.015 1.049 ±0.02 1.380 ±0.02 1.610 ±0.02 2.067 ±0.02 in (mm) 15.8 ±0.25 20.9 ±0.381 26.6 ±0.51 35.1 ±0.51 40.9 ±0.51 52.5 ±0.51 Wall Thickness 0.060 +0.02 0.072 +0.02 0.091 +0.02 0.120 +0.02 0.140 +0.02 0.180 +0.020 in (mm) (1.5 +0.51) (1.8 +0.51) (2.3 +0.51) (3.0 +0.51) (3.6 +0.51) (4.6 +0.51) Pressure Rating 160 160 160 160 160 160 SIDR 11.5@ 730F psi (kPa) (1103) (1103) (1103) (1103) (1103) (1103) Weight gm/ft 30 ±2 50 ±2 72 ±2 125 ±3 146 ±3 248 ±5 (gm/m) (98 ±7) (164 ±7) (236 ±7) (410 ±10) (479 ±10) (814 ±16) ï›™ ADS, Inc., January 2015 ADS, Inc. Drainage Handbook Specifications ♦ 1-2 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Pipe Properties (continued) Inside 0.622 ±0.01 0.824 ±0.015 1.049 ±0.02 1.380 ±0.02 1.610 ±0.02 2.067 ±0.02 Diameter in (mm) (15.8 ±0.25) (20.9 ±0.38) (26.6 ±0.51) (35.1 ±0.51) (40.9 ±0.51) (52.5 ±0.51) Wall Thickness 0.069 +0.02 0.092 +0.02 0.117 +0.02 0.153 +0.02 0.179 +0.02 0.230 +0.028 in (mm) (1.8 +0.51) (2.3 +0.51) (3.0 +0.51) (3.9 +0.51) (4.5 +0.51) (5.8 +0.71) SIDR 9Pressure 200 200 200 200 200 200 Rating @ 730F psi (kPa) (1379) (1379) (1379) (1379) (1379) (1379) Weight gm/ft 32 ±2 53 ±2 88 ±3 155 ±3 185 ±5 330 ±5 (gm/m) (105 ±7) (174 ±7) (289 ±10) (509 ±10) (607 ±16) (1083 ±16) Inside 0.622 ±0.01 0.824 ±0.015 1.049 ±0.02 1.380 ±0.02 1.610 ±0.02 2.067 +0.02 Diameter in (mm) (15.8 ±0.25) (20.9 ±0.38) (26.6 ±0.51) (35.1 ±0.51) (40.9 ±0.51) (52.5 ±0.51) Wall Thickness 0.089 +0.02 0.118 +0.02 0.150 +0.02 0.197 +0.02 0.230 +0.03 0.295 +0.035 in (mm) (2.3 +0.51) (3.0 +0.51) (3.8 +0.51) (5.0 +0.51) (5.8 +0.71) (7.5 +0.89) SIDR 7Pressure 250 250 250 250 250 250 Rating @ 730F psi (kPa) (1724) (1724) (1724) (1724) (1724) (1724) Weight gm/ft 38 ±2 71 ±2 116 ±3 210 ±5 227 ±5 440 ±8 (gm/m) (125 ±7) (233 ±7) (381 ±10) (689 ±16) (745 ±16) (1443 ±26) * Additional SIDRs may be available. Contact an ADS Representative for regional availability. ï›™ ADS, Inc., January 2015 1324 BCF 1324 CARSON® Heavywall in 14 in in 1 2 1 2 6 23 1 6 in 12” BODY 2 Material: HDPE Model: 13” x 24” Weight: 17 lbs Wall Type: Straight Mouseholes: 0-4 Performance: ANSI/SCTE-77 Tier 8, WUC 3.6, 12” ASTM C857 A-8, Exceeds 20,000 lb minimum load failure in 81 4 in 173 4 in in 213 4 18” BODY 1 4 12 Material: HDPE Model: 13” x 24” Weight: 23 lbs Wall Type: Straight Mouseholes: 0-4 DIM1E3N2SI4ONS AT BOTTOM OF BOX ARE THE SAME FOR 12" AND 18" DEPTHS Performance: ANSI/SCTE-77 Tier 8, WUC 3.6, in 4 in in ASTM C857 A-8, Exceeds 20,000 1 2 1 61 2 23 1 lb minimum load failure 6 in 2 LOAD RATING / NOTES MEDIUM DUTY ANSI/SCTE TIER 15 For use in non-vehicular traffic situations only. 18” Weights and dimensions may vary slightly. Actual load rating is determined by the box and cover combination. in 81 4 Cover comes standard with permanent in 173 4 markings for manufacturer, load rating, model in in 213 4 size and manufacturing location. 1 4 12 DIMENSIONS AT BOTTOM OF BOX ARE THE SAME FOR 12" AND 18" DEPTHS oldcastleinfrastructure.com (800) 735-5566 1324 BCF CARSON® Heavywall COVER OPTIONS Heavy Duty Plastic, Flush Solid Heavy Duty Plastic, Flush with Plastic Reader Door Heavy Duty Plastic, Flush with Cast Iron Reader Door HD Plastic HD Plastic Heavy Duty Plastic, Flush with AMR Recess Flush Solid AMR Recess Heavy Duty Plastic, Flush with AMR Bracket Polymer, Flush Solid Polymer, Flush with Cast Iron Reader Door Composite, Flush Solid Ductile Iron, Flush Solid Ductile Iron, with Max View Reader Door Polymer Composite Flush Solid AMR Recess 17X30 DUCTILE IRON COVER WITH Ductile Iron MAX VIEW READER DOOR AND 2" AMR Max View Door HOLE ADD ON OPTIONS Touch Read Hole AMR Bracket WARNING: Cancer - www.P65Warnings.ca.gov All information contained on this sheet is current at the time of publication. Revision 11/30/18 Oldcastle reserves the right to discontinue or update product information without notice. © 2018 Oldcastle Infrastructure (800) 735-5566 oldcastleinfrastructure.com (800) 735-5566 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/21/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Grading Yes N/A Crews are removing top soil from the site. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES TESC Set Up Crews have set up a construction entrance and installed silt fence. INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/23/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Grading Yes N/A Crews continue removing top soil from the site. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES TESC Set Up Crews have set up a construction entrance and installed silt fence. INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/24/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes N/A Crews are excavating in preparation of installing the west infiltration trench. The crews informed me that geotest will be on site tomorrow to check for suitable infiltrating material. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/29/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes Yes Crews continue installing the west infiltration trench. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 7/9/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes N/A Crews continue installing the west infiltration trench. Rough Grading Yes Yes Crews are bringing in material to bring the site up to grade. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 7/19/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Rough Grading Yes Yes Crews are compacting material for the building foundations. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 7/21/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Finish Grading Yes Yes Crews are compacting material for the building foundations. Sewer N/A N/A Crews are installing sewer to the west apartment. Public works is inspecting that work. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 7/23/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Finish Grading Yes Yes Crews continue compacting material for the building foundations. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 7/26/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Finish Grading Yes Yes Crews continue compacting material for the building foundations. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 9/17/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Sidewalk Yes N/A Crews are setting sidewalk forms. Landscaping Yes Yes Crews have planted sod on in the ditch along 172nd. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 9/17/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Sidewalk Yes N/A Crews are setting sidewalk forms. Landscaping Yes Yes Crews have planted sod on in the ditch along 172nd. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 9/23/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes Yes Crews are installing roof and footing drains on the buildings on the north side of the southern wetland. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 9/29/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes Yes Crews are installing roof and footing drains on the buildings on the north side of the southern wetland. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 10/7/2021 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes Yes Crews are installing roof and footing drains on the southwest building along 172nd.. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 4/19/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Drainage Yes Yes Crews are installing drainage at the corner of 172nd and 67th. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 5/6/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Sidewalk Yes Yes Crews have resumed civil work. Crews are forming sidewalks around the buildings. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 5/25/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Grading Yes Yes Crews are grading the southern driveway into the development in preparation of HMA paving. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 2 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 5/31/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Grading Yes Yes Crews are paving the southern driveway into the development. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Page 2 Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 3 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/1/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Grading Yes Yes Crews are cutting HMA in preparation of crosswalk and planter island construction. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Page 2 Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 3 Department of Community & Economic Development CIVIL INSPECTION DAILY REPORT PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT DATE PROJECT NAME PREPARED BY 6/2/2022 Centennial Park Phase II Brian Grieve WORK PERFORMED Was work performed today? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED APPROVED APPROVED NOTES PLANS? MATERIALS? Flatwork Yes Yes Crews are placing concrete for walkways and patio areas. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL Was Temporary Traffic Control required? ☐ - Yes ☒ - No Is the contractor maintaining the traffic control devices? ☐ - Yes ☐ - No ☒ - N/A CLOSURE TYPE APPROVED NOTES PLAN? N/A TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CNTROL Page 2 Are the contractor’s erosion control measures in place? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No Is the contractor maintaining erosion control BMPs? ☒ - Yes ☐ - No ☐EROSION CONTROL ISSUE - N/A NOTES N/A INSPECTOR COMMENTS None Page 3 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park As-built Review Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 8.5.2022 Contact: Ryan Kilby Phone No.: 425-750-7926 Review Phase: 1 and Phase II Report Date: Reviewing Dept.: CED Engineer Project #: Plan Stamp Date: # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved PHASE I 1. BG C6.2 PH I The sidewalk along 67th shifts to the west and The Site Improvement Plan sheets have been matches the existing curb line at the north end of the updated to reflect the as built condition of the project. The plans show a full planter strip in that 12’ sidewalk in the northwest corner of the site. location. Adjust to match actual conditions. 2. BG C4.2 PH I A water meter is not shown on the east side of the The water meter has been added to the Water 67th sidewalk at the north end of the project. See the plan sheets. attached photo. 3. BG C5.2 PH I The sewer line is shown running underneath building The sewer plan has bee updated to show the an and the rock wall on the west side of the building. sewer line and cleanout in the correct location That sewer line was installed to the north of the north of the rock wall and building. building and rock wall, not as shown. 4. BG C6.1 PH I Speed bumps are shown along the south portion of the The speed bumps have been updated to the as drive isle where the parallel parking was deleted and built location in the center of the lane as replaced with perpendicular. Those speed bumps mentioned in the comment. were installed in the center of the lane, not along the southern curb as shown. 5. BG C4.3 PH I The plans show a blowoff assembly at the end of the Blow off assembly has been crossed out on the water line in the northeast corner of the property, but plan sheet as it was not installed as mentioned. none was installed. See the attached photo. 6. RM ALL PAGES PH I Update signature approval block to As-Built block All plan sheets have been updated with the with City Engineer signature. correct AB title block referenced. 7. RM C4.2-C4.11 PH I Update fire line tees to 12"x6" with 6" gate valves and All associated callouts have been marked up to 6"x4" reducers. show the fire line tees to 12"x6" with 6" gate valves and 6"x4" reducers have been installed. PHASE II 8. BG C3.2, C3.3 PH II The rock outfalls from the roof and wall drains on the The rock outfalls have been updated on that south side of the sidewalk are not shown as installed. plans to match the AB locations. 9. RM ALL PAGES PH II Update approval signature block to As-Built block All plan sheets have been updated with the with City Engineer signature. correct AB title block referenced. Page 1 of 2 18204 59th Avenue NE REVIEW COMMENT FORM Arlington, WA 98223 360-403-3551 Project Name: Centennial Park As-built Review Permit No.: PWD#2427 Review Date: 8.5.2022 Contact: Ryan Kilby Phone No.: 425-750-7926 Review Phase: 1 and Phase II Report Date: Reviewing Dept.: CED Engineer Project #: Plan Stamp Date: # Rev. Dwg. or Add’l Ref. City Comment Response/Resolution Spec. Ref. Approved 10. RM PH II No water submitted for Phase II No changes were made to the water plan for Phase II. All have been installed as designed. However, the water plans have been included with this resubmittal. 11. LP Resubmittal PH I ï‚· Electronic plan set - Electronic plan set has been submitted with packet ï‚· Draft Water Bill of Sale - Others to complete DWBS ï‚· Legal Description and Exhibit Map for Watermain - Others to create Legals for Watermain Easement (Phase I and II can be combined) Easement and Public ROW dedication ï‚· Update Legal Description for Public Right of Way dedication with a current Surveyor Stamp (Jackie H. Siebert Professional Surveyor License is expired) 12. LP Resubmittal PH II ï‚· Electronic plan set - Electronic plan set has been submitted with packet ï‚· Draft Water Bill of Sale - Others to complete DWBS - Others to create Legals for Watermain ï‚· Legal Description and Exhibit Map for Watermain Easement and Public ROW dedication Easement (Phase I and II can be combined) Page 2 of 2          !"#  !"#  $ %&'()*( + ,- *( .& -/0123345416278199:65;<## %)."=>?> @..$/(-=ABA ?B#>  C/+  D)+ E-) .< F-. <166:853:23:639246;:GH46IJK47346I;2630519246;:GH46IJK47346IL518G:25: 711M<  <01I25:H27H:;;9277:G5N26 O2771P:3<#:M728:277OH27H:;P45N O162OQ O5::263 5N:6G:3K8:2R5:G5N:H27H:<  #:;KJ945527 - C/S- -/ =2G8:7L+ T>UV>"WX? ?"0 ! >UV>"WX? ?"0 !YT ?Z >A  ?Z >0>[00A""U\A YT ]1646I+Y^0U>>"=>U_  0?`  0U15+W718a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`  03a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`N$&$S F C  7 [a?Z??1b?\D[[ZF BQZ1??)?1  cZ[dZ1 <0!6 N$%*'4%N*)*&3'*2N$%'4%),N$#JJ*#--N$%*'4%N*[2_#&4#$-#&4#$-#^ ?PP#()'4&O&47G  G C  [#(#S*'_,N'JN$-%*U4%&N$N$%*'4%N* 7 FBC ?PP#()'4&O&47G  G C  [#(#S*'_,N'JN$-%*U4%&N$N$%*'4%N*e?ff?) gZ X06!06 1'%#$-_#4%&N$[2_#1#-4*&_%&N$D4,#JU(#J1'%#N3_(#%#J1'%#$-_#4%N*D%'%U-   F D9D?8?\)QZaG ZN_U$4,(&-%98  F  F?8DZ)?[? D[ C  898[?ZD)?[ZD((F&%#3h-%,'%:#*#N$%,#*#O&$'(_U$4, C  )8G8? (&-%,'@#T##$4N**#4%#J9 DN%,#2,'@#3#%'*#-%'$J'*Jh-ON*O&$'(N$ :'%#*G[&33                             7   7   7   7   B7  C  B7  B7  /0ijk6 1'%##@&#:[2_#1#-4*&_%&N$--&S$#J[N['*S#%1'%#      ?1ZD)?[         ZN'JJ&%&N$'(4N33#$%-9 l?          N-,b*'$J(&#$'*J         D?)'$J#'-#3#$%-ZN@'a#'%N$         O'$2NO%,#-#'JJ&%&N$'(TU&(J&$S-'*#SN&$S%NT#3&P#JU-#A*#-&J#$%&'(4N33#*4&'( )8G1ZGbD     %,#2:&((*#mU&*#-#_'*'%#:'%#*3#%#*-9$#3#%#*ON*%,#*#-&J#$%&'(AN$#3#%#*ON*%,# 4N33#*4&'(9N$$#4%&N$O##-&$#OO#4%'%%,#%&3#NOTU&(J&$S_#*3&%-UT3&%%'(:&(( '__(29[egD     ZN4N33#$%-9)8GD?8G?         ZN'JJ&%&N$'(4N33#$%-9)8G8?     F    [?DQ\[[D ZN@'a#'%N$7    F    [?DQ\[[DZN4N33#$%-9)8G1ZGbD7    F    [?DQ\[[DZN4N33#$%-9)8GD?8G?7    F    [?DQ\[[DZN4N33#$%-9)8G8?7    BB  DG\Q[ZN4N33#$%-9)8G8?B7    C  DG\Q[ZNN33#$%-9)8GD?8G? C  BB  DG\Q[ZN4N33#$%-9)8G1ZGbDB7  BB  DG\Q[ ?1ZD)?[B7  n6 l##1#-4*&_%&N$ZN%#-3NU$% )*N4#--&$S[#4,$N(NS2 o F9 &@&()#*3&% o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`abcbdcdeacaacbc`fagahfijkljkkmnoeppqrfscf`e`atuvw (+*,9*,(,, `abcbdcxeacaacbc`fagahfijkljkkmnoeppqrfscf`yeactuvw (9*-1*,(,- bcaxgcdeagahfipzp{fp||}~f€~‚pƒtuvw (9*-U*,(,- bc`„dgxextytaca`i€ppfq€€{ |€tuvw (9*-U*,(,- bc`„`aaextytaca`i€eppfq€€f€onk†f‡atuvw (9*-U*,(,- bc`„`ayextytaca`i€eppfq€€f€onk†f‡`tuvw (,*()*,(,- „`cya„ceipzp{iˆk†l‰Š‹lmˆkf€j‰Œmlfquuom‹nlmˆktuvw (,*()*,(,- „`cya„aejˆƒj†leijkljkkmno€n‰ŽƒˆkˆŒj†‘cde`he`bÂ’p q{tuvw