Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Report (2)
s�T20zf DO'/3 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER MIQFFICE COPY 0. •., ct\ MANAGEMENT MEMO BEN 0 a 2021 Private Improvements Ra JTE G1�' NG D VIS10 Janet Turner Engineering, It�1LO 14 Terrace Glen Apartments 964,6 SW Greenburg Road, Portland, OR 97223 sO BY: Janet L Turner, P.E. Janet Turner Engineering, LLC 16869 65th Avenue, #194, Lake Oswego OR 97035 (541) 510-0878 Owner/Developer: Stefanie Kondor Related Northwest 18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900, Irvine, CA 92612 (949) 660-7272 Architect: C2K Architecture 1645 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 (503) 444-2200 Report Date: June 8, 2021 fme , r vf CACk , 0. Terrace Glen Apartments Private Improvements ..•. 9640 SW Greenburg Road, Portland, OR 97223 JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC 110 Stormwater Memo Table of Contents Report Sections: Section A - Project Overview and Description Page 1 Section B— Methodology Page 1 Section C—Analysis Page 3 Section D— Engineering Conclusion Page 6 Section E—Stormwater System Exhibits Page 6 Section F - O&M Protocol Page 6 Designer's Certification and Statement Page 7 Appendices: Appendix A—Topographic Survey Appendix B—Storm Drain Plan and Details Appendix C—Stormwater Facility Sizing Calculations Appendix D—Geotechnical Investigation Appendix E— Erosion and Sediment Control Plans and Details Appendix F—O&M Protocol Am- • ••: I. Preliminary JTE Stor mvuater Janet Turner Engineering, LLC Management Memo To: City of Tigard, Clean Water Services From: Janet Turner, P.E., Janet Turner Engineering, LLC cc: Date: June 8, 2021 Terrace Glen Apartments Re: Private Improvements Section A- Project Overview and Description This project proposes to construct affordable housing units in the city of Tigard, consisting of two, 4-story buildings, with an approximately 36,860 square feet (sf) footprint. The project site is located at 9640 SW Greenburg Road in Tigard, Oregon (Washington County). The 2.9-acre project site is currently developed with a Church and residence and associated vehicular parking, concrete walkways and utilities.The existing site slopes down from west to east with an average slope of approximately 4.8% and a total drop of 22-feet. The existing site stormwater is assumed to sheet flow across the parking lot to the surrounding grassy and treed areas and infiltrate into the vegetated surfaces. Per review of the topographic survey and available city mapping, an 8-inch public sewer and a public water main are located in SW Greenburg Road. In addition, both an 8-inch sanitary sewer and a 12-inch storm drain mainline are located to the northeast of the project site in a 20-foot easement off of SW 92nd Avenue. This project proposes to gravity feed the sanitary sewer services and the site storm piping through a new 20-foot wide Public Utility Easement (PUE) to connect into these two mains. Fire protection and domestic water will service the site via the water main in SW Greenburg Road. Section B- Methodology The project site is under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards. Because the proposed on-site improvements will create or modify more than 1,000 square feet of impervious surfaces, the development will be required to provide stormwater management in accordance with CWS Design and Construction Standards, specifically the November 2019 issuance of Resolution & Order (R&O) 19-22. R&O 19-22 outlines requirements for sizing/designing stormwater treatment of any new or modified impervious surface areas. 1 wr This Hydromodification Category 2 project has employed techniques to minimize the effects of hydromodification in this moderate risk project. All of the new impervious areas will receive water quality treatment, per Section 4.04.2 of R&O 19-22. The total project site area is 124,377 square feet (2.86 acres). Impervious areas include the proposed vehicular asphalt pavement (driveways and parking areas), concrete pedestrian walkways and curbs and building roof areas. Pervious surfaces proposed for the development include various landscape areas. See the table below for a breakdown of pre and post development areas for the whole site. % Area Description Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) Total awr Existing 16,322 0.375 13.1% Asphalt Paving Proposed 49,420 1.135 39.7% Existing 757 0.017 0.6% Concrete Proposed 11,175 0.257 9.0% Existing 769 0.018 0.6% Wood Deck Proposed 0 0.000 0.0% Roofs Existing 8,731 0.200 7.0% Proposed 36,862 0.846 29.6% Existing 97,798 2.245 78.6% Vegetation Proposed 26,920 0.618 21.6% Total Project Area: 124,377 2.855 Nis Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total Impervious 97,457 2.237 78.4% Pervious 26,920 0.618 21.6% y�y Total: 124,377 2.86 The project drainage basin is divided into two areas, one to the south (BASIN A) and one to the north (BASIN B) of the site. Each drainage area is composed of a combination of impervious and pervious surfaces. See the tables below for a breakdown of post development impervious areas for each drainage area. Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total Asphalt Paving 25,220 0.579 48.7% Concrete 7,672 0.176 14.8% Imo Roofs 18,882 0.433 36.5% Total: 51,774 1.19 2 BASIN B-Post Development Impervious Areas I Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total Asphalt Paving 24,199 0.556 53.0% Concrete 3,504 0.080 7.7% Roofs 17,980 0.413 39.4% Total: 45,683 1.05 Geotechnical investigation and infiltration testing were performed for this project by GeoDesign, Inc. in December 2020. Eleven (11) borings were advanced at depths ranging from 0.9 to 22.7 feet below grade. Infiltration testing, using the encased falling head method, was performed in four of the borings. B-4, closest to the proposed underground chambers, was tested at 5-feet below grade and resulted in an infiltration rate of 1.00 inches per hour. A Factor of Safety of 2 has been applied for the stormwater facility sizing analysis. Groundwater was encountered in four of the six of the explorations at the time of the testing, at a depth of between 17.8 feet and 20.0 feet below grade, or approximate elevation 217.17' at boring B-4. Refer to the attached Geotechnical Engineering report, dated December 21, 2020, included in Appendix D, herein. Section C—Analysis Water Quality Treatment: The proposed development is designed to meet current CWS requirements for impervious area treatment prior to discharge to the adjacent Public storm system. As noted above, the project site has been divided into two basins. The pre-developed conditions of the project area are as follows: Pre Development Areas Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total Impervious 26,579 0.610 21.4% Pervious 97,798 2.245 78.6% Total: 124,377 2.86 Pre Development Impervious Areas Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total BASIN A 13,500 0.310 50.8% BASIN B 13,079 0.300 49.2% Total: 26,579 0.61 3 The post-developed conditions of the project are as follows: ram., Post Development Impervious Areas Area Quantity(sf) Quantity(ac) %Total BASIN A 51,774 1.189 53.1% BASIN B 45,683 1.049 46.9% Total: 97,457 2.24 R&O 19-22 requires this development project to treat all new impervious surfaces and three times the modified impervious surface, as shown in the Table below. Post Development Impervious Areas to Be Treated New * Ex Quantity Quantity 3 x Ex Quantity Area (sf) (sf) (sf) Total(sf) BASIN A 38,274 13,500 40,500 78,774 BASIN B 32,604 13,079 39,237 71,841 r. Total: 70,878 26,579 79,737 150,615 a A proprietary Contech Stormfilter type of treatment system shall be installed for each Basin to meet the water quality treatment requirements, in accordance with Section 4.07.8. The StormFilter units have been sized based on the calculated water quality flow rate and the " associated number of cartridges required to treat the water quality flow rate. Cartridge design flow rate and height is in accordance with manufacturer's design guidelines. The design water quality storm event is 0.36 inches in 4-hours, based on R&O 19-22 ak<. requirements. See the tables below for details for each Basin. Water Quality Treatment-Contech StormFilter Unit BASIN A 96" DIAMETER MANHOLE-9 CARTRDIGES @ 8,35 GPM(LOW DROP PHOSPHOSORB) Water Water Quality Quality Peak Contech Unit 100-year Peak Contech Unit Impervious Peak Flow Flow Rate Treatment Flow Rate Peak Hydraulic Area(sf) Rate(cfs) (gpm) Capacity(gpm) (cfs) Capacity(cfs) 78,774 0.160 71.8 75.2 1.8 1.8 4 =s Water Quality Treatment Contech StormFilter Unit BASIN B r"• .METER MANHOLE-9 CARTRDIGES @ 8,85 GPM(LOW DROP PHOSPHOSORB) Water Water Quality Quality Peak Contech Unit 100-year Peak Contech Unit Impervious Peak Flow Flow Rate Treatment Flow Rate Peak Hydraulic iii Area(sf) Rate(cfs) (gpm) Capacity(gpm) (cfs) Capacity(cfs) 71,841 0.150 67.3 75.2 1.7 1.8 1 Flow Control: Stormwater flow control was designed using the NRCS Type 1A, 24-hour rainfall distribution resolved into 10-minute time intervals, in conjunction with the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) method and HydroCAD 10.10 modeling. Coefficients and curve ws numbers used in the calculations are consistent with the Technical Release 55 (TR-55)- Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. The design storm depths, per Table 4-4 (Design to Storm Distribution Chart), are as follows: ill Design Storm: 2-year, 24-hour: 2.5 inches 5-year, 24-hour: 3.10 inches 10-year, 24-hour: 3.45 inches 25-year, 24-hour: 3.90 inches I100-year, 24-hour: 4.50 inches The new development will incorporate techniques for mitigating its impacts on the downstream Public stormwater system in accordance with Chapters 4 and 5 of the CWS I .: standards. All impervious area will be routed through two on-site underground detention chamber systems (one for each Basin) in order to meet CWS flow control requirements, in accordance with Section 4.07.9. R&O 19-22 requires this development project to detain all Inew and modified impervious surfaces, as shown in the Table below. Post Development impervious Areas for Hydromodification 1 1 New Modified Quantity Quantity Area (sf) (sf) Total(sf) BASIN A 38,274 13,500 51,774 I BASIN B 32,604 13,079 45,683 Total: 70,878 26,579 97,457 5 0 This Hydromodification Category 2 project has employed techniques used to minimize the effects of hydromodification in this moderate risk project. The stormwater facilities were designed such that the post-development runoff rates from the site do not exceed the pre- development runoff rates, per the Peak-flow matching detention requirements shown in Table 4-7 of Section 4.08.6.c of R&O 19-22. Pre-and post-development runoff flows for the required storm events for the two Basins are summarized in the tables, below. Refer to Appendix C for the hydrologic analysis. BASIN A Runoff Flows-Pre vs.Post Development(cfs) Pre Post Storm Event Developed Developed Difference Flow Flow 2-Year 0.10 0.08 -0.02 m►w 5-Year 0.21 0.09 -0.12 10-Year 0.28 0.11 -0.17 25-Year 0.38 0.17 -0.21 ,ar BASIN B Runoff Flows-Pre vs.Post Development(cfs) Pre Post Developed Storm Event Developed Flow Difference Flow 2-Year 0.09 0.07 -0.02 +w 5-Year 0.19 0.08 -0.11 10-Year 0.25 0.09 -0.16 25-Year 0.33 0.11 -0.22 �,. The underground chambers will be Type ADS Stormtech SC-740 Chambers with end caps, constructed to provide flow control for impervious surfaces, as described above. These facilities will convey overflow runoff via a hard-piped storm drain system, with a 40. connection to the existing Public storm drain system located to the northeast of the project site. See Appendix C for cut sheet information on the chambers. Downstream Conveyance System Review Per Section 2.04.2.m.3 of R&O 19-22, for each development constructing new impervious surface of greater than 5,280 square feet or collecting and discharging greater than 5,280 square feet of impervious area, a capacity and condition analysis of existing downstream w.+ storm facilities and conveyance elements receiving flow from the proposed development shall be performed. Flows from the project area will be conveyed from the underground chambers into a private 8-inch storm line. The 25-year storm event will generate 0.17 cfs and 0.11 cfs of runoff from Basins A and Basin B, respectively, for a total of 0.28 cfs. At a slope of 0.40%, the full flow capacity of an 8-inch pipe is 0.90 cfs, with a resultant pipe velocity of 2.59 feet per second (fps), providing plenty of capacity to discharge the 25-year storm event for the developed area. The 8-inch private storm drain will connect into an existing storm drain manhole located to the northeast of the site. From there, site runoff will be conveyed via an existing 12-inch storm drain pipe. At a slope of 0.25%, the full flow capacity of this 12-inch pipe is 2.11 cfs, with a resultant pipe velocity of 2.68 feet per second (fps). The 0.28 cfs runoff from the new development is 13.3% of the total capacity of the existing 12-inch storm drain, leaving plenty of capacity to discharge the 25-year storm event for the existing and proposed developed areas. Erosion Control Construction erosion and sediment control measures are proposed per CWS and Oregon DEQ requirements. Refer to Appendix E, herein, for the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plan and details. Section D— Engineering Conclusions The proposed stormwater design, including treatment, conveyance and detention has been designed per the current CWS Runoff Treatment and Control standards. Construction erosion and sediment control measures will be utilized for the proposed development, meeting CWS and Oregon DEQ requirements. Refer to Appendix A for the topographic survey and Appendix B for the Storm Drain Plan C3.0. Section E—Stormwater System Exhibits Appendix A, herein, contains the Topographic Survey Drawing. The Storm Drain Plans can be found in Appendix B, attached herein. Refer to Appendix C for runoff and the underground chamber system sizing calculations, along with some cut sheet information on the chambers. Appendix D contains the Geotechnical Investigation. Appendix E, herein, contains the Erosion Control drawings. ,mow Section F—Operations and Maintenance Protocol Operations and maintenance protocol for the proposed Stormfilters and underground chambers have been added herein as Appendix F. 7 4,0 Designer's Certification and Statement I hereby certify that this Stormwater Management Memo for the Terrace Glen Apartments project has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets minimum standards of the Clean Water Services' Design & Construction standards and meets normal standards of engineering practice. I hereby acknowledge and agree that the jurisdiction does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of drainage facilities designed by me. w 1111 I I I I I r I 11 lii 8 I i w ii .. :.f JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC ism arr Yrr a APPENDIX A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY +w a 41111 411110 EXISTING C®1�I�I ,IONS 1''I TREE TABLE OF A PORTION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1 "LEHMANN ACRE TRACTS" TYPE TRUNK9zE °Rw LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 26, ou sosox oEaws 09'w'%J ]a' 50a04 0ECi0OW5 ,• 0' T.1S., R.1W., W.M. CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON S1t601 ONI- . 50 LEGEND 5061 J01iW0.15 Oa.%x 19` 50. WWs OW X 7 ,5' we AV CONCRETE 50701 CONIFER vn rluE- SO)fiJ CONIFER Ofi'1%2 37 O u fin;,�t+ / 3444r � saN'ACE s ROOK ,INDICATES BLOCK Imo M. S1 nN 50885 50885 .500DEODuW5 ]Y 1 SURVEY N07ES: CM, Aa+rw� �^`MICE z0' z5' r` \ 0wr b` atl \ l UPON ds'r!w SET.RN NO 4Cmz-ue2. MM.. v 50890 CoNRER tlY I 891 TER 21 00 �^ .�: \ i I.en REND DATUM R[]w. 5.892 coo R (� '/7 i _ _ ADVT.SIDEWALK 5089J WIRER 21' 85' EY. , .1. ;� /^ 1 b !I R mw 5em JxMs nc I ws WV r0 COMPLETE Ras sUm[r s AN INMATES NO00 MICE 5089A cwlaR 2T' S0' S '• 11 � \\ / t�'q1 IS NOT J Bdlnnlry stwlrr.NO u emr CORNERS WERE.5,II MIS SURVEY. r.Ru. �R,C 50895 CON(ER 1Y 15 [ Ifni_///lT + / \ \ (�Va\ Cam,.A�•1#x• '� POROLIND Of AMYL-GROUND R.!/ / // V.� \ ' `\ ORMATTON AMA.,3.,�osns` PANT OE RA5 SUM,NO STATENEWI PAW CONCUMING THE�•a i' \ a IN OAS SLAM TO.SEMENSSi SUCH MAT MONOIROAG.OR Y TRICTIONS mc COuu.vrtCr ME Rni OS MS PROPERTY.NO AImWr INS BEEN Y�v'E Ofi A mum IS eo / i,a \ \ p��]9 a� 4,, EASICATES DECWWS ap' u II \ \OE�\ 50MSG ,1 VI' j .tm RwvwrE(vw) 01907 OEaNOUS le 50 ll--rr �.Oe-- —"Y _, \\ T.\ ��EE++4 to 50910 DECDUWs MP To Oa'x 8 25' / 421 ` \ -\ �s 0 ao9rsj?x509t1 DECDUWs �i - 's AA aa' m' It / \ \ \ p \\ 50912 DEC MOO ` \\ I EA 1 \ ISMNE NENE I a' 20 / I 1 \ \p' 2p / V +I 2tl l ee ' .l 1 _ T4Sr\- R \ \\ \ II V/I u 1 DECIDUOUS 2' / ' / / �h I \ ! .,-. :\ l..J ad 50932 bEapuW //-/y Ei AWAITS OOxAUrDd RCN WOLF 50931 DECIDUOUS I> XI' 'hBgppT /; /; ! "J \\ \ / 1 3 >J`\ ata 5 tl Ea NnCATES Aar OdpnxrcR r .Tiil:lEr.El-1♦ � l- ,�21D,V�U,,,� JN \,Ay _) O 1; /®P. Q ' S i- Y N 8835.49•E ZJB.65• 4 51o,moo 0» DEarx�s Zoe' zOD Rwa �/ jJ / li' \ \\ �'zw4 n,,,„ - %T`:01 E: - �I ,_xaLeEw_a -I umno aeon '" 4q +x HYDRANT t051065 51,3 ITT �, V+'V l/, I 11 \ I �/�i / a �x <\ \ (,'��4Tn ,i.,_yr!/' S• I / 18 k - I 1 /- ne,E �'y 19 5r[pa ll::�A 'V1/ 1 / ,�/ / C'�\M1r000iiA✓r✓rl / I 1 f�1 ;ys I ^ 'i - l \�;��,fff 1 \ \ �"�' -_o9 0' 1 ' e 511)t DECWUws it' 25' rNNr / \ \ 1 I / —%—%— EOCA CART LINK FENCE LAE 117x DECIDUWS 23. 25' / 1 j \ ‘IC;''''', es rOvO \ \ \ 1 stDECIDUOUS I - i i i I / / : \ I I i I / r COUP 357 CONFER I r r s25a CORNER 24' E5' / --- Q i A ' / / I 1 \ EMI-MG ROADWAY PAINT 512a1 OpFCIDUWS W'%J JS' I __ STRIPE slzfis Ecuuas ,o'TO I5•x 7 w' / i i I / r 2 J � 11 i i l I\ i / I n El % �--�I d // ! I !'- 5Lm l �1I \ (�/E/.,� yl\2I . . ' V / Ir. / ` / _ 1W +!,• 9650 SWU1zC RO. l , j ;S /53 gel '-"ljjl E / / l ♦$' / In 51275 pEa0Uw5 1r JV \ / /�s :3` 1 I I I / I 1 / \ l IM1 Ea SANITARY SEWER w mown mow mow AMIN � f -"ill** / r�� i 1 i / / / / ' i / / LA B I moors E%a N c.aRE,E / I� / '�•`—�s �• ) / / i 1 // l i t' l : / (/1 1/ 1 I 1 EwE.TS COSTING ASPHALT c y_mlo / is/ _ ( L. \\ i i' / / i// !'� a 1 i -- I I I / (/ 1 LAND j 0. lI / / I I I / 1 / MEM ! LAND SURVEYOR I I 1 -` t -- DEL''La \ \ / la 1 /L1 I I I I I l /,T^`F / l / I � / / , / _ _ lit. / y/ I // / yI1 I I I / J, / f/IL ORTt•5wx00ll / / {{ AI ! �1T / i '( Z S'4E/ / I !V ,�/ //' ' V B�REIT� DOVE 639 I/ / V / .{ 't, 1 I : / I , qNK / I / / /EXPIRES 12-31-21 % ,. SroOA A - __ - �`- /- / \ 1 I _ I t _ /- !1l 72 Yea it> N� / y rz l 1 H . .o] 220120 " \ A N 89J'00'W 54218"„: 1 ` I z:ry E Y *SUN / smE m 71 GRAPHIC SCALE 6445 SW FALLBROOK PLACE, SUITE 100 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008 (IN FBBT) PH: (503) 746-8812 I inch-so R... FAX: (503) 639-9592 JANUARY 14,2020 www.erneriodesign.corn JOB:510J-003 w • = e • • ;•• mot 6 *alp JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC iw rr War APPENDIX B STORM DRAIN PLAN Vair tie 41110 wrr r.r 1 , i I , • , I .. . .. k I I I I ., t C2 ‹ i / > CON190S.TR15U29C1.2T ILOOTNT 1NOON TTMES C:O MMIT,ATTE 29112196.MOTTO 01.61.90164200910 TOER 14 SHEET NOTF_S ARCHITECTURE / ITTOTHENISTE PRIVATE KT AT 520 MTH 51.4.9 MID LETTS AS TOWN 2 REFER 70 OTT CO 0 FOR=MOT 90111,14.699 :. ' ''' 2 02249CTI-001151-016 5704,'OTTE WM1 NEW CORE-22111.521,46226471011/TM TTIT r-'j'•• 1 i IFTIMEOISIVITHINGTON ome479 As 9,Rturimoo 62292 3 TM,21292,0010 SMITE 00.616895 FOR 06114111011.RUM TO OTT 0 11102 BUTT RAH 0.110 SWETT TATO 2 TORTOVITER TT,22,05. It'a,......4 4. /H579.2.ST0101601-09 TWO,FOR 221121120.79 TETT,REFER 90 OUT 4021.1 •.. JTEMIT-45296, 74177% \ '' PITT T41124 41111002061,2.T.1.9.. E>6,2,0 2.9"'''''''' •''''''''' \ '''4'1:::::,‘, COOT FM 2 3 Lf R11422414916 Of TO OICIOT, / ; ' V.' \' 61,9297.22 110 o0.49..91,44, ; ,',4,,z,j4<.\ / /,,. \\ \C` COPT 2 SO MOLT 5200500 ROFT / t Irk .. ‘...,9'; •-\\ 46-,T go,9,96, 11,2246.30 Y • '001159 2 50 2 11/ FOOTITORAIN . 5.6 MOD 21, Y 'ET TT , iii-----_ COTT 2 SO 57 0 TR 6292241 91' ''', ' TT TNEW"."7145,22<:329 52 E 520,0642 MT q ' /1// —1__r• \ N '''1E)1?27'2244.42 Of COTT(SO 1.9, 5200041T, '; • 1 I, •-•4 OTIT 2 95 15 7, 5.00100 MT T-669,4,960.66,666 o , RI192241.92,,,,LF C>1419114766,‘„4,1,,, 1 1 ‘,. 59211500T, •Di-......f,p,.........—\ ,,_,,, 4 5200090 FT, I a FASTENT'''''''''''' T9.99.6°224, 52091-151 TIT .9=1-'44'''',.9, ,,,,44,..... ,,,,,,,,,,,. 211T223. "N646/4 11922232 IS WASHINGTON SOU ,..,,,,I.i, / / .,,,,,,i• iii .2-'11::,:a.:0;:, \ ',., /,. 0,572 52 66 0 Tr COTT 2 50 54 6 lf I 1 I 5=OTTO TT ',.opp,00 66,6,9 52490100 TM I ' i TERRACE MALL ROAD 41'' c / CONSTR.51969.41-9 6,9199 19 20..21021. COTT OW 5 6 Li o, , STOTT, \ • TTI 66 90 699 T6 1:22:>570PAGE camases VI I 1 e GLENN 9FEETTITED PAT OFTTT ITT ' / ; , I ,- , . 1,7L4,_,..T' APARTMENTS r - I ,,,,,,,,,, 819.2229 V o--I-- —1 • — I 1 1 ,;;" )T T " I / ,• ' „o. •.6 \ ' ....., 6—-292912— 99 , —.9OTT , .1I' 2."9./7 z%",',:9,,,r,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;'/.71 1• i' ! _J a-...:;;°,4"' „,,,,,, 11,2229W OTT' I /t /ir./ 57r020 TT ; r, ,,,,‘N 20421-1250 19 OLT ;,,,,,.466..0 ,,,,,,,,,,. "I COTT,51222.1164 ,o.,,„,,,,,, RELATED NW 879-222 OS k; ' :11:===1 460.92 69;69 / COOT 2 SO 901.9 •1 ' . i,e.252...1 4 '` , , COTT 6.92 20 Slr ,o,66.,o-‘69 ,,,,,0,,,,,,, I - 4 .92.1.CTS RIT„5.22 6,221312; / LIT' i ‘\' D>66',';'' ''''''''''' \\ ' :2459TUTT6214 ......... L._.;;;.6,1,-.——7,7—,...-..-- -—,<—.. : I ' / / • /i Itl '•v •110,‘, 520.0910 MT > • R0122,22 '9— -":\ o • MOTT 505 2 TR 42292 ...''''<:::.1 :1.71'.:r1VS; ••• •'• '"" T t / '/ • ' .RIOT 05 CCITECT10114‹ /9/0 .,,,,,,,,,,. 114,111 OTTER 12,1 2 TOOT 9640 SW GREEN BURG TOAST 2 52 26 2 LT ro r4 R11922949S ,,..,,, A COTT 2 51,204 LF •."2, OM,2 SO 75.0 V 4,9=nm Tigard,OR 97223 920 00.20 TYR MT 2 SOO 8 LF 7o.“'F'T'A''''' r 11111 COTT 6,19 6, y 9 52 00100 MT . X 'I M'"9149'.27" •-•-1- elifil/ 6,2246 31' I 6,2245 29 . 2 ..,1"; • 0,4464,0,4 66 Ft'0300n7 '9:1' I r. ''. IFFE2 246 421 d11111 OTT 6,41.1 LT TROTT, 02672 9416.411 "" WTI,TT 5,2241,42,0 5-0 050361, COTT 5•50 15 5, 694.9460 4 646='''''''''''''41 9.09062 To, 6,2244 72' ..<1,,,..,,,,,, I 520 MOTT • TT JUNE 06,2021 /. 6- . 6, ILL 2 TETT PERMIT ST X 1 UMERGROINO TORAT TIMM IT.<1 BUILDING 2 6142h1.911 1.1 2 SO 13 1 LT ' „,,,./ -- 5200300 MT I 00195T 6.50 56 61, C011,6.51,0714 II 11 ST MATEO PT,DEPT 00.1 ROOTS]60' t 5.9 Top Fr, 4 IIII II 122E2 249 WI '20.... 520 0500 ryrr 6.6. iir.,....ii, ,roilge!701,,, 1111114..r,;•,Ir ' iiii I 1>- ....;;.....-...- ' r ---" III., '5-0 OTT TT il '' "''''''''. III'0614.790 SI ----7 1:1 ..—..... ::I = ,, ,— . ....< ,0, .,,°°" — / r c—r,:-0:-°,vr I '=°"'"'" `"" OTT 69 MO 71, ST..... I TO 0100 TT 411 • . orE.,9,6, '‘q /111 / t' p,'----'-''''---,-; ST•1°-2— 261-',2,2;2" g,zr,r,..,-,r.°— 5200500 T/FT 11,2212 9T . . .-4...-00495,9.90.6 49 ITTEMENT SW,232 42 1111' AN / . — '= —ICC ' . 17;TSIT:12 5.51.6 I I_.'''•=11•F12",,,, -:-`---7---1--' !7,„2, . ,* i 77-,. i. i Fri "'+, 5.-rwirrvir-i N 52 RAMO MT \ ''4 I ki .4.'9'2. N i 1 RtitiOR ../lAff _.............._ 51;,) 7 51,1 -4954ffit o —ST—— TT •TT——99. I . 9'MOTO, ,97.Aji'• 2241247;S" HT 2 WM n., t ,;•7 r / ,„,„,,,.,0„,„ 6,-22 et &meas. "'''' 11111A" Ar—E) -----1 OKI,SD 304 Li 8111.22449S rri.,«3C AL 0,9 WYE 5200150T, 021,2 SO 21 4 LS OUT 25021 4, 2,922509. 41,_ ,....„,,,, 520 0500 MT 09.72 SD 49 919 rr.r 41 9#47-;: OT PT—PT 2121 OM PM PIM it' MT PVT PM MR ' 2.11 2019 • 2...2... T.' lr.; _.=e 6,7VITH o 9 99 j I 'I ri ' 5200.1 TT .. I STOW 4076167T'' Twain,°TT orovaTom995.,4,6922o .dh. WI11.011f VIrCfr WITO•PENZ.5.10f(A BRED ANO1.111.11PiCIVIOP 11.10f ,1. r •,• .1.11r,rem ..,..,,,,,, —;FITITZ .-,-,,,y,... 129•11-11,,V, ;;;;;;;;:ele;;;;TlIge";;;;T:"Ti. 6492247 60 . , 0,2242 OS ooryST 2 50 119 1 LT 9•T 2 02 111912.2„..99. T04.9 6,9029.066 ,n.„,n,,,,, COTT 2 SO 26 2, 9,49.94, COTT 2 50 22 7 Tr 5.0.00900 TT R114.211,91. 5.00500 17/97 TT,COTT ...TT'. '0;15=4“;59 2 LT 211.12396 50 •• COTT NTT MT 021ST WONT 001.51,TN 9 LF, 520 0146 TT 6,2292 57 0.119-242 Or 5.00100MT• •, 6,2242 IS 1 6, -222 TV ''''‘*•g;''''',;0 Ts:*1.,• 0259 6.M 163, COTT 6940 20 7L9 .COTT 2 SO 21 2 LF "7 .•• . ,60 0,00 TT 0,5T V 50 II 7, I, E 5.00400MT 5211292,72, 4,0 01469, 300199 F74 5**2‘00100 FT/FT Nziof ••• • : • . : , : N iii.,_ ..nue 090,012,92-92941 1 LLI STORM DRAIN PLAN PLAN SCALE VI zloin a C3.0 _ ____ I ) 1 I 1 1 �' I „�::=b7o „e i I i )--""--m'--"-.s"SD—// I N6� o,7p� r�N C2C ,2 nN, o N,K .,_ I __ �Al ..r......0�R� R�., N «oONDa KM II 4 r\ ice , C KE, 5,nowN� . I \,,, ARCHITECTURE cow sm II I \,,, 16.NW HOY,PORTLAND,OR 97209 603 MR 2200 - All i i i i ii ,,, �„«w�,.,JIL SFMH ,41 i in L J , I °WEER SYSTEM PER e I I f l l l l l l l DI 6NR'',9_.„,.. , / 4 4 4vA)i, \ 1ik�1 1' ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 D1 �1� tri o _�I I I I I I I I I I 4 - , I rrm f _ ii� B, :,,, °._ _ 2E 'r awvEn N>a 1- • fmi.oc PLAN WALE \ - �3 _ry R7 a.num STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM#1 11111 EARTN STORMER TER DESIGN MOTES N — � R{. i i ,„R.; w.,.— M Li , l,w .�i;a:a;. -- --n T—K� ))SFMH N ° — w a TERRACE .alr kieIF, E` PLAN SCALE �E R� ON AM'%o "15 , GLENN TTT •rpwsn rrtesecRc N —y' s1 EO.S,ExT®EE rWr,NE,uuc PPE wrzu.6. i hNnRn,AFN N �„ N TYPICAL APARTMENTS • " O STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM#2 N° " T, ^�"„■„ E " O TRENCHING&BACKFILL SECTION NO YALE oreatta RELATED NW FRME MO COVER ..m. ,S.m"I�wsn ,,......,— 9640 SW GREENBURG _: Tigard,OR 97223 innSECTION AA rtr=mn.wwr..nT47.... e...�..=.: ::: — i �N o96 ' tmmFil�r sTa EN sicna wo roKR STANDARD DETAIL NV ",DHErr D^ iu a s yyy,,,...��� i na u SURE'AM O96"DIAMETER STORMFILTER MANHOLE(SFMH96) —ow 1.5 �nl�'I'1l STRIK7URECOUPLER SEE ROPE E 7 1 oR— MEMO GRACE RW�mRENWW. II ,�W 1111101 9 I ill RECURRED Ilk F. , , a�N.,NaR UNPIN IS ors" .RWEMA °A .a. I�t� N.NEWa © oaE» 1 1 p AND 2.R �. 11110 II PPE O al 111�ik1 1AN- I�III - -=� ' " 11* — - =A� ",H �s°RPROJECTEDINTERSECTION BETWEEN -7— ,n�• .EEL NE� rram 071; 'WES POR AS SWAM CR T�N� A�NREEELENIERSTUCTREE,~EEAPE A�_SNAIL ElEAS,RUCNEAr PPE KETOROMIT PROVIDE XECUA1E W UTILITY DETAILS ENLARGED _- — MUD Ze ISM EMSNED GRADE Of cNDRD N TO FACILITAIE 6scux. 6I G.War ma END w ME a RSV.m.WP6'0D VS STORM DRAIN PLAN 47 MINOR ACIEO Cr mor mum .1.NA RDER PIPE E."s'En PM 6.g s RISER PIPE TO r.N 6 uN WD a MAX a6.RWDc eL,Ew END Rrt A AD SIRLICTURLS DOD M dSECURE�r�W EN «�iuoz6i"vRau TM HEAVY Rum GRATE MIN acme R,xsEM T"•••". O STANDARD CATCH BASIN(CB) WEC) STANDARD CLEANOUT(CO) 0 STANDARD AREA DRAIN(AD) d C3.1 Ft I 411111t = m: _ � . _ -- CSC MOJECTRFOIBM]gN_. . - a_ _ _ Ramon. wig f i ARCHITECTURE TERRACE GLEN REVISION BASIN A 1645 NW HO]t PORRAND OR MO, g� PORTLAND,OR €'R soa 4as zoo SC)4DST0RM2ECH CHARMED 0PEC1D1CAtrON3Ili i Ri J rt ,,.... - ....,.+_..,,.._, : q r• i keel Darner Y e^n'rinc.Li, 342 72 16 e ry i ACCEIPMIE BF] CHAMBER SYMMS h i 1i! 1 �._- Iii 1 TERRACE 1 ' op..i.,�u�J ,'IR}Iq�lIFR,RNr C GLENN : ....__a.....,_.�,._ > ' APARTMENTS •L k �'°MAK' a ( ..,.._..�.,. ��ro.. B, _ {a coat i1,0 _ L f it RELATED NW ll I-� d/ _al _ .. ___ II[h T-:_ jj 'I'It? .00,.„__ _ .n Fi a i 9640 SW GREENBURG LROTRS i 0 -a �--- .,..-_-_ ip' 'I Tigard,OR 97223 ...,....,a.,,.,_ 6v ..,..,._,...A...am..n. 7 ...,.•.., ,_�..........._...e.:.....--- F9 �5 I[I: h I '!riVt, =............;4_y0 tit:111i ii iirliatg- ....... - 'I i I JR� " !^ffI ,a ) �t �. , 7 ¢., � z, ^ �-. ill terzA i1_ ill ®®e { ii lq iyi ili FI ,.........,...,,,i..ad.�$M i �' _ S W STORM DRAIN DETAILS .,. OF eo5 Ei C3.2 ir : C 2 < PROJECT WORKS°. // NAxBnm:P ",_B'.c.. �� — qp ,,� -xxna e.. tl 0800., tom? yI ARCHITECTURE — — — i w��e�ew^'rt r.l i 1645 NW HO I TORRRND.OR T7209 TERRACE GLEN BASIN B i 1e 50.""�'00 PORTLAND,OR SC.+d9 RNTF TBMR 1 ...-..,....w.......a ..,...w,w........w.. a.as..e�mm..m.u.+m.m......e.«.....,.m.<.,,r..re. a . 11 -._ - -- - -- --- 9-- JIF n.w�...a.—a.ww....w . ..,...-..a...,-..w .:T.:.a,..w.....a....�.m-sw-.,. i Janet inn, i.nAn«,N,.II, 18 ..m.. .. Via..,..-....,-.....:.,,d... •(! � .. ..— swe�... -.-..w a a.s- IF.° i/ ry , ...L., .; ,.'5S;'w0.5NSib^'-.4S'nY.'.R4:.t d.<,„{Sc..�o,.iSif.'fi..;^.fl.`aRaS'it—.uT...a-.o -. dl -.-r... ^€'imrwmwnw+o:.n�. r...,w.....-...mx..............w...�.�.......maa. OF 9 rnnnw HOACCEPTABLE MU IMATERMAA BTORMTECH 60.760 CHAMBER SYSTEMS �—w _.w..w a..m \ ..a...m _ Iwo. ie N[F w w4 le -- a , — =,- wa — TER RACE C E — i pJP GLENN — .— �` i ;J ._ a�. W ..7_ ..� _ {i APARTMENTS NTS= �a . . . l :itT i [ t -TT."`'''' — -- - ,.�.., .^ I1 RELATED NW �..��- ...� ... _J�,w,..-I1— �. .,_"_ t ........,...,..........�...,..........J� I�3 ii .- 09640 SW GREENBURG "."". ! ^.'.'.'•.'.,.'w^.^..a'.-..,,- Iy2 I� Tigard,OR 97223 FeT 't R mpe �qqq r - p35a�E -`1' � 2/ i ate . C'.1 0. `21rds �i�`E'&""...-."e � 1 e t ��T�II LIT t Al . dw . �,� av,l L 1 a' \,� =- € i1 7 1 w .va i91 w ; ='= !� .,._ ®�r� ,,._a L�-.._� ..:.��~ I EI — 1/ \ __--w_ i I 11 nEF„nw,w�o.77,NNE..,:::.._ i \�—_w_w_ 1 R ..n..NF,7.— moo. -:. — m—.— i F _...w.. a w. — ,` 1 it � I^ �E ti F e.n,N I � ®® "s_� 1� t� — .... '- .. . N STORM DRAIN DETAILS ! R I� _ _., ,...,, �..�._a.. �, op �i C3.3 rw ww •• 6•. • ire r •OM• • JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC trr wit I APPENDIX C STORMWATER FACILITY SIZING CALCULATIONS r I I I I I StormTech LLLLLLL ® , III ii, c, ,,,...., ,,,, ,,,..,,..... ....,.„,,,,,s‘c2,,,,„-,.,.:41:,a,-,:„ STORMTECH SC-740 CHAMBER elm Designed to meet the most stringent industry performance standards for superior structural integrity while providing designers with a cost-effective method to save valuable land and protect water resources.The StormTech o" system is designed primarily to be used under parking lots,thus maximizing .. . , „„ , land usage for private(commercial)and public applications" ".. thus , i limit enhancing the performance and extending the service life of these practices. N '.�' STORMTECH SC-740 CHAMBER may'' �. (not to scale) Nominal Chamber Specifications , at ':' 'I'''TI4 -It''' ' ? k r l Size(LzWx H) �� . ' 1 '1'` 85.4"x 51"x 30" 4st445. 2,170 mm x 1,295 mm x 762 mm P90.7"(2304 mm) — Chamber Storage ACTUAL LENGTH 45.9 ft3(1.30 m3) 24"(600 mm)DIAMETER MAX. 1_,Itcririi.liwitifirm Min.Installed Storage* 74.9 ft3(2.12 m3) ��� 29.3" I Weight (744 mm) 74.0Ibs(33.6kg) 1 (310 mm) 45.9"(1166 mm) (— Shipping 85.4"(2169 mm) 111 30 chambers/pallet INSTALLED LENGTH 1 60 end caps/pallet 12 pallets/truck 30.0" 'NO �� (762 mm) *Assumes 6"(150 mm)stone above,below and „� 1�� .r o r between chambers and 40%stone porosity. 51.0" 1 (1295 mm) EMBEDMENT STONE SHALL BE A CLEAN.CRUSHED AND ANGLII,AR GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES,<35% STONE WITH AN AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION BETWEEN#3 AND#57 FINES,COMPACT IN 6"(150 mm)MAX LIFTS TO 95%PROCTOR CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DENSITY.SEE THE TABLE.OF ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS. ASTM F2418 POLYLENE(PP)CHAMBERS OR ASTM F922 POLYETHYLENE(PE)CHAMBERS CHAMBERS SHALL BE BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC ADS GEOSYi'HETICS 601T NON-WOVEN CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". GEOTEXTILE ALL AROUND CLEAN.CRUSHED. PAVEMENT'LAYER(DSIGNED EMBEDMENT STONE �BY SITE DESIGN ENGNEER) — ___ —__ 50 'I Erm) (4 mm)MI (2.MAXX .;�.,. f+ ; ,0 mm)MIN , PERIMETER STONE ,nr' �� �. Øs\\� 30" EXCAVATION WALL _ ,I � 1 e � _ (CAN BE SLOPED .3- ,,r.-<.. ) - ORVERTICAL) LDEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED „I li _ — I_ BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 6"(150 mm)MIN 12 (300 mm)MIN SC 740 _ END CAP SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 6 51"(1295 mm) 12"(300 mm)TYP THE ENSURING THE REQUIRED BEARING (150 mm)MIN CAPACITY OF SUBGRADE SOILS i 'MINIMUM COVER TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT.FOR UNPAVED INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,INCREASE COVER TO 24"(600 mm). - . , .. StormTech " - 1/11N-.:6 SC-740 CUMULATIVE STORAGE VOLUMES PER CHAMBER Assumes 40%Stone Porosity.Calculations are Based Upon err a 6"(150 mm)Stone Base Under Chambers. STORAGE VOLUME PER CHAMBER FT3(M3) ' a :lehainherian -''; rye t F �'+ 42(1067) + 45.90(1.300) 74.90(2.121) 41(1041) 45.90(1.300) 73.77(2.089) 40 1016 't' Stone 45.90 1.300 72.64(2.057) 1 SC-740 Chamber 45.9 1.3 74.9 2.1 81.7(2.3) 88.4(2.5) 39(991) Cover 45.90(1.300) 71.52(2.025) 38(965) 45.90(1.300) 70.39(1.993) Note:Assumes 6"(150 mm)stone above chambers,6"(150 mm)row T spacing and 40%stone porosity. _ 37(940) 45.90(1.300) 69.26(1.961) 36(914) 45.90(1.300) 68.14(1.929) 35(sss) 45s5(1.298) sass(1.897) AMOUNT OF STONE PER CHAMBER 34(864) ( mm 45.69(1.294) 65.75(1.862) 33(838) � - 45.41(1.286) 64.46(1.825) 32(813) 44.81(1.269) 62.97(1.783) 31(787) 44.01(1.246) 61.36(1.737) SC-740 3.8(2.8) 4.6(3.3) 5.5(3.9) 30(762) 43.06(1.219) 59.66(1.689) _ 29(737) 41.98(1.189) 57.89((1.639) ry SC-740 3,450(2.1) 4,170(2.5) 4,490(3.0) �. 28(711) 40.80(1.155) 56.05(1.587) .,.. __ 27(686) 39.54(1.120) 54.17(1.534) __ Note:Assumes 6"(150 mm)of stone above and between chambers. 26(660) _ 38.18(1.081) 52.23(1.479) 25(635) ' 36.74(1.040) _ 50.23(1.422) _ III I_ M3 24(610) 35.22(0.977) 48.19(1.365) VOLUME EXCAVATION PER CHAMBER YD3(M3) 23(584) 33.64(0.953) 46.11(1.306) 22(559) ymm 31.99(0.906) 44.00(1.246) 21(533) 30.29(0.858) 1.85(1.185) __ _ -- ( SC-740 5.5(4.2) 6.2(4.7) 6.8(5.2) 111 20(508) _ 1 28.54(0.808) 39.67(1.123) 19(483) 26.74(0.757) 37.47(1.061) Note:Assumes 6"(150 mm)of row separation and 18"(450 mm)of cover.The 18(457) 24.89(0.705) 35.23(0.997) volume of excavation will vary as depth of cover increases. 17(432) 23.00(0.651) 32.96(0.939) 16(406) 21.06(0.596) 30.68(0.869) ____ 15(381) _ 19.09(0.541) 28.36(0.803) 14(356) i 17.08(0.484) 26.03(0.737) 13(330) 1 15.04(0.426) 23.68(0.670) _ 12(305) i 12.97(0.367) 21.31(0.608) 11(279) 10.87(0.309) 18.92(0.535) 10(254) 1 8.74(0.247) 16.51(0.468) IliMiliil' Working on a project? _......_ wain StormTech- 9(229) 6.58(0.186) 14.09(0.399) Visit us at 8(203)I 4.41(0.125) 11ss(o.330) and utilize the StormTech Design Tool 7(178) _ 2.21(0.063) 9.21(0.264) 6(152) 4 0(0) 6 76(0.191) ii_ 5(127) ._____ 0(0) 5.63(0,160) 4(102) I Stone 0(0) 4.51(0.128) 3(76) Foundation 0(0) 3.38(0.096) 2(51) 0(0) 2.25(0.064) ( 1(25) I 0(0) 1.13(0.032) Note:Add 1.13 ft'(0.032 m3)of storage for each additional inch(25 mm)of stone lik,v. foundation. For more information on the StormTech SC-740 Chamber and other ADS products,please contact our Customer Service Representatives at 1-800-821-6710 Advanced Drainage Systems,Inc. THE MOST ADVANCED NAME IN WATER MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS'' 4640 Trueman Blvd.,Hilliard,OH 43026 1-800-821-6710 www.ads-pipe.com ADS"Terms and Conditions of Sale"are available on the ADS website,www.ads-pipe.com ;;yp The ADS logo and the Green Stripe are registered trademarks of Advanced Drainage Systems,Inc. <Basin Drainage Basin r 4: L Diagram for Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE �Subcat Reach; fPon Link Routing Dia g Prepared by HP, Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD®10 10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC +w. Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Table of Contents Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Reports 1 Routing Diagram 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) 3 Area Listing (all nodes) 2 year Event 4 Node Listing 5 Subcat Basin A: Drainage Basin A 5 year Event 7 Node Listing 8 Subcat Basin A: Drainage Basin A 10 year Event 10 Node Listing 11 Subcat Basin A: Drainage Basin A 25 year Event 13 Node Listing 14 Subcat Basin A: Drainage Basin A Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Storm Type Curve Mode Duration B/B Depth AMC Name (hours) (inches) 1 2 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.50 2 2 5 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.10 2 3 10 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.45 2 4 25 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.90 2 vow I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 0.879 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (Basin A) 0.310 75 Paved parking, HSG C (Basin A) ibe I I I I I I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.61" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.10 cfs 0.060 of los I I I I I I I I 1 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff = 0.10 cfs © 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.060 af, Depth= 0.61" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Area (sf) CN Description 13,500 75 Paved parking, HSG C 38,274 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 51,774 74 Weighted Average 51,774 74 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Hydrograph 0.115 e/ Q Runoff 011 0.10 cfs 0 105- r Type IA 24-hr 0.095� 2 year Rainfall=2.50n 0 085= o.os; ,/ Runoff Area=51 ,774 sf 0 0751' Runoff Volume=0.060 af w°0651 ;%j Runoff Depth=0.61" = 0.06= II- 0 05 / jam Tc=5.0 m i n 0.045 ti # • �/���i/r C N=7410 0.035-] 0. , 0.02525] �'" 0.015= 0.01 „ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) wo a Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A 0 Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 •"' 4.50 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.01 9.00 1.30 0.09 0.00 0.06 10.50 1.50 0.15 0.00 0.05 12.00 1.66 0.20 0.00 0.04 13.50 1.80 0.26 0.00 0.04 Yr 15.00 1.92 0.31 0.00 0.04 16.50 2.04 0.37 0.00 0.04 18.00 2.15 0.42 0.00 0.04 19.50 2.25 0.47 0.00 0.04 21.00 2.34 0.52 0.00 0.04 22.50 2.43 0.57 0.00 0.03 24.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.03 L 25.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 27.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 28.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 30.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 A 31.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 33.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 34.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 36.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 37.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 39.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 40.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 42.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 43.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 III I I 1 I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.97" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.21 cfs 0.096 of I I I I I 1 i I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.096 af, Depth= 0.97" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Area (sf) CN Description 13,500 75 Paved parking, HSG C 38,274 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 51,774 74 Weighted Average 51,774 74 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Hydrograph ❑Runoff°.22= 0.21 cfs 021, Type IA 24-hr 0.;8® 5 year Rainfall=3.10" 017 Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.16 y 015; Si Runoff Volume=0.096 af w 0.13; Runoff Depth=0.97" = 0.1z; ° 011 I Tc=5.0 min oos 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02a 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) r 6r plus I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 '" Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff .. (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 0.96 0.02 0.00 0.04 9.00 1.61 0.19 0.00 0.10 10.50 1.86 0.29 0.00 0.08 12.00 2.06 0.38 0.00 0.07 13.50 2.23 0.46 0.00 0.07 .,, 15.00 2.38 0.54 0.00 0.07 16.50 2.53 0.63 0.00 0.06 18.00 2.67 0.70 0.00 0.06 19.50 2.79 0.78 0.00 0.06 21.00 2.90 0.85 0.00 0.05 22.50 3.01 0.91 0.00 0.05 24.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.05 6. 25.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 27.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 30.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 31.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 33.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 r 34.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 k' 37.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 il 42.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 43.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 iii r thi it Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBasin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.21" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.28 cfs 0.119 of aim ,taw mit 40110 Yr1 AIN 46S- NIIM Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff = 0.28 cfs © 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.119 af, Depth= 1.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 13,500 75 Paved parking, HSG C 38,274 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 51,774 74 Weighted Average 51,774 74 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Hydrograph r /^ ❑Runoff 0.3_ 0.28 cfs 0.28- Type IA 24-hr 0.26= 10 year Rainfall=3.45" 0.24-E 0.22= Runoff Area=51 ,774 sf Runoff Volume=0.119 af 0.18 Runoff Depth=1 .21 3 0.14= Tc=5.0 min 0.12i CN=74/0 ar` 0.1 °.08i 0.06 0.04 0.02: yf 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 90 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff - (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 4.50 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 1.07 0.03 0.00 0.07 ,A, 9.00 1.79 0.26 0.00 0.12 10.50 2.07 0.38 0.00 0.09 12.00 2.29 0.49 0.00 0.08 13.50 2.48 0.60 0.00 0.08 15.00 2.65 0.70 0.00 0.08 16.50 2.82 0.79 0.00 0.08 18.00 2.97 0.89 0.00 0.07 19.50 3.11 0.98 0.00 0.07 4,, 21.00 3.23 1.06 0.00 0.06 22.50 3.35 1.14 0.00 0.06 24.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.05 25.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 27.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 30.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 31.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 33.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 34.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 37.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 42.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 43.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.52" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.38 cfs 0.151 of 4a Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Runoff = 0.38 cfs @ 7.98 hrs, Volume= 0.151 af, Depth= 1.52" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 13,500 75 Paved parking, HSG C 38,274 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 51,774 74 Weighted Average 51,774 74 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Hydrograph 0.42-/ 1.13 Runoff 0.4= 0.38 cfs 038= Type IA 24-hr u�+ 0.36 0.34 , 25 year Rainfall=3.90" 0.32; 0.3= Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0.28; 0.261Runoff Volume=0 151 af .- 0.24q 0.22 Runoff Depth=1.52" 0 0.2 Tc=5.0 min LL 0.18 01 CN=74/0 0.12, 0.08- 0.06 0.oa m 0.02= / � ij //il//7////////� Atti 0 5 ,0 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) Aut spa Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN A PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin A: Drainage Basin A Time Precip. Perv.Excess imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 7.50 1.21 0.06 0.00 0.10 9.00 2.03 0.36 0.00 0.16 10.50 2.34 0.52 0.00 0.12 12.00 2.59 0.66 0.00 0.10 13.50 2.80 0.79 0.00 0.10 .4 15.00 3.00 0.91 0.00 0.10 16.50 3.18 1.03 0.00 0.09 18.00 3.35 1.14 0.00 0.09 19.50 3.51 1.25 0.00 0.08 4tw 21.00 3.65 1.35 0.00 0.08 22.50 3.78 1.44 0.00 0.07 24.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.06 25.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 27.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 30.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 ;,a 31.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 33.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 34.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 37.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 42.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 u 43.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 541, ,a, US 8. ,. BASIN A Drainage :asin A - SO TH NI AL 1A Inlet Drain Basin #2 u, /2\A\ Stormtech Chambers #2 Subcat Reach ona Link Routing Diagram for Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Prepared by HP, Printed 6/7/2021 �,« —' HydroCAD®10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Table of Contents Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Reports 1 Routing Diagram 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) 3 Area Listing (all nodes) 2 year Event 4 Node Listing 5 Subcat BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH 7 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 10 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 5 year Event 13 Node Listing 14 Subcat BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH 16 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 19 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 10 year Event 22 Node Listing 23 Subcat BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH 25 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 28 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 25 year Event 31 Node Listing 32 Subcat BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH 34 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 37 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 :arrrr vr. Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Storm Type Curve Mode Duration B/B Depth AMC Name (hours) (inches) 1 2 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.50 2 2 5 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.10 2 3 10 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.45 2 4 25 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.90 2 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description w (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 1.189 98 Roof, ramps& concrete, HSG C (BASIN A) ;.r *WO AiON 11111 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=51,774 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.27" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.69 cfs 0.225 af Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.36' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.69 cfs 0.225 af Outflow=0.69 cfs 0.224 af Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=231.80' Storage=3,390 cf Inflow=0.69 cfs 0.224 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.066 af Primary=0.08 cfs 0.159 af Outflow=0.10 cfs 0.224 af Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Runoff = 0.69 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.225 af, Depth= 2.27" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Area (sf) CN Description 51,774 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 51,774 98 100.00% Impervious Area Atm Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH a Hydrograph 0.75 0 Runoff ,v 0.69 cfs 0.74 Type IA 24-hr 0.654 0.64 2 year Rainfall=2.50" 05y Runoff Area=51 ,774 sf Runoff Volume=0.225 af y 0.454 Agh 0.4 Runoff Depth=2.27" 0.35= Tc=5.0 min u olow 0.25 CN=0198 0.2 4. 0.14 0.05 46, 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) .un 410. r a - . Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" "' Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 °° Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff , (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.02 0.04 .., 3.00 0.20 0.00 0.07 0.07 4.00 0.29 0.00 0.14 0.09 5.00 0.39 0.00 0.22 0.11 6.00 0.51 0.00 0.33 0.15 '" 7.00 0.67 0.00 0.48 0.19 8.00 1.06 0.00 0.85 0.66 9.00 1.30 0.00 1.08 0.21 10.00 1.44 0.00 1.22 0.15 11.00 1.56 0.00 1.34 0.13 12.00 1.66 0.00 1.44 0.11 13.00 1.75 0.00 1.53 0.11 N, 14.00 1.84 0.00 1.62 0.10 15.00 1.92 0.00 1.70 0.10 16.00 2.00 0.00 1.78 0.09 17.00 2.08 0.00 1.85 0.09 "' 18.00 2.15 0.00 1.92 0.08 19.00 2.22 0.00 1.99 0.08 20.00 2.28 0.00 2.05 0.07 21.00 2.34 0.00 2.11 0.07 22.00 2.40 0.00 2.17 0.07 23.00 2.45 0.00 2.22 0.06 24.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.06 ,., 25.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 26.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 27.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 28.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 }19. 29.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 30.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 31.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 32.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 33.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 34.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 35.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 „„ 36.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 37.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 38.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 39.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 ,. 40.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 41.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 42.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 43.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 "` 44.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 45.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 46.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 47.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 48.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.27" for 2 year event Inflow = 0.69 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.225 af Outflow = 0.69 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.224 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.69 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.224 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.36' @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 3.0 min calculated for 0.224 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.5 min ( 674.1 - 672.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30° 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' / 230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.68 cfs © 7.88 hrs HW=231.36' (Free Discharge) L1Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.68 cfs @ 2.17 fps) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.68 cfs of 24.99 cfs potential flow) mar Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 ror Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph ma / El Inflow 0.75E I fl RQ rf 0 Primary 0.69 cfs 0.7= Inflow Area=1 .189 ac dim 0.65 Peak Elev=231 .36' 005 Storage=0.001 of war o.as= 3 0.4; Ire 0 0.35: 'Lie 0.25= � ura 0.2a ;% / arrtr 0.05_ ./ i� i /y�+i� � /r+ //�i�/+/-.Or/ 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 tarTime (hours) Tarr err tor tor tar +ar trio tar ur Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" ` Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 am Hydrograph for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.000 229.35 0.00 2.00 0.04 0.000 230.93 0.04 3.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 4.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 5.00 0.11 0.000 231.02 0.11 6.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 .00 7.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 8.00 0.66 0.001 231.35 0.66 9.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 10.00 0.15 0.001 231.06 0.15 11.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 12.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 13.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 ,,,, 14.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 15.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 16.00 0.09 0.000 231.00 0.09 17.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 18.00 0.08 0.000 230.99 0.08 19.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 20.00 0.07 0.000 230.98 0.07 44 21.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 22.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 23.00 0.06 0.000 230.96 0.06 24.00 0.06 0.000 230.95 0.06 >, 25.00 0,00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ~, 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 i 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ...: 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 'is'" 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 I AiI Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.27" for 2 year event Inflow = 0.69 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.224 af Outflow = 0.10 cfs © 13.46 hrs, Volume= 0.224 af, Atten= 85%, Lag= 334.7 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 13.46 hrs, Volume= 0.066 af Primary = 0.08 cfs © 13.46 hrs, Volume= 0.159 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.80' @ 13.46 hrs Surf.Area= 1,961 sf Storage= 3,390 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 394.0 min calculated for 0.224 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 394.1 min ( 1,068.2 - 674.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,545 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 8,825 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 3,863 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 41.1 108 Chambers in 4 Rows 6,507 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 1,961 0 0 234.52 1,961 8,825 8,825 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs © 13.46 hrs HW=231.80' (Free Discharge) -4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.08 cfs © 13.46 hrs HW=231.80' (Free Discharge) t- =Culvert (Passes 0.08 cfs of 1.59 cfs potential flow) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.08 cfs @ 6.42 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph 0.69 CfS C Inflow 3 Outflow / Inflow Area=1.189 ac M DiscardedC1 Primary 0.75 4 Ake 07: ' .'� Peak EIev=231.80' Storage=3,390 cf 0.6w ,A4 55-77 0.5E / .: 0.25-_ 0.2 0.10 cfs %r 0.15. 0.08 CfS 1./ /l/// //' 0.05_ 26 28 / 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) Wlrl di di +IYi1 W11i di Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Eli Hydrograph for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary ,;,, (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 l 2.00 0.04 38 230.07 0.03 0.02 0.00 .ems, 3.00 0.07 106 230.15 0.04 0.02 0.02 4.00 0.09 199 230.27 0.05 0.02 0.03 5.00 0.11 343 230.46 0.06 0.02 0.04 6.00 0.15 573 230.59 0.07 0.02 0.04 7.00 0.19 924 230.73 0.07 0.02 0.05 8.00 0.66 2,109 231.22 0.09 0.02 0.06 9.00 0.21 2,911 231.57 0.10 0.03 0.07 *,,, 10.00 0.15 3,171 231.69 0.10 0.03 0.08 11.00 0.13 3,307 231.76 0.10 0.03 0.08 12.00 0.11 3,365 231.78 0.10 0.03 0.08 13.00 0.11 3,385 231.79 0.10 0.03 0.08 6„, 14.00 0.10 3,384 231.79 0.10 0.03 0.08 15.00 0.10 3,364 231.78 0.10 0.03 0.08 16.00 0.09 3,330 231.77 0.10 0.03 0.08 17.00 0.09 3,282 231.74 0.10 0.03 0.08 *a" 18.00 0.08 3,219 231.72 0.10 0.03 0.08 19.00 0.08 3,143 231.68 0.10 0.03 0.08 20.00 0.07 3,055 231.64 0.10 0.03 0.08 21.00 0.07 2,954 231.59 0.10 0.03 0.07 22.00 0.07 2,841 231.54 0.10 0.03 0.07 23.00 0.06 2,718 231.49 0.10 0.03 0.07 24.00 0.06 2,583 231.43 0.10 0.03 0.07 iii. 25.00 0.00 2,266 231.29 0.09 0.02 0.07 26.00 0.00 1,944 231.15 0.09 0.02 0.06 27.00 0.00 1,635 231.02 0.08 0.02 0.06 28.00 0.00 1,341 230.90 0.08 0.02 0.06 om.' 29.00 0.00 1,061 230.79 0.08 0.02 0.05 30.00 0.00 795 230.68 0.07 0.02 0.05 31.00 0.00 543 230.58 0.07 0.02 0.04 32.00 0.00 308 230.41 0.06 0.02 0.04 33.00 0.00 116 230.17 0.05 0.02 0.02 34.00 0.00 12 230.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 35.00 0.00 1 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 39,00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 IN 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=51,774 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.87" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.86 cfs 0.284 af Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.44' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.86 cfs 0.284 af Outflow=0.86 cfs 0.284 af .,. Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=232.54' Storage=4,776 cf Inflow=0.86 cfs 0.284 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.077 af Primary=0.09 cfs 0.207 af Outflow=0.12 cfs 0.284 af .La Dt' Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type /A 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Runoff = 0.86 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af, Depth= 2.87" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Area (sf) CN Description 51,774 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 51,774 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Ato / Hydrograph 0.95,: o.s 0.86 cfs ❑Runoff 085= - Type IA 24-hr 0.8 0 751 5 year Rainfall=3.10" � Runoff Area=51,774 sf 0 0.6; Runoff Volume=0284 af 00 5 Runoff Dep th=2.87 v �0.45- Tc=5.0 min 01 04. LL 0 357 CN=0/98 0.3 0.25' , f a1_ o.os /f///7/////%7 //////////////////////////////// 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) do Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 2.00 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.06 3.00 0.25 0.00 0.11 0.09 4.00 0.36 0.00 0.19 0.12 5.00 0.48 0.00 0.30 0.15 6.00 0.64 0.00 0.45 0.19 Ali 7.00 0.83 0.00 0.63 0.23 8.00 1.32 0.00 1.10 0.83 9.00 1.61 0.00 1.39 0.26 10.00 1.79 0.00 1.57 0.19 ado 11.00 1.93 0.00 1.71 0.16 12.00 2.06 0.00 1.83 0.14 13.00 2.17 0.00 1.95 0.13 ,i, 14.00 2.28 0.00 2.05 0.12 15.00 2.38 0.00 2.16 0.12 16.00 2.48 0.00 2.25 0.11 17.00 2.58 0.00 2.35 0.11 i" 18.00 2.67 0.00 2.44 0.10 19.00 2.75 0.00 2.52 0.10 20.00 2.83 0.00 2.60 0.09 21.00 2.90 0.00 2.67 0.09 22.00 2.97 0.00 2.74 0.08 23.00 3.04 0.00 2.81 0.08 24.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.07 ,, 25.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 26.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 27.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 28.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 '"' 29.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 30.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 31.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 32.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 40, 33.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 34.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 35.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 Auk 36.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 37.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 38.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 39.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 J. 40.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 41.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 42.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 43.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 44.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 45.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 46.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 47.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 48.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 taw way Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.87" for 5 year event Inflow = 0.86 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volurne= 0.284 af Outflow = 0.86 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.86 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.44' @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 2.5 min calculated for 0.284 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.3 min ( 667.4 - 666.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' /230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.86 cfs © 7.88 hrs HW=231.44' (Free Discharge) t— Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.86 cfs © 2.31 fps) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.86 cfs of 27.13 cfs potential flow) .00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph IN. 0 n RF'i rf I 0 Inflow 0.9 0.86 cfs Primary Inflow Area=1 .189 ac 0.85; , 75_ ;y Peak Elev=231 .44' 07= � Storage=0.001 of 0.65i °/ 011) .55:' 0.5_ a 0.35 025-2" , • /¥ 0.1: 0.05 / 00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 , , 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I Ire dYi1 iiiiu Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Hydrograph for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.000 229.70 0.00 2.00 0.06 0.000 230.97 0.06 44 3.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 4.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 5.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 6.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 " 7.00 0.23 0.001 231.12 0.23 8.00 0.83 0.001 231.43 0.83 9.00 0.26 0.001 231.14 0.26 10.00 0.19 0.001 231.09 0.19 11.00 0.16 0.001 231.06 0.16 12.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 13.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 4 14.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 15.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 16.00 0.11 0.000 231.02 0.11 17.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 - 18.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 19.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 20.00 0.09 0.000 231.00 0.09 21.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 22.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 23.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 24.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 4= 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 - 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ... 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 - 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Summary for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.86" for 5 year event Inflow = 0.86 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ 14.92 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 422.3 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 14.92 hrs, Volume= 0.077 af Primary = 0.09 cfs @ 14.92 hrs, Volume= 0.207 af ,14 Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 232.54' © 14.92 hrs Surf.Area= 1,961 sf Storage= 4,776 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 489.8 min calculated for 0.284 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 489.8 min ( 1,157.2 - 667.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,545 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 8,825 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 3,863 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 108 Chambers in 4 Rows 6,507 cf Total Available Storage .., Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 1,961 0 0 234.52 1,961 8,825 8,825 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' /229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' iscarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs © 14.92 hrs HW=232.54' (Free Discharge) =Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.09 cfs © 14.92 hrs HW=232.54' (Free Discharge) Lj=Culvert (Passes 0.09 cfs of 1.96 cfs potential flow) -2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.09 cfs @ 7.64 fps) -3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Arni Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph ❑Inflow 0.86 cfs 0 Outflow Inflow Area=1 .189 ac 0 Discarded 0.95 ❑Primary 0.9- Peak Elev=232.54' 0.851, 0.6 Storage=4,776 cf irr 0.65 w 0.55� 45 0 5_ # 0.35- � ask0.3 0.25' 0.12 cfs '�//' .,. 0.15 e / 0 09 cfs ./�l///�.�ij///,��tir/.�� / _ "".411400.zA1z,r/.7te.dr,A"f 0.05 y /, 0 4 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) irr illti Wli iWr tdW1 sir ivi Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 h. Hydrograph for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary it. (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.06 70 230.11 0.04 0.02 0.02 btu 3.00 0.09 189 230.26 0.05 0.02 0.03 4.00 0.12 342 230.46 0.06 0.02 0.04 5.00 0.15 564 230.59 0.07 0.02 0.04 6.00 0.19 910 230.73 0.07 0.02 0.05 k.`" 7.00 0.23 1,403 230.93 0.08 0.02 0.06 8.00 0.83 2,938 231.59 0.10 0.03 0.07 9.00 0.26 3,986 232.09 0.11 0.03 0.08 , 1 10.00 0.19 4,354 232.28 0.12 0.03 0.09 11.00 0.16 4,564 232.40 0.12 0.03 0.09 12.00 0.14 4,674 232.47 0.12 0.03 0.09 13.00 0.13 4,735 232.51 0.12 0.03 0.09 ilm 14.00 0.12 4,768 232.53 0.12 0.03 0.09 15.00 0.12 4,776 232.54 0.12 0.03 0.09 16.00 0.11 4,765 232.53 0.12 0.03 0.09 17.00 0.11 4,734 232.51 0.12 0.03 0.09 `"" 18.00 0.10 4,686 232.48 0.12 0.03 0.09 19.00 0.10 4,619 232.44 0.12 0.03 0.09 20.00 0.09 4,536 232.39 0.12 0.03 0.09 21.00 0.09 4,437 232.33 0.12 0.03 0.09 22.00 0.08 4,323 232.27 0.12 0.03 0.09 23.00 0.08 4,193 232.20 0.11 0.03 0.09 24.00 0.07 4,049 232.12 0.11 0.03 0.09 25.00 0.00 3,678 231.93 0.11 0.03 0.08 26.00 0.00 3,297 231.75 0.10 0.03 0.08 27.00 0.00 2,932 231.58 0.10 0.03 0.07 28.00 0.00 2,582 231.43 0.10 0.03 0.07 29.00 0.00 2,246 231.28 0.09 0.02 0.07 30.00 0.00 1,924 231.15 0.09 0.02 0.06 31.00 0.00 1,617 231.02 0.08 0.02 0.06 32.00 0.00 1,324 230.90 0.08 0.02 0.06 33.00 0.00 1,044 230.78 0.08 0.02 0.05 34.00 0.00 779 230.67 0.07 0.02 0.05 I 35.00 0.00 528 230.57 0.07 0.02 0.04 ,,,, 36.00 0.00 295 230.40 0.06 0.02 0.04 37.00 0.00 107 230.16 0.04 0.02 0.02 I 38.00 0.00 10 230.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 39.00 0.00 1 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 .,. 40.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 `" 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=51,774 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.22" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.96 cfs 0.319 af Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.48' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.96 cfs 0.319 af Outflow=0.96 cfs 0.318 af Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=233.29' Storage=5,541 cf Inflow=0.96 cfs 0.318 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.082 af Primary=0.11 cfs 0.236 af Outflow=0.14 cfs 0.318 af I I I I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 l is Summary for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Runoff = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.319 af, Depth= 3.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 51,774 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C I 51,774 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Hydrograph / ❑ of if _ 0.96 cfs Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Runoff Area=51 ,774 sf Runoff Volume=0.319 af Runoff Depth=3.22" Tc=5.0 m i n LL CN=0198 j 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.02 2.00 0.17 0.00 0.05 0.08 y., 3.00 0.28 0.00 0.13 0.10 4.00 0.40 0.00 0.23 0.13 5.00 0.54 0.00 0.35 0.16 iii 6.00 0.71 0.00 0.51 0.21 7.00 0.92 0.00 0.72 0.26 8.00 1.47 0.00 1.25 0.92 9.00 1.79 0.00 1.57 0.29 10.00 1.99 0.00 1.77 0.21 11.00 2.15 0.00 1.93 0.18 12.00 2.29 0.00 2.06 0.15 13.00 2.42 0.00 2.19 0.15 Ito 14.00 2.54 0.00 2.31 0.14 15.00 2.65 0.00 2.42 0.13 16.00 2.76 0.00 2.53 0.13 17.00 2.87 0.00 2.64 0.12 18.00 2.97 0.00 2.73 0.12 19.00 3.06 0.00 2.83 0.11 ?!. 20.00 3.15 0.00 2.92 0.10 21.00 3.23 0.00 3.00 0.10 22.00 3.31 0.00 3.08 0.09 23.00 3.38 0.00 3.15 0.08 24.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.08 ,.. 25.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 26.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 27.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 28.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 w.. 29.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 30.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 31.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 32.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 "" 33.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 34.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 35.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 :, 36.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 37.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 38.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 39.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 - 40.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 41.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 42.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 43.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 -°' 44.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 45.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 46.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 47.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 48.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.22" for 10 year event Inflow = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.319 af Outflow = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.318 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.318 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.48' @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 2.3 min calculated for 0.318 af(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.1 min ( 664.4 - 663.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 „, Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80° 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' /230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.48' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.96 cfs @ 2.38 fps) 4-2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.96 cfs of 28.28 cfs potential flow) 444 Pit ik W., Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph / — — Inflow I rl QF', rfs Primary 1 0.96 cfs I Inflow Area=1 .189 ac Peak Elev=231 .48' Storage=0.001 of 0 o , '4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) DIY' I I I I I I ow Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" ' ` Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 ydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 ' ° Hydrograph for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.000 230.05 0.00 2.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 3.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 4.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 5.00 0.16 0.001 231.06 0.16 6.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 ®"` 7.00 0.26 0.001 231.14 0.26 8.00 0.92 0.001 231.47 0.93 9.00 0.29 0.001 231.16 0.30 10.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 11.00 0.18 0.001 231.08 0.18 12.00 0.15 0.001 231.06 0.15 13.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 14.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 15.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 16.00 0.13 0.000 231.03 0.13 17.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 i'" 18.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 19.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 20.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 21.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 22.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 23.00 0.08 0.000 230.99 0.08 24.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 "'• 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 3636.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 w. 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 `" 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 .0 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 Summary for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.21" for 10 year event Inflow = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.318 of Outflow = 0.14 cfs @ 14.82 hrs, Volume= 0.318 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 416.3 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 14.82 hrs, Volume= 0.082 of Primary = 0.11 cfs © 14.82 hrs, Volume= 0.236 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 233.29' @ 14.82 hrs Surf.Area= 1,961 sf Storage= 5,541 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 525.7 min calculated for 0.318 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 525.8 min ( 1,190.2 - 664.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,545 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 8,825 cf Overall - 4,962 cf Embedded = 3,863 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 108 Chambers in 4 Rows 6,507 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 1,961 0 0 234.52 1,961 8,825 8,825 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf - #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 14.82 hrs HW=233.29' (Free Discharge) tiJoY t--4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 14.82 hrs HW=233.29' (Free Discharge) t =Culvert (Passes 0.11 cfs of 2.27 cfs potential flow) 2_Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.11 cfs @ 8.70 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) ES Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" `` Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph (-0.96 cfs C Inflow °":.'Outflow Inflow Area=1 .'189 ac ❑Prmaryed 000 Peak Elev=233.29' Storage=5,541 cf , 13 a ; 0 LL 0.14 cfs +'t!kr+..... r � rwrefez 0.11 cfs %./// %{,rfiirrr-x,..,_ / ,/' 0 ' �.,„�,, ,. ;,',,, .,. ,.,� , ,.' / 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I I I I I I a I OP Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" y" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 Hydrograph for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 1 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary ,,, (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.08 93 230.14 0.04 0.02 0.02 3.00 0.10 248 230.34 0.06 0.02 0.03 4.00 0.13 438 230.54 0.07 0.02 0.04 5.00 0.16 714 230.65 0.07 0.02 0.05 6.00 0.21 1,127 230.82 0.08 0.02 0.05 ilk,. 7.00 0.26 1,702 231.05 0.08 0.02 0.06 8.00 0.93 3,440 231.82 0.11 0.03 0.08 9.00 0.30 4,630 232.44 0.12 0.03 0.09 10.00 0.21 5,057 232.74 0.12 0.03 0.10 11.00 0.18 5,303 232.99 0.13 0.03 0.10 12.00 0.15 5,430 233.15 0.13 0.03 0.10 13.00 0.15 5,499 233.23 0.13 0.03 0.11 taw 14.00 0.14 5,534 233.28 0.14 0.03 0.11 15.00 0.13 5,540 233.29 0.14 0.03 0.11 16.00 0.13 5,526 233.27 0.13 0.03 0.11 17.00 0.12 5,491 233.22 0.13 0.03 0.11 ` 18.00 0.12 5,437 233.16 0.13 0.03 0.10 19.00 0.11 5,366 233.07 0.13 0.03 0.10 20.00 0.10 5,280 232.96 0.13 0.03 0.10 Amu 21.00 0.10 5,178 232.85 0.13 0.03 0.10 22.00 0.09 5,062 232.74 0.12 0.03 0.10 23.00 0.08 4,931 232.64 0.12 0.03 0.10 24.00 0.08 4,784 232.54 0.12 0.03 0.09 25.00 0.00 4,384 232.30 0.12 0.03 0.09 26.00 0.00 3,975 232.08 0.11 0.03 0.08 27.00 0.00 3,583 231.89 0.11 0.03 0.08 28.00 0.00 3,206 231.71 0.10 0.03 0.08 ea.,. 29.00 0.00 2,845 231.54 0.10 0.03 0.07 30.00 0.00 2,498 231.39 0.09 0.03 0.07 31.00 0.00 2,166 231.25 0.09 0.02 0.07 32,00 0.00 1,848 231.11 0.09 0.02 0.06 33.00 0.00 1,544 230.99 0.08 0.02 0.06 34.00 0.00 1,254 230.87 0.08 0.02 0.05 35.00 0.00 978 230.76 0.07 0.02 0.05 ,, 36.00 0.00 716 230.65 0.07 0.02 0.05 37.00 0.00 469 230.55 0.07 0.02 0.04 38.00 0.00 244 230.33 0.06 0.02 0.03 39.00 0.00 70 230.11 0.04 0.02 0.02 40.00 0.00 5 230.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 a; w L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=51,774 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.67" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=1.09 cfs 0.363 af Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.53' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=1.09 cfs 0.363 af Outflow=1.09 cfs 0.363 af Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=234.16' Storage=6,227 cf Inflow=1.09 cfs 0.363 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.088 af Primary=0.17 cfs 0.275 af Outflow=0.20 cfs 0.363 af II M t 1110 '4w. I qSy�, AI Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Runoff = 1.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af, Depth= 3.67" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 51,774 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 51,774 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Hydrograph V 1.09 cfs ❑Runoff ill Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Runoff Area=51,774 sf j Runoff Volume=0.363 af 1 N Runoff Depth=3.6T' Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 111 Time (hours) tir iWu L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 iok Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN A: Drainage Basin A - SOUTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff .., (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.02 2.00 0.20 0.00 0.07 0.09 3.00 0.32 0.00 0.16 0.12 4.00 0.45 0.00 0.28 0.15 5.00 0.61 0.00 0.42 0.19 6.00 0.80 0.00 0.60 0.24 7.00 1.05 0.00 0.83 0.30 8.00 1.66 0.00 1.44 1.05 9.00 2.03 0.00 1.80 0.33 ,,,; 10.00 2.25 0.00 2.02 0.24 11.00 2.43 0.00 2.20 0.21 12.00 2.59 0.00 2.36 0.17 13.00 2.73 0.00 2.50 0.17 .t, 14.00 2.87 0.00 2.64 0.16 15.00 3.00 0.00 2.77 0.15 1 , 16.00 3.12 0.00 2.89 0.14 17.00 3.24 0.00 3.01 0.14 :" 18.00 3.35 0.00 3.12 0.13 19.00 3.46 0.00 3.23 0.12 20.00 3.56 0.00 3.33 0.12 Au' 21.00 3.65 0.00 3.42 0.11 22.00 3.74 0.00 3.51 0.10 23.00 3.82 0.00 3.59 0.10 24.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.09 25.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 26.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 27.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 28.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 iiii 29.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 30.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 31.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 32.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 33.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 34.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 35.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 %,,,.. 36.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 37.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 38.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 39.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 40.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 41.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 42.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 43.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 <4. 44.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 45.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 46.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 47.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 OW 48.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 y Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Terrace Glen Apartments Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 Summary for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.67" for 25 year event liwi Inflow = 1.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af Outflow = 1.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 1.09 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Surf.Area= Storage= 1 af Peak Elev= 231.53 © 7.88 hrs 0.000 ac 0 00 Plug-Flow detention time= 2.0 min calculated for 0.363 af(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.0 min ( 661.2 - 660.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' /230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=1.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.53' (Free Discharge) =Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.09 cfs © 2.47 fps) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 1.09 cfs of 29.73 cfs potential flow) ON wMr Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph i1 (lQ 0 Inflow I rf ❑Primary 1.09 cfs Inflow Area=1 .189 ac `$ Peak Elev=231 .53' Storage=0.001 of H !!!!!!!!! AY' 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) wr I I I r err . Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 36 Hydrograph for Pond 1A: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.000 230.64 0.00 2.00 0.09 0.000 231.00 0.09 3.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 4.00 0.15 0.001 231.06 0.15 5.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 6.00 0.24 0.001 231.13 0.24 7.00 0.30 0.001 231.16 0.30 8.00 1.05 0.001 231.52 1.05 9.00 0.33 0.001 231.18 0.33 4. 10.00 0.24 0.001 231.12 0.24 11.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 12.00 0.17 0.001 231.07 0.17 13.00 0.17 0.001 231.07 0.17 14.00 0.16 0.001 231.06 0.16 15.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 16.00 0.14 0.001 231.05 0.14 17.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 i. 18.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 19.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 20.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 21.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 22.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 23.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 24.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 i..a 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46. 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 '" 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 L, 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 37 Summary for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 I Inflow Area_ 1.189 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.66" for 25 year event Inflow 1.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af Outflow = 0.20 cfs @ 11.17 hrs, Volume= 0.363 af, Atten= 82%, Lag= 197.7 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 11.17 hrs, Volume= 0.088 af Primary = 0.17 cfs @ 11.17 hrs, Volume= 0.275 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 234.16' @ 11.17 hrs Surf.Area= 1,961 sf Storage= 6,227 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 538.7 min calculated for 0.363 af(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 538.8 min ( 1,200.0 - 661.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description 3 #1 230.02' 1,545 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 8,825 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 3,863 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size=44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 108 Chambers in 4 Rows 6,507 cf Total Available Storage LElevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 1,961 0 0 234.52 1,961 8,825 8,825 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert kw* L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' /229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' piscarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 11.17 hrs HW=234.16' (Free Discharge) =Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.16 cfs @ 11.17 hrs HW=234.16' (Free Discharge) =Culvert (Passes 0.16 cfs of 2.59 cfs potential flow) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.12 cfs @ 9.80 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.04 cfs @ 0.37 fps) a I vr.rr.rr.arrm.. ; sae Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 38 Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph err 1.09 cfS o Inflow Outflow Inflow Area=1 .189 ac ❑Discarded Primary as, Peak Elev=234.16' Storage=6,227 cfTIT 0.20 cfs .///.r///.isres.•.,. , 0.17cfs fir '.�i(i■��j'� %f//.� �,. ..�.,.r.�.'. ''///./ 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) w1iY xl L I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN A POST REV Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" `.. Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 39 in Hydrograph for Pond 2A: Stormtech Chambers #2 , Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary .; (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.09 129 230.18 0.05 0.02 0.02 it., 3.00 0.12 331 230.44 0.06 0.02 0.04 4.00 0.15 576 230.59 0.07 0.02 0.04 5.00 0.19 922 230.73 0.07 0.02 0.05 ti 6.00 0.24 1,421 230.94 0.08 0.02 0.06 7.00 0.30 2,101 231.22 0.09 0.02 0.06 8.00 1.05 4,100 232.15 0.11 0.03 0.09 9.00 0.33 5,466 233.19 0.13 0.03 0.11 10.00 0.24 5,945 233.80 0.14 0.03 0.11 11.00 0.21 6,211 234.14 0.15 0.03 0.12 12.00 0.17 6,223 234.16 0.17 0.03 0.14 13.00 0.17 6,221 234.16 0.17 0.03 0.14 0 14.00 0.16 6,218 234.15 0.16 0.03 0.13 15.00 0.15 6,217 234.15 0.15 0.03 0.12 16.00 0.14 6,210 234.14 0.15 0.03 0.12 17.00 0.14 6,179 234.10 0.15 0.03 0.12 ti"" 18.00 0.13 6,127 234.04 0.15 0.03 0.12 19.00 0.12 6,054 233.94 0.15 0.03 0.12 20.00 0.12 5,962 233.83 0.14 0.03 0.12 „{ 21.00 0.11 5,852 233.69 0.14 0.03 0.11 22.00 0.10 5,726 233.53 0.14 0.03 0.11 23.00 0.10 5,586 233.35 0.14 0.03 0.11 24.00 0.09 5,432 233.15 0.13 0.03 0.10 25.00 0.00 5,001 232.69 0.12 0.03 0.10 26.00 0.00 4,565 232.41 0.12 0.03 0.09 27.00 0.00 4,149 232.17 0.11 0.03 0.09 28.00 0.00 3,750 231.97 0.11 0.03 0.08 ita, 29.00 0.00 3,367 231.78 0.10 0.03 0.08 30.00 0.00 2,999 231.61 0.10 0.03 0.07 31.00 0.00 2,646 231.46 0.10 0.03 0.07 32.00 0.00 2,307 231.31 0.09 0.02 0.07 33.00 0.00 1,983 231.17 0.09 0.02 0.06 34.00 0.00 1,673 231.04 0.08 0.02 0.06 35.00 0.00 1,377 230.92 0.08 0.02 0.06 L 36.00 0.00 1,095 230.80 0.08 0.02 0.05 37.00 0.00 827 230.69 0.07 0.02 0.05 38.00 0.00 574 230.59 0.07 0.02 0.04 39.00 0.00 336 230.45 0.06 0.02 0.04 40.00 0.00 137 230.20 0.05 0.02 0.02 41.00 0.00 17 230.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 42.00 0.00 1 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 to 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,V ,t.$4 Basin B x+4 Drainage Basin B 441 Subcat !Reach on. Link Routing Diagram for Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Prepared by HP, Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD®10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Table of Contents Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC `*t. TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Reports 1 Routing Diagram 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) 3 Area Listing (all nodes) 2 year Event 4 Node Listing 5 Subcat Basin B: Drainage Basin B 5 year Event 616 7 Node Listing 8 Subcat Basin B: Drainage Basin B 10 year Event 10 Node Listing 11 Subcat Basin B: Drainage Basin B 25 year Event 13 Node Listing 14 Subcat Basin B: Drainage Basin B Mitt qM5 I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Storm Type Curve Mode Duration B/B Depth AMC Name (hours) (inches) 1 2 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.50 2 2 5 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.10 2 3 10 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.45 2 4 25 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.90 2 tlY .tx f k Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 0.300 75 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (Basin B) 0.748 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (Basin B) ire Y.. r I I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBasin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.61" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.09 cfs 0.053 of I I 1 M 1 I 1 1 L ro Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff = 0.09 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.053 af, Depth= 0.61" tim Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Area (sf) CN Description * 13,079 75 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C ^ 32,604 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C ift 45,683 74 Weighted Average 45,683 74 100.00% Pervious Area -.,. Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Hydrograph / 0.17. ❑Runoff 0.095` 0.09 cfs itim 0.09_ % Type IA 24-hr 0.085 0.08 2 year Rainfall=2.50" 0075„ Runoff Area=45,683 sf E 0.07, / _0065 Runoff Volume=0.053 af 06., w r Runoff Depth=0.61" 00.055_ 3 0 05 Tc=5.0 min a 0.045 w / �,,.f//iri� ike 0035= / r�iii,►i/,,���' CN=74/0 0.03= 0.025 a /,r 0.021 , - 0.0151 / VP 0.014/7 0.005-//', i '//77 ///// /7/071//./ ///�////7//�/.7/W 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Ava Time (hours) ire. 04. limo L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 ku Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff k, (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 _s 4.50 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.01 9.00 1.30 0.09 0.00 0.05 "' 10.50 1.50 0.15 0.00 0.04 12.00 1.66 0.20 0.00 0.04 13.50 1.80 0.26 0.00 0.04 15.00 1.92 0.31 0.00 0.04 16.50 2.04 0.37 0.00 0.04 18.00 2.15 0.42 0.00 0.04 19.50 2.25 0.47 0.00 0.04 6. 21.00 2.34 0.52 0.00 0.03 22.50 2.43 0.57 0.00 0.03 24.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.03 25.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 ii" 27.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 28.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 30.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 31.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 33.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 34.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 36.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 i 37.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 39.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 40.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 42.00 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 43.50 2.50 0.61 0.00 0.00 t I 1 I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBasin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.97" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.19 cfs 0.085 of ski• y�. e vi+ 1 1 1 1 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.085 af, Depth= 0.97" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Area (sf) CN Description 13,079 75 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 32,604 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 45,683 74 Weighted Average 45,683 74 100.00% Pervious Area ;,°^ Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, «i33 Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Hydrograph wr / []Runoff 0.2= 0.19 cfs 019 0 Type IA 24-hr rtin o.1s 016= 5 year Rainfall=3.10" 0.15 Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.14_ 0.13 Runoff Volume=0.085 af s. 01; Runoff Depth=O.97" LT °09 Tc=5.0 m i n 0.08 1 4t CN=74/0 40. 0.07 o.os 0.05 vatv 0.03 0.02 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 mut Time (hours) kam x Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 ", Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 0.96 0.02 0.00 0.04 9.00 1.61 0.19 0,00 0.09 10.50 1.86 0.29 0.00 0.07 12.00 2.06 0.38 0.00 0.06 13.50 2.23 0.46 0.00 0.06 15.00 2.38 0.54 0.00 0.06 16.50 2.53 0.63 0.00 0.06 18.00 2.67 0.70 0.00 0.05 19.50 2.79 0.78 0.00 0.05 21.00 2.90 0.85 0.00 0.05 22.50 3.01 0.91 0.00 0.04 24.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.04 25.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 °"` 27.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 30.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 31.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 +04 33.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 34.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 ,,3. 37.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 42.00 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 " 43.50 3.10 0.97 0.00 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 ..,, Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method. Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBasin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.21" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.25 cfs 0.105 of Alt 1 N I 1 111 I a Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.105 af, Depth= 1.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 13,079 75 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 32,604 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 45,683 74 Weighted Average 45,683 74 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Hydrograph 0 Runoff 0.26 0.25 cfs o za-= Type IA 24-hr 0.22- 10 year Rainfall=3.45" 0.2 Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0 1$_ Runoff Volume=0.105 af Runoff Depth=1 .21" a3 01 a 0.12 Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 0 08; o.os; .wY 0.04_ 0.02- °ZE /�/./07/7/7./ �l//7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) ., Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 I ' Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff , (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 i 3.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 .liti 4.50 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 7.50 1.07 0.03 0.06 9.00 1.79 0.26 0.00 0.11 10.50 2.07 0.38 0.00 0.08 12.00 2.29 0.49 0.00 0.07 13.50 2.48 0.60 0.00 0.07 15.00 2.65 0.70 0.00 0.07 16.50 2.82 0.79 0.00 0.07 18.00 2.97 0.89 0.00 0.06 19.50 3.11 0.98 0.00 0.06 ,max 21.00 3.23 1.06 0.00 0.06 22.50 3.35 1.14 0.00 0.05 24.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.05 25.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 =i 27.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 I 30.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 31.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 33.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 34.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 37.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 42.00 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 .."'" 43.50 3.45 1.21 0.00 0.00 I I I I I I f'. Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Time span=0.00-44.00 hrs, dt=0.03 hrs, 1468 points Runoff by SBUH method. Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.52" Tc=5.0 min CN=74/0 Runoff=0.33 cfs 0.133 of 4 . I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 7.98 hrs, Volume= 0.133 af, Depth= 1.52" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-44.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 13,079 75 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 32,604 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C "` 45,683 74 Weighted Average 45,683 74 100.00% Pervious Area 31 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Hydrograph MOW 0.36; Runoff 0.33 cfs 0.34% eua 0.32 Type IA 24-hr 0.3 25 year Rainfall=3.90" 0.28 0.26 Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.24 $4 Runoff Volume=0.133 af N 0.22= Runoff Depth=1.52" 0.2, 0 0.18; /� Tc=5.0 m i n 0.14 % CN=74/0 0 12i 0.04^ I 0", =//��/'r /� i/,/,�7. /il/,/� .�7�%�///0.7/7,,/" ./7//7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) :w> L r Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen BASIN B PRE Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Hydrograph for Subcatchment Basin B: Drainage Basin B Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess iwi. (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 11101 4.50 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 7.50 1.21 0.06 0.00 0.09 1 9.00 2.03 0.36 0.00 0.14 10.50 2.34 0.52 0.00 0.10 12.00 2.59 0.66 0.00 0.09 13.50 2.80 0.79 0.00 0.09 15.00 3.00 0.91 0.00 0.09 16.50 3.18 1.03 0.00 0.08 18.00 3.35 1.14 0.00 0.08 i 19.50 3.51 1.25 0.00 0.07 ,tia3 21.00 3.65 1.35 0.00 0.07 22.50 3.78 1.44 0.00 0.06 I 24.00 3.90 1.52 0.06 25.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 27.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 28.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 30.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 „ate 31.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 33.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 34.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 36.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 37.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 40.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 42.00 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 .... 43.50 3.90 1.52 0.00 0.00 I i I I I BASIN B\;) P Drainage asin B - Jo NO TH lB Inlet Drain Basin #2 r 2B .10 Stormtech Chambers #2 subcat IReach /PonC Link Routing Diagram for Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-2' Prepared by HP, Printed 6/7/2021 [1 HydroCAD®10 10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Table of Contents iwo Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Reports w. 1 Routing Diagram 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) 3 Area Listing (all nodes) 2 year Event 4 Node Listing 5 Subcat BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH 7 Pond 1B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 10 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 5 year Event 13 Node Listing 14 Subcat BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH 16 Pond 1B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 19 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 10 year Event 22 Node Listing 23 Subcat BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH 25 Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 28 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 25 year Event 31 Node Listing 32 Subcat BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH NAa, 34 Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 37 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 i I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Storm Type Curve Mode Duration B/B Depth AMC Name (hours) (inches) 1 2 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.50 2 2 5 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.10 2 3 10 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.45 2 4 25 year Type IA 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.90 2 I I I I I I I I I I i Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 1.049 98 Roof, ramps& concrete, HSG C (BASIN B) INS 111 1 w.r I L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBASIN B: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=45,683 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.27" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.60 cfs 0.198 af Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.33' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.60 cfs 0.198 af Outflow=0.60 cfs 0.198 af Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=231.51' Storage=2,786 cf Inflow=0.60 cfs 0.198 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.062 af Primary=0.07 cfs 0.136 af Outflow=0.10 cfs 0.198 af dew ire I I I 1 I I I L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Runoff = 0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af, Depth= 2.27" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" Area (sf) CN Description 45,683 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 45,683 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Hydrograph 0.65- ❑Runoff 0.60 cfs 0.6= ,/ Type IA 24-hr 0.551 � 2 year Rainfall=2.50" wrw 0.5_ Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.452 Runoff Volume=0.198 af 0.4-' f111M w 0 35 Runoff Depth=2.27" . 3 .. _ 0.3 Tc=5.0 min 0.25-- C N=0/98 f, 0.15 0.05- 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) II I k Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff f,,,„ (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 g 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.02 0.04 3.00 0.20 0.00 0.07 0.06 4.00 0.29 0.00 0.14 0.08 5.00 0.39 0.00 0.22 0.10 lik. 6.00 0.51 0.00 0.33 0.13 7.00 0.67 0.00 0.48 0.16 8.00 1.06 0.00 0.85 0.58 9.00 1.30 0.00 1.08 0.19 10.00 1.44 0.00 1.22 0.14 11.00 1.56 0.00 1.34 0.12 12.00 1.66 0.00 1.44 0.10 13.00 1.75 0.00 1.53 0.09 14.00 1.84 0.00 1.62 0.09 15.00 1.92 0.00 1.70 0.09 16.00 2.00 0.00 1.78 0.08 17.00 2.08 0.00 1.85 0.08 18.00 2.15 0.00 1.92 0.07 19.00 2.22 0.00 1.99 0.07 20.00 2.28 0.00 2.05 0.07 21.00 2.34 0.00 2.11 0.06 22.00 2.40 0.00 2.17 0.06 23.00 2.45 0.00 2.22 0.05 24.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.05 25.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 26.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 27.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 28.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 29.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 30.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 31.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 32.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 33.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 34.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 35.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 36.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 37.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 38.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 39.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 lift 40.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 41.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 42.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 43.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 - 44.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 45.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 46.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 47.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 48.00 2.50 0.00 2.27 0.00 t +r.. Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" ` Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.27" for 2 year event Inflow = 0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af Outflow = 0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.33' © 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 3.5 min calculated for 0.198 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.7 min ( 674.3 - 672.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 6. #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' /230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 t,.= n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.33' (Free Discharge) 4L-1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.60 cfs © 2.09 fps) t-2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.60 cfs of 23.90 cfs potential flow) Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Pond 1B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph Li Inflow I6 Rl rfs ❑Primary 0.65--' 0.60 cfs I Inflow Area=1,049 ac 0.551: Peak Elev=231 .33' 05 Storage=0.001 of 0.45 e 0.4- ',may c 0.35- LL 0.3- 0.25- ) 0.151 kri " 0.05 � / /7 I L 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) m�u I I 1 I I I I II Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 year Rainfall=2.50" iii'' Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 ■ Hydrograph for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.000 229.35 0.00 2.00 0.04 0.000 230.92 0.04 ili 3.00 0.06 0.000 230.95 0.06 4.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 5.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 Si 6.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 7.00 0.16 0.001 231.06 0.16 8.00 0.58 0.001 231.32 0.58 9.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 10.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 11.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 .: 12.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 13.00 0.09 0.000 231.00 0.09 lw 14.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 15.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 16.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 17.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 18.00 0.07 0.000 230.98 0.07 19.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 20.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 21.00 0.06 0.000 230.96 0.06 '� 22.00 0.06 0.000 230.96 0.06 23.00 0.05 0.000 230.95 0.05 24.00 0.05 0.000 230.94 0.05 ..: 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ,1iki 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 1 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 I 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 i 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ta,ig 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 L Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" tie Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.27" for 2 year event Inflow = 0.60 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af Outflow = 0.10 cfs © 12.58 hrs, Volume= 0.198 af, Atten= 84%, Lag= 282.0 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs © 12.58 hrs, Volume= 0.062 af Primary = 0.07 cfs @ 12.58 hrs, Volume= 0.136 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.51' © 12.58 hrs Surf.Area= 2,006 sf Storage= 2,786 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 340.6 min calculated for 0.198 af(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 340.6 min ( 1,014.9 - 674.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,626 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 9,027 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 4,065 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 -Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 108 Chambers in 5 Rows 6,588 cf Total Available Storage =>a Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) } 230.02 2,006 0 0 Wr 234.52 2,006 9,027 9,027 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 'I' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf ,311i #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs © 12.58 hrs HW=231.51' (Free Discharge) 4„ ?4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.07 cfs @ 12.58 hrs HW=231.51' (Free Discharge) t1=Culvert (Passes 0.07 cfs of 1.42 cfs potential flow) ' 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.07 cfs @ 5.87 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 1 Terrace Glen Apartments ill Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRainfall=2.50" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 11 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 II , r_________ Hydrograph D Inflow 0.60 cfs . =outflow Inflow Area=1.049 ac ❑Prmaryed I 0.65.. Peak Elev=231 .51' 0.55 Storage=2,786 cf iiru, 0.5� 0.45 eA w 0.4V %7 *,,, 0 0.35: LL 0.3- �jt 0.25` r': J/ 1W 0.2 0.10 cfs .e.,srd.0°,.<t_._ 0.15 0.1 6. j � ,,,,Age 0.07 cfs ;� i` 'tom, /" 0.05.: / l :�. --. s ' 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 ii Time (hours) I I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 2 yearRarnfall=2.50" "`R Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 ,,. Hydrograph for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary ,,,, (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.04 33 230.06 0.03 0.02 0.00 3.00 0.06 86 230.13 0.04 0.02 0.02 4.00 0.08 158 230.22 0.05 0.02 0.03 5.00 0.10 274 230.36 0.06 0.02 0.03 6.00 0.13 459 230.54 0.07 0.02 0.04 " 7.00 0.16 745 230.66 0.07 0.02 0.05 8.00 0.58 1,768 231.07 0.09 0.03 0.06 9.00 0.19 2,452 231.36 0.09 0.03 0.07 10.00 0.14 2,658 231.45 0.10 0.03 0.07 11.00 0.12 2,755 231.49 0.10 0.03 0.07 12.00 0.10 2,785 231.51 0.10 0.03 0.07 13.00 0.09 2,782 231.50 0.10 0.03 0.07 . 14.00 0.09 2,761 231.50 0.10 0.03 0.07 15.00 0.09 2,724 231.48 0.10 0.03 0.07 16.00 0.08 2,675 231.46 0.10 0.03 0.07 17.00 0.08 2,615 231.43 0.10 0.03 0.07 "' 18.00 0.07 2,543 231.40 0.10 0.03 0.07 19.00 0.07 2,460 231.36 0.09 0.03 0.07 20.00 0.07 2,367 231.32 0.09 0.03 0.07 21.00 0.06 2,263 231.28 0.09 0.03 0.07 22.00 0.06 2,150 231.23 0.09 0.03 0.07 23.00 0.05 2,028 231.18 0.09 0.03 0.06 24.00 0.05 1,897 231.13 0.09 0.03 0.06 '•SA 25.00 0.00 1,606 231.00 0.08 0.02 0.06 26.00 0.00 1,312 230.88 0.08 0.02 0.05 27.00 0.00 1,032 230.77 0.08 0.02 0.05 28.00 0.00 767 230.67 0.07 0.02 0.05 ""°' 29.00 0.00 515 230.57 0.07 0.02 0.04 30.00 0.00 283 230.37 0.06 0.02 0.04 31.00 0.00 97 230.14 0.04 0.02 0.02 32.00 0.00 9 230.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 ttv 33.00 0.00 1 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 _A 40.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 "" 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 yearRainfa/I=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=45,683 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.87" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.76 cfs 0.251 af Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.40' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.76 cfs 0.251 af Outflow=0.76 cfs 0.250 af 16. Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak EIev=232.06' Storage=3,972 cf Inflow=0.76 cfs 0.250 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.072 af Primary=0.08 cfs 0.178 af Outflow=0.11 cfs 0.250 af 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Runoff = 0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.251 af, Depth= 2.87" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Area (sf) CN Description 45,683 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C { 45,683 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Hydrograph ❑Runoff 4u6 o.s= " 0.76 cfs 0.75-1 Type IA 24-hr ° 5 year Rainfall=3.10" 0.65_' 0 Runoff Area=45,683 sf 0.551 Runoff Volume=0.251 af 0.45- Runoff Depth=2.87" 04 Tc=5.0 min 0.35 °.3 CN=0/98 0.25-, 05 0.05=// 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) IIYYI o Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a sin 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff ii (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 2.00 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.06 3.00 0.25 0.00 0.11 0.08 4.00 0.36 0.00 0.19 0.10 5.00 0.48 0.00 0.30 0.13 6.00 0.64 0.00 0.45 0.17 7.00 0.83 0.00 0.63 0.21 8.00 1.32 0.00 1.10 0.73 9.00 1.61 0.00 1.39 0.23 10.00 1.79 0.00 1.57 0.17 11.00 1.93 0.00 1.71 0.15 12.00 2.06 0.00 1.83 0.12 13.00 2.17 0.00 1.95 0.12 14.00 2.28 0.00 2.05 0.11 15.00 2.38 0.00 2.16 0.11 16.00 2.48 0.00 2.25 0.10 17.00 2.58 0.00 2.35 0.10 "`" 18.00 2.67 0.00 2.44 0.09 19.00 2.75 0.00 2.52 0.09 20.00 2.83 0.00 2.60 0.08 y 21.00 2.90 0.00 2.67 0.08 22.00 2.97 0.00 2.74 0.07 23.00 3.04 0.00 2.81 0.07 24.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.06 ..; 25.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 26.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 i 27.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 28.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 ""` 29.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 30.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 31.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 32.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 ""'b 33.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 1 34.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 35.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 36.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 37.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 38.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 39.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 40.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 41.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 42.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 1 43.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 is 44.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 45.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 46.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 47.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 48.00 3.10 0.00 2.87 0.00 6 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 yearRainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.87" for 5 year event Inflow = 0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.251 af Outflow = 0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.250 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.250 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.40' @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 2.8 min calculated for 0.250 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.4 min ( 667.5 - 666.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 IDevice Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' /230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.40' (Free Discharge) — Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.76 cfs @ 2.23 fps) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.76 cfs of 25.89 cfs potential flow) .ie6 I I I I I I I umr Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph / 00 Inflow n 7F rfs ❑Primary o.s= L0.76 cfs IInflow Area=1 .049 ac 0.75� �, , Peak Elev=231 .40" 0.65 Storage=0.001 of 0.45y o 0.4 0.2_ 0.05 EI`/�i%� 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I I iru I ow ir Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 yearRainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 ilk Hydrograph for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Pi Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.000 229.65 0.00 2.00 0.06 0.000 230.95 0.06 atm 3.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 4.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 5.00 0.13 0.001 231.03 0.13 6.00 0.17 0.001 231.07 0.17 v"° 7.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 8.00 0.73 0.001 231.38 0.73 9.00 0.23 0.001 231.12 0.23 vfam 10.00 0.17 0.001 231.07 0.17 11.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 12.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 13.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 14.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 15.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 16.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 9 17.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 18.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 19.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 j s 20.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 21.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 22.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 23.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 24.00 0.06 0.000 230.96 0.06 - 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 j 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ".` 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 WO 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ,,,, 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 hitik 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 "' 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 sktO Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Summary for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.86" for 5 year event Inflow = 0.76 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.250 of Outflow = 0.11 cfs © 13.73 hrs, Volume= 0.250 af, Atten= 85%, Lag= 351.1 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 13.73 hrs, Volume= 0.072 of Ave Primary = 0.08 cfs @ 13.73 hrs, Volume= 0.178 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 232.06' @ 13.73 hrs Surf.Area= 2,006 sf Storage= 3,972 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 435.8 rein calculated for 0.250 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 435.9 min ( 1,103.4 - 667.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,626 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 9,027 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 4,065 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap 108 Chambers in 5 Rows 6,588 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 2,006 0 0 234.52 2,006 9,027 9,027 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert 4"` L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 13.73 hrs HW=232.06' (Free Discharge) L4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.08 cfs © 13.73 hrs HW=232.06' (Free Discharge) 4-1=Culvert (Passes 0.08 cfs of 1.73 cfs potential flow) 12=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.08 cfs @ 6.88 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) ear Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 it Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph ❑Inflow 0.76 cfs 1 outflow Inflow Area=1 .049 ac ®Discarded ■Primary °8 0 Peak EIev=232.06' 0.75•= 0.7 Storage=3,972 cf I 0.65= ir 0.6, 0.55 Prg I H 0.5_ . 0.45' 0 0.47 %� a 0.35- f ' I 0.3 0.25 0.11 cfs Ae d 0.15 m ,,r' 0.08 cfs "/./.II✓✓e'"' // .� /JI!//f 0.05:_ I 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I I I I I I bit Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 5 yearRainfall=3.10" "" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCY 9 p Page 21 { H dro ra h for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.06 59 230.09 0.04 0.02 0.01 - 3.00 0.08 153 230.21 0.05 0.02 0.03 4.00 0.10 277 230.37 0.06 0.02 0.03 5.00 0.13 454 230.54 0.07 0.02 0.04 6.00 0.17 736 230.65 0.07 0.02 0.05 7.00 0.21 1,148 230.82 0.08 0.02 0.05 8.00 0.73 2,479 231.37 0.09 0.03 0.07 9.00 0.23 3,380 231.78 0.10 0.03 0.08 10.00 0.17 3,682 231.92 0.11 0.03 0.08 11.00 0.15 3,846 232.00 0.11 0.03 0.08 12.00 0.12 3,924 232.04 0.11 0.03 0.08 13.00 0.12 3,960 232.06 0.11 0.03 0.08 - 14.00 0.11 3,971 232.06 0.11 0.03 0.08 15.00 0.11 3,961 232.06 0.11 0.03 0.08 16.00 0.10 3,935 232.04 0.11 0.03 0.08 17.00 0.10 3,892 232.02 0.11 0.03 0.08 400., 18.00 0.09 3,834 231.99 0.11 0.03 0.08 19.00 0.09 3,761 231.96 0.11 0.03 0.08 20.00 0.08 3,673 231.91 0.11 0.03 0.08 21.00 0.08 3,571 231.87 0.11 0.03 0.08 22.00 0.07 3,456 231.81 0.11 0.03 0.08 23.00 0.07 3,328 231.75 0.10 0.03 0.08 0 24.00 0.06 3,188 231.69 0.10 0.03 0.08 ,.i. 25.00 0.00 2,847 231.53 0.10 0.03 0.07 26.00 0.00 2,499 231.38 0.09 0.03 0.07 27.00 0.00 2,166 231.24 0.03 0.07 28.00 0.00 1,847 231.10 0.09 0.03 0.06 29.00 0.00 1,542 230.98 0.08 0.02 0.06 30.00 0.00 1,251 230.86 0.08 0.02 0.05 31.00 0.00 974 230.75 0.07 0.02 0.05 32.00 0.00 711 230.64 0.07 0.02 0.05 33.00 0.00 463 230.54 0.07 0.02 0.04 34.00 0.00 238 230.32 0.06 0.02 0.03 35.00 0.00 65 230.10 0.04 0.02 0.01 ,,,, 36.00 0.00 5 230.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 i 40.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 „, 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Printed 6/7/2021 Prepared by HP 9e 22 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pa Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentBASIN B: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=45,683 sf Tc=5.0100 00%CN=0/98Impervious Runoffunoff D p 0 85 cfs 0.281 af Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.43' Storage=0.001 of Inflow=0.85 cfs 0.281 of Outflow=0.85 cfs 0.281 af Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=232.46' Storage=4,693 cf Inflow=0.85 cfs 0.281 of Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.078 of Primary=0.09 cfs 0.203 of Outflow=0.12 cfs 0.281 of Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Runoff = 0.85 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af, Depth= 3.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 45,683 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 45,683 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Hydrograph ❑Runoff 0.85 cfs 085 0.81 Type IA 24-hr 0.75_ 10 year Rainfall=3.45" 0.65; Runoff Area=45,683 sf 00. 6 0 Runoff Volume=0.281 af 0.5= 0 Runoff Depth=3.22 0.45 Tc=5.0 min u. 0.4 A j 441. 003 j CN=0/98 0.25.1 elrr 0.2, r 0.15: o.os_ I . f���i //////l///7//,'W,/./// 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) ww wwi was Amu wn Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" "" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 ,.v, Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff ,,,, (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 2.00 0.17 0.00 0.05 0.07 .4, 3.00 0.28 0.00 0.13 0.09 4.00 0.40 0.00 0.23 0.12 5.00 0.54 0.00 0.35 0.15 6.00 0.71 0.00 0.51 0.19 7.00 0.92 0.00 0.72 0.23 8.00 1.47 0.00 1.25 0.82 9.00 1.79 0.00 1.57 0.26 iiii 10.00 1.99 0.00 1.77 0.19 11.00 2.15 0.00 1.93 0.16 12.00 2.29 0.00 2.06 0.14 13.00 2.42 0.00 2.19 0.13 14.00 2.54 0.00 2.31 0.12 15.00 2.65 0.00 2.42 0.12 16.00 2.76 0.00 2.53 0.11 17.00 2.87 0.00 2.64 0.11 *""' 18.00 2.97 0.00 2.73 0.10 19.00 3.06 0.00 2.83 0.10 I 20.00 3.15 0.00 2.92 0.09 21.00 3.23 0.00 3.00 0.09 22.00 3.31 0.00 3.08 0.08 23.00 3.38 0.00 3.15 0.07 i 24.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.07 25.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 26.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 27.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 28.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 ' " 29.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 30.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 31.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 iii 32.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 33.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 34.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 35.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 Itr 36.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 37.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 38.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 39.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 w. 40.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 41.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 42.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 43.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 44.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 45.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 46.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 A., 47.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 48.00 3.45 0.00 3.22 0.00 i +ek Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.22" for 10 year event Inflow = 0.85 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af Outflow = 0.85 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.85 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.43' @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af .44 Plug-Flow detention time= 2.5 min calculated for 0.281 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.3 min ( 664.5 - 663.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' / 230.80' S= 0.0000 'I' Cc= 0.900 'A" n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.85 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.43' (Free Discharge) 4 -1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.85 cfs @ 2.30 fps) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.85 cfs of 26.98 cfs potential flow) ima Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 Pond 1B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph n Rc rf ❑Inflow ❑Primary 0.9 0.85 cfs;for Inflow Area=1 .049 ac Peak Elev=231 .43' 65 Storage=0.001 of 0 a 0.37. 0.25� ✓ 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) I I I I I I I of, - Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" "" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 - Hydrograph for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary ,, (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.000 229.96 0.00 2.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 .. 3.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 4.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 5.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 6.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 "`" 7.00 0.23 0.001 231.12 0.23 8.00 0.82 0.001 231.42 0.82 9.00 0.26 0.001 231.14 0.26 10.00 0.19 0.001 231.08 0.19 11.00 0.16 0.001 231.06 0.16 12.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 13.00 0.13 0.001 231.03 0.13 . 14.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 15.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 16.00 0.11 0.000 231.02 0.11 17.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 "`"' 18.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 19.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 20.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 21.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 22.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 23.00 0.07 0.000 230.98 0.07 24.00 0.07 0.000 230.97 0.07 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 4lo"' 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 il 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 Ir 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ilo 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ii 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 P 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 +"" 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 I , Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 t," Summary for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.21" for 10 year event Inflow = 0.85 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ 14.73 hrs, Volume= 0.281 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 411.1 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs © 14.73 hrs, Volume= 0.078 af Primary = 0.09 cfs © 14.73 hrs, Volume= 0.203 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 232.46' © 14.73 hrs Surf.Area= 2,006 sf Storage= 4,693 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 483.3 min calculated for 0,281 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 483.4 min ( 1,147.9 - 664.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,626 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 9,027 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 4,065 cf x 40.0% Voids war #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap t'"' 108 Chambers in 5 Rows 6,588 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 2,006 0 0 234.52 2,006 9,027 9,027 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 111 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 14.73 hrs HW=232.46' (Free Discharge) L4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.09 cfs @ 14.73 hrs HW=232.46' (Free Discharge) t- =Culvert (Passes 0.09 cfs of 1.92 cfs potential flow) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.09 cfs © 7.52 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) it* i4t% :vtiwuawaWiaaiaauvaiN;N awsiaYWSNivttSaWYaamiulNeFwiaaitiwa+awslin. .omN .a.. , .::..:.w .x.e.a.�+wikkrtHxaKiaYfliYtOt4dsYYY1a#iaattiaukloN'.xwwwi a-.w.u,n,,. ,Au:..sss ,..,..eu>u:e»1 aso:a.aNw3fstMtwaesii.>rtNaxUieltietiui+NWHxLaasHevAro4usiauuN.ahk 1K�waulaN:..-. Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph 0.85 cfs 0 Inflow C Outflow Inflow Area=1.049 ae Discarded Primary 05 Peak Elev=232.46' ❑ 0.85 080 Storage=4,693 cf it/ 0.75- OJ 0.65 Or 0.6 qF: i . 0.55 110 S. 0.5 0 0.45 ' 0.4 0.35 /rr 0.3 ri/ 0.25 0.12 cfs +'s....� 0.2 «�,✓° _ 0.15 ,./40111. 0.09 cfs � !�. ,.��' i a1 ..Jlf////f/11///�%/f/i%!///////l,// 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) 6160 I I I I I I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 "" Hydrograph for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 fr Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 r 1.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.07 78 230.12 0.04 0.02 0.02 sr 3.00 0.09 202 230.27 0.05 0.02 0.03 4.00 0.12 357 230.46 0.06 0.02 0.04 5.00 0.15 577 230.59 0.07 0.02 0.04 6.00 0.19 919 230.73 0.07 0.02 0.05 7.00 0.23 1,403 230.92 0.08 0.02 0.06 8.00 0.82 2,914 231.56 0.10 0.03 0.07 9.00 0.26 3,941 232.05 0.11 0.03 0.08 iii 10.00 0.19 4,298 232.23 0.12 0.03 0.09 11.00 0.16 4,500 232.34 0.12 0.03 0.09 12.00 0.14 4,604 232.40 0.12 0.03 0.09 13.00 0.13 4,660 232.44 0.12 0.03 0.09 Mitt 14.00 0.12 4,688 232.45 0.12 0.03 0.09 15.00 0.12 4,693 232.46 0.12 0.03 0.09 16.00 0.11 4,678 232.45 0.12 0.03 0.09 17.00 0.11 4,644 232.43 0.12 0.03 0.09 18.00 0.10 4,593 232.40 0.12 0.03 0.09 19.00 0.10 4,524 232.36 0.12 0.03 0.09 20.00 0.09 4,439 232.31 0.12 0.03 0.09 21.00 0.09 4,339 232.25 0.12 0.03 0.09 22.00 0.08 4,223 232.19 0.11 0.03 0.09 23.00 0.07 4,092 232.12 0.11 0.03 0.09 24.00 0.07 3,947 232.05 0.11 0.03 0.08 - 25.00 0.00 3,578 231.87 0.11 0.03 0.08 26.00 0.00 3,201 231.69 0.10 0.03 0.08 27.00 0.00 2,839 231.53 0.10 0.03 0.07 28.00 0.00 2,491 231.38 0.09 0.03 0.07 29.00 0.00 2,158 231.24 0.09 0.03 0.07 30.00 0.00 1,839 231.10 0.09 0.03 0.06 31.00 0.00 1,535 230.98 0.08 0.02 0.06 32.00 0.00 1,244 230.86 0.08 0.02 0.05 w 33.00 0.00 967 230.75 0.07 0.02 0.05 34.00 0.00 705 230.64 0.07 0.02 0.05 35.00 0.00 457 230.54 0.07 0.02 0.04 ., 36.00 0.00 233 230.31 0.06 0.02 0.03 37.00 0.00 62 230.10 0.04 0.02 0.01 38.00 0.00 4 230.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 -ate 40.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 "` 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 o. 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 a ,w Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-lnd+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin Runoff Area=45,683 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.67" Tc=5.0 min CN=0/98 Runoff=0.96 cfs 0.320 af Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin#2 Peak Elev=231.48' Storage=0.001 af Inflow=0.96 cfs 0.320 af Outflow=0.96 cfs 0.320 af Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers#2 Peak Elev=233.26' Storage=5,575 cf Inflow=0.96 cfs 0.320 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.084 af Primary=0.11 cfs 0.236 af Outflow=0.14 cfs 0.320 af iS ii 1ay41 op a4W 111 I I 1 I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 Summary for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Runoff = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af, Depth= 3.67" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 45,683 98 Roof, ramps & concrete, HSG C 45,683 98 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) "" 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Hydrograph 1 0.96 cfs Runoff Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Runoff Area=45,683 sf • • • R n =u off Volume 0.320 af • • Runoff Depth=3.67" 0 Tc=5.0 min LL CN=0/98 AWN0 / /,/, /! /l/i' 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) 4W uMN veimairomio Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" ` " Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 Il Hydrograph for Subcatchment BASIN B: Drainage Basin B - NORTH Time Precip. Perv.Excess Imp.Excess Runoff (hours) (inches) (inches) (inches) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 1.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.02 2.00 0.20 0.00 0.07 0.08 3.00 0.32 0.00 0.16 0.11 4.00 0.45 0.00 0.28 0.13 5.00 0.61 0.00 0.42 0.17 6.00 0.80 0.00 0.60 0.21 ` 7.00 1.05 0.00 0.83 0.26 8.00 1.66 0.00 1.44 0.93 9.00 2.03 0.00 1.80 0.29 1 1 10.00 2.25 0.00 2.02 0.21 11.00 2.43 0.00 2.20 0.18 12.00 2.59 0.00 2.36 0.15 13.00 2.73 0.00 2.50 0.15 - 14.00 2.87 0.00 2.64 0.14 15.00 3.00 0.00 2.77 0.13 16.00 3.12 0.00 2.89 0.13 17.00 3.24 0.00 3.01 0.12 18.00 3.35 0.00 3.12 0.12 19.00 3.46 0.00 3.23 0.11 20.00 3.56 0.00 3.33 0.10 21.00 3.65 0.00 3.42 0.10 22.00 3.74 0.00 3.51 0.09 23.00 3.82 0.00 3.59 0.08 24.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.08 25.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 26.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 27.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 28.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 hie, 29.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 30.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 31.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 32.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 33.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 34.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 35.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 ,,,& 36.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 37.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 38.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 39.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 - 40.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 41.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 42.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 43.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 "," 44.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 45.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 46.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 47.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 ,1141 48.00 3.90 0.00 3.67 0.00 I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 ,_ Summary for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.67" for 25 year event Inflow = 0.96 cfs © 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af Outflow = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Primary = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 231.48° @ 7.88 hrs Surf.Area= 0.000 ac Storage= 0.001 af Plug-Flow detention time= 2.3 min calculated for 0.320 af(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.1 min ( 661.3 - 660.1 ) ,,,. Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 229.30' 0.002 af 4.00'D x 7.93'H SDMH #2 IDevice Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.80' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 1.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.80' / 230.80' S= 0.0000 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 229.30' 4.0' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) 6.0' Crest Height Primary OutFlow Max=0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs HW=231.48' (Free Discharge) t-1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.96 cfs @ 2.38 fps) t-2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Passes 0.96 cfs of 28.30 cfs potential flow) ikS4 c4U 1 I I Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 Hydrograph Ll Inflow fl AF cf3 { 0 Primary 1 0.96 cfs Inflow Area=1 .049 ac ' leoPeak EIev=231 .48' Storage=0.001 of 1$0 stew p 0/4 , Aor i 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) visI t. rr I hi I I k Terrace Glen Apartments ii Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 36 Hydrograph for Pond 1 B: Inlet Drain Basin #2 r Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary 6. (hours) (cfs) (acre-feet) (feet) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.000 229.30 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.000 230.48 0.00 2.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 3.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 4.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 I 5.00 0.17 0.001 2.31.07 0.17 6.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 7.00 0.26 0.001 231.14 0.26 8.00 0.93 0.001 231.47 0.93 9.00 0.29 0.001 231.16 0.30 10.00 0.21 0.001 231.10 0.21 1.4 11.00 0.18 0.001 231.08 0.18 12.00 0.15 0.001 231.06 0.15 13.00 0.15 0.001 231.05 0.15 14.00 0.14 0.001 231.04 0.14 15.00 0.13 0.001 231.04 0.13 16.00 0.13 0.000 231.03 0.13 ��1 i 17.00 0.12 0.000 231.03 0.12 18.00 0.12 0.000 231.02 0.12 19.00 0.11 0.000 231.01 0.11 20.00 0.10 0.000 231.01 0.10 21.00 0.10 0.000 231.00 0.10 22.00 0.09 0.000 230.99 0.09 23.00 0.08 0.000 230.99 0.08 24.00 0.08 0.000 230.98 0.08 'i,o, 25.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 27.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 °" 29.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 31.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 33.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 34.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ,., 36.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 37.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 38.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 39.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 ire 40.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 41.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 "" 44.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 0.00 48.00 0.00 0.000 230.80 iim; Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 37 Summary for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Inflow Area = 1.049 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.66" for 25 year event Inflow = 0.96 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af Outflow = 0.14 cfs @ 14.77 hrs, Volume= 0.320 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 413.5 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs © 14.77 hrs, Volume= 0.084 af Primary = 0.11 cfs @ 14.77 hrs, Volume= 0.236 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 233.26' @ 14.77 hrs Surf.Area= 2,006 sf Storage= 5,575 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 527.0 min calculated for 0.320 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 527.0 min ( 1,188.3 - 661.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 230.02' 1,626 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 9,027 cf Overall -4,962 cf Embedded = 4,065 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 230.52' 4,962 cf ADS StormTech SC-740 +Cap x 108 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.12'L = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap `' 108 Chambers in 5 Rows 6,588 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 230.02 2,006 0 0 234.52 2,006 9,027 9,027 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 230.02' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 29.8' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 230.02' / 229.90' S= 0.0040 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 228.02' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 234.15' 48.0" x 4.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Discarded 230.02' 0.500 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 217.17' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 14.77 hrs HW=233.26' (Free Discharge) L4=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 14.77 hrs HW=233.26' (Free Discharge) L =Culvert (Passes 0.11 cfs of 2.26 cfs potential flow) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.11 cfs @ 8.66 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) .1.#»..iY»ibaNiatNS#AiiltLLiAkF4kii3dJtkb9iNtiNMN.Niii3+.N4»h13u6i4it+ei 6.Ain«ti iia fP srr5arn M ixlH t s+5t4»HiL1N.t11N41Mit Cl4N»tsHUN4144iti41UAAi'a3Nk Ya.....,�;,;e ....s.: .x iu l#atsiR£W;4 i»l4tida i$4+1irNain3#i16AMf4iHNYifi<bH1sWYktFliHM1v11s4tLN#YMi44bsaiit#. . Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 38 Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 Hydrograph 0.96 cfs o Outlo outflow Inflow Area=1 .049 ac Discarded ❑Primary 1 Peak Elev=233.26' r Storage=5,575 cf 0.14 cfs 0.11 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (hours) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I ail Terrace Glen Apartments Terrace Glen Chambers BASIN B POST REV 6-1-21 Type IA 24-hr 25 year Rainfall=3.90" Ito Prepared by HP Printed 6/7/2021 HydroCAD® 10.10-4a s/n 10679 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 39 i. Hydrograph for Pond 2B: Stormtech Chambers #2 10 Time Inflow Storage Elevation Outflow Discarded Primary (hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 0 230.02 0.00 2.00 0.08 107 230.15 0.05 0.02 0.02 i§ 3.00 0.11 273 230.36 0.06 0.02 0.03 4.00 0.13 470 230.55 0.07 0.02 0.04 5.00 0.17 752 230.66 0.07 0.02 0.05 6.00 0.21 1,169 230.83 0.08 0.02 0.05 7.00 0.26 1,746 231.06 0.09 0.03 0.06 8.00 0.93 3,486 231.83 0.11 0.03 0.08 9.00 0.30 4,674 232.44 0.12 0.03 0.09 Ail 10.00 0.21 5,099 232.73 0.13 0.03 0.10 11.00 0.18 5,342 232.97 0.13 0.03 0.10 12.00 0.15 5,468 233.12 0.13 0.03 0.10 13.00 0.15 5,535 233.21 0.13 0.03 0.11 0.11 + 14.00 0.14 5,569 233.25 0.14 0.03 15.00 0.13 5,574 233.26 0.14 0.03 0.11 16.00 0.13 5,559 233.24 0.14 0.03 0.11 17.00 0.12 5,523 233.19 0.13 0.03 0.11 .,,, 18.00 0.12 5,468 233.12 0.13 0.03 0.10 19.00 0.11 5,396 233.04 0.13 0.03 0.10 20.00 0.10 5,309 232.93 0.13 0.03 0.10 21.00 0.10 5,206 232.82 0.13 0.03 0.10 22.00 0.09 5,089 232.72 0.13 0.03 0.10 23.00 0.08 4,955 232.62 0.12 0.03 0.10 24.00 0.08 4,807 232.53 0.12 0.03 0.09 v. 25.00 0.00 4,406 232.29 0.12 0.03 0.09 26.00 0.00 3,996 232.07 0.11 0.03 0.08 0 27.00 0.00 3,602 231.88 0.11 0.03 0.08 28.00 0.00 3,224 231.70 0.10 0.03 0.08 "° 29.00 0.00 2,861 231.54 0.10 0.03 0.07 30.00 0.00 2,512 231.39 0.09 0.03 0.07 31.00 0.00 2,178 231.24 0.09 0.03 0.07 32.00 0.00 1,859 231.11 0.09 0.03 0.06 33.00 0.00 1,553 230.98 0.08 0.02 0.06 34.00 0.00 1,261 230.86 0.08 0.02 0.05 35.00 0.00 984 230.75 0.08 0.02 0.05 .,a 36.00 0.00 721 230.65 0.07 0.02 0.05 37.00 0.00 472 230.55 0.07 0.02 0.04 38.00 0.00 246 230.33 0.06 0.02 0.03 39.00 0.00 70 230.11 0.04 0.02 0.02 .t.. 40.00 0.00 5 230.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 "` 44.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 0.00 0 230.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 x4Ab dhaWY L Terrace Glen Apartments-Tigard,OR 8" Private Storm Drain 25 year, 24-hour Storm Event- BASIN A=0.17 CFS, BASIN B=0.11 CFS 25 year, 24-hour Storm Event=0.28 CFS TOTAL Manning Formula Uniform Pipe Flow at Given Slope and Depth Inputs: Pipe Diameter, do 8.0000 in Manning Roughness, n _ 0.0110 Pressure slope (possibly equal to pipe slope), So 0.0040 slope Percent of(or ratio to)full depth (100%or 1 if flowing full) 1.0000 fraction Results: Flow, Q 0.90 ft^3/s Velocity, v 2.59 ft/s Velocity head, by 0.10 ft Flow Area,A 50.27 inA2 Wetted Perimeter, P _ 2.09 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.17 ft Top Width,T 0.00 ft Froude Number, F 0.00 Shear Stress (tractive force),t 0.1665 psf Version 2.0(20 June 2017) HawsEDC Calculators I Terrace Glen Apartments-Tigard, OR 12" Public Storm Drain • 25 year, 24-hour Storm Event=0.28 CFS TOTAL from New Development Manning Formula Uniform Pipe Flow at Given Slope and Depth Inputs: Pipe Diameter, do 12.0000 in Manning Roughness, n 0.0110 Pressure slope (possibly equal to pipe slope), So 0.0025 slope Percent of(or ratio to)full depth (100%or 1 if flowing full) 1.0000 fraction Results: Flow, Q 2.11 ft^3/s Velocity, v 2.68 ft/s Velocity head, by 0.11 ft Flow Area,A 113.10 in^2 Wetted Perimeter, P 3.14 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.25 ft Top Width,T 0.00 ft Froude Number, F 0.00 Shear Stress (tractive force),t 0.1561. psf Version 2.0(20 June 2017) HawsEDC Calculators I 1 I I i .. ••• JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC oir Ss:' L APPENDIX D GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION f DESIGNk AN NivCOMPANY YiIY L I I Wr REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES Terrace Glenn Apartments 9640 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon \ For Related Northwest December 31, 2020 ikGeoDesign Project: RelatedNW-2-01 I 1 I f /,r ff , t 1 I GEO[, ESIGN 1\Ni\ AN v 5 COMPANY '- iiilll I December 31, 2020 ill I Related Northwest 208 SW First Avenue, Suite 240 Portland, OR 97204 IAttention: Ryan Hood I Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services p 9 9 I Terrace Glenn Apartments 9640 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon GeoDesign Project: RelatedNW-2-01 i iii GeoDesign, Inc. is pleased to submit this report of geotechnical engineering services for the proposed Terrace Glenn Apartments project located at 9640 SW Greenburg Road in Tigard, Oregon. Our services for this project were conducted in general accordance with our proposal dated September 22, 2020 and our change order dated November 24, 2020. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. Please call if you have questions regarding Ii this report. Sincerely, iGeoDesign, Inc. 00,-",... .017 Brett A. Shipton, P.E., G.E. Principal Engineer RTL:BAS:kt IAttachments One copy submitted(via email only) I Document ID: RelatedNW-2-01-123120-geor.docx ©2020 GeoDesign,Inc. All rights reserved. 9450 SW Commerce Circle,Suite 300 I Wilsonville,OR 97070 1503.968.8787 www.geodesigninc.com EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed Terrace Glenn Apartments project located at 9640 SW Greenburg Road in Tigard, Oregon. The proposed project includes the construction of two new, four-story apartment buildings. The buildings will be constructed using wood framing and will have footprints of approximately 17,751 and 15,680 square feet. The proposed buildings do not have basements. The development will also include construction of retaining walls, paved parking areas, paved drive aisles, underground utilities, and landscape areas. SW Greenburg Road half-street improvements will also be performed as part of this project. The site is 2.88 acres in size. The site is currently occupied by a church, a two-story residence, AC pavement, landscaping, an orchard, an outdoor deck, and vacant areas. The existing structures will be demolished as part of this project. The site location relative to surrounding physical features is shown on Figure 1. Based on our review of the available information and the results of our explorations, it is our opinion that the site can be developed as proposed. Our specific recommendations for site development and design are provided later in this report. The following items will have an impact on design and construction of the proposed project: • The proposed buildings can be supported on spread footings that are underlain by firm native soil or structural fill. It may be necessary to over-excavate soft undocumented fill soil at some locations prior to footing construction or structural fill placement. • The structural fill that is placed beneath new buildings to raise grades will result in settlement. Once the structural fill has been placed, we recommend that the construction of foundations, floor slabs, and other structures be delayed until it is verified that fill-induced settlement is complete. • If new fill is placed next to existing structures, the weight of the new fill could cause settlement beneath existing structures. We note that the foundations of the existing buildings to the north of the site are within a few inches of the property line. We recommend that new fill not be placed near existing structures. Alternatively, settlement damage can also be mitigated by using lightweight fill or installing ground improvement. • We measured relatively low infiltration rates in our explorations. Stormwater infiltration will likely be limited at the site. • Liquefaction, lateral spreading, fault rupture, landslides, and flooding are not considered hazards at the site. • Our seismic analysis indicates that design levels of ground shaking can be computed assuming Site Class D in accordance with ASCE 7-16. It may be necessary to perform a site- specific seismic analysis for the proposed buildings, depending on the results of analyses performed by the structural engineer. If necessary, we can perform this additional seismic analysis. • The on-site soil is suitable for use as structural fill, provided it is properly moisture conditioned. 111 DESIGN= II T5 cm-4.Y i RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. IACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 Regional and Site Geology 2 3.2 Surface Conditions 3 3.3 Subsurface Conditions 3 3.4 Infiltration Testing 4 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5 4.1 Seismic Hazards 5 4.2 Other Geologic Hazards 6 5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 6 5.1 Foundation Support 6 I 5.2 Slabs on Grade 7 5.3 Seismic Design Parameters 8 5.4 Fill-Induced Settlement 8 I 5.5 On-Site Pavement Recommendations 10 5.6 Retaining Walls 11 5.7 Permanent Slopes 13 I 5.8 Drainage 13 6.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 13 6.1 Site Preparation 13 6.2 Excavation 14 6.3 Structural Fill 15 6.4 Erosion Control 18 i i 6.5 Wet Weather Construction 18 7.0 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION 18 8.0 LIMITATIONS 19 IREFERENCES 21 FIGURES Vicinity Map Figure 1 Site Plan Figure 2 I ii Surcharge-Induced Lateral Earth Pressures Figure 3 { " !DESIGN? AN N V 5 ^1°'''^" RelatedNW-2-01.123120 L TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. ° APPENDICES Appendix A Field Explorations A-1 a Laboratory Testing A-2 Exploration Key Table A-i Soil Classification System Table A-2 I Boring Logs Figures A-1 -A-10 Atterberg Limits Test Results Figure A-1 1 Consolidation Test Results Figure A-12 Summary of Laboratory Data Figure A-1 3 Appendix B Nearby Explorations B-1 iii Figures, Logs, and Laboratory Test Results Appendix C I Infiltration Test Data C-1 Infiltration Test Data I I I i I 1 1 i km WIDDESIGIW V'5tt"PAN" RelatedNW-2-01.1 231 20 L A ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Lai AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AC asphalt concrete ACP asphalt concrete pavement ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BGS below ground surface ii, CRBG Columbia River Basalt Group DCP dynamic cone penetrometer DOGAMI Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries iii g gravitational acceleration (32.2 feet/second') H:V horizontal to vertical IBC International Building Code MCE maximum considered earthquake MCEG maximum considered earthquake geometric mean OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHPD Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development ow OSSC Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction (2021) pcf pounds per cubic foot giiii pci pounds per cubic inch PG performance grade PGA peak ground acceleration *I PGAM maximum considered earthquake geometric mean peak ground acceleration adjusted for site affects psf pounds per square foot Nit psi pounds per square inch SEAOC Structural Engineers Association of California SOSSC State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code SPT standard penetration test USGS U.S. Geological Survey I b 1 I or PAW iii CEODESIGN= AN N V 5CI)MPANV RelatedNW-2-01:1231 20 �rw 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed ww Terrace Glenn Apartments project located at 9640 SW Greenburg Road in Tigard, Oregon. The proposed project includes the construction of two new, four-story apartment buildings. The buildings will be constructed using wood framing and will have footprints of approximately 17,751 and 15,680 square feet. The proposed buildings do not have basements. The development will also include construction of retaining walls, paved parking areas, paved drive aisles, underground utilities, and landscape areas. SW Greenburg Road half-street improvements Aro will also be performed as part of this project. The site is 2.88 acres in size. The site is currently occupied by a church, a two-story residence, i'"` AC pavement, landscaping, an orchard, an outdoor deck, and vacant areas. The existing structures will be demolished as part of this project. The site location relative to surrounding physical features is shown on Figure 1. Foundation loads for the proposed buildings are not currently available. Based on our experience with similar projects, we have assumed that maximum column and wall loads will not exceed 300 kips and 6 kips per foot, respectively. A preliminary project grading plan shows fills of up to approximately 11 feet and cuts of up to approximately 5 feet. We should be contacted to re-evaluate our recommendations if the structural loads, cuts, or fills exceed these values we used in our design. Acronyms and abbreviations used herein are defined above, immediately following the Table of Contents. Yrr 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this evaluation was to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design and construction of the proposed development. Specifically, we completed the following scope of services: ir.' • Reviewed readily available, published geologic data and our in-house files for existing information on subsurface conditions in the site vicinity and our previous explorations at nearby surrounding sites. ""' • Coordinated and managed the field explorations, including utility locates, coordination with existing property owners, traffic control, obtaining a Washington County permit, and scheduling subcontractors. ••• • Explored subsurface conditions by drilling the following borings using a trailer-mounted, solid-stem drill rig: • Four on-site borings to depths between 20.1 and 22.7 feet BGS in building areas. "•' • Four on-site borings to depths between 5.5 and 9.5 feet BGS in pavement areas. • Three off-site borings to depths between 0.9 foot and 5 feet BGS in SW Greenburg Road rw where half-street improvements will be performed. • Performed falling head infiltration tests in four borings at locations and depths where stormwater infiltration is being considered. w.. [DESIGN`= "" 1;5 cow-- 1 RelatedNW-2-01:1231 20 • Collected soil samples for laboratory testing and maintained detailed logs of subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations. • Conducted a laboratory testing program that consisted of the following tests: • Fifteen moisture content determinations in general accordance with ASTM D2216 • Four particle-size analyses in general accordance with ASTM D1 140 • One Atterberg limits test in general accordance with ASTM D4318 • One consolidation test in general accordance with ASTM D2435 • Provided recommendations for site preparation, grading and drainage, compaction criteria 1 ifor both on-site and imported materials, fill type for imported material, procedures for use of on-site soil, and wet weather earthwork procedures. • Evaluated groundwater conditions at the site and provided general recommendations for dewatering during construction and subsurface drainage, if required. L • Provided recommendations for the use of on-site native and fill material for support of slabs on grade. itiw • Provided building foundation support recommendations, including preferred foundation type, allowable bearing pressure, lateral resistance parameters, and settlement estimates. • Provided recommendations for use in design of conventional retaining walls, including backfill and drainage requirements and lateral earth pressures. • Provided recommendations for on-site AC pavement design and pavement subgrade t preparation. il ,,,, • Provided seismic design coefficients as prescribed by the 2019 SOSSC. • Provided recommendations for wet weather construction. • Prepared this geotechnical engineering report that presents our findings, conclusions, and we recommendations. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS L 3.1 REGIONAL AND SITE GEOLOGY rff The Portland metropolitan area is situated within the Puget-Willamette Trough physiographic province, a north-south structural basin lying between the Coast Range to the west and the Cascade Range to the east (Burns, 1998; Orr and Orr, 1999). The subsided lowland of the Portland Basin, a major component of the Willamette Trough, is bound by the anticlinal Tualatin Mountains and the Cascade front (both at least partly controlled by northwest-trending faults) and extends from highlands at Oregon City north to St. Helens and Woodland. A review of published geologic literature, previous explorations in the area, and explorations conducted during our investigation indicates the site is underlain by Pleistocene flood deposits (Ma et al., 2012) delineated as fine flood deposits (Mff). The unit consists of white or tan sand ow and silt that were deposited in a series of distinct layers. Each layer is a few inches to a few feet thick and represents a single flood. The unit was deposited by multiple catastrophic glacial L floods associated with the late Pleistocene Missoula Floods. Underlying the flood deposits is the Pliocene to Pleistocene Age (5 million to 1.5 million years 1 w before present)Troutdale Formation (Tpt), which consists of poorly indurated gray and brown silt and clay, mottled yellow and reddish-brown silty fine sand, with occasional pebble conglomerate beds (Schlicker and Deacon, 1967). iiii [ DESIGN= " Y;1 comPANY 2 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 I The Troutdale Formation is underlain by the Miocene Age (20 million to 10 million years before present) CRBG (Tcr), which is a series of basalt flows that originated from southeastern Washington and northeastern Oregon. The unit consists of weathered and unweathered basaltic lava flows with interflow zones of breccia, ash, and baked soil (Schlicker and Deacon, 1967). The CRBG is several hundred feet thick and is considered the geologic basement unit for this report. Subduction of the Juan de Fuca Plate beneath the west margin of the North American Plate presents the potential for great plate-interface earthquakes (magnitude greater than 8). LPaleoseismic investigations indicate that plate interface earthquakes have an average recurrence of 500 to 600 years (Atwater and Hemphill-Haley, 1997; Goldfinger et al., 2003) and that the last subduction zone earthquake occurred in the year 1700 (Satake et al., 1996). Moderate intensity 6 and long duration ground shaking would be expected at the site in the event of a large magnitude Cascadia plate-interface earthquake. ' L Crustal faults are present in the site vicinity. The closest faults to the site are the Canby-Molalla fault and the Beaverton fault zone, which are located approximately 1.4 and 2.4 miles from the pp Y site, respectively (USGS, 2020). 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS The site is a 2.88-acre lot that is bound by SW Greenburg Road on the west, an apartment complex on the north, and single-family residences on the east and south. The site is currently occupied by a church, a two-story residence, AC pavement, landscaping, an orchard, an outdoor deck, and vacant areas. The existing structures will be demolished as part of this project. 41 Vegetation at the site consists of an orchard, landscape trees, dense brush, shrubs, and lawn. The topography of the site slopes down from west to east, with ground surface elevations L ranging from approximately 256 feet on the west to 233 feet on the east. Historical aerial photographs show that significant development has not occurred at the site in at least 25 years. 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS L We conducted a subsurface exploration program that consisted of drilling 11 borings (B-1 through B-1 1) to depths between 0.9 foot and 22.7 feet BGS at the approximate locations shown 160 on Figure 2. Descriptions of the field exploration and laboratory testing programs, logs of the explorations, and laboratory test results are presented in Appendix A. Logs for explorations that were performed on the property to the north of the site are presented in Appendix B. We encountered AC pavement or topsoil in our explorations, which is underlain by layers of fill, silt, clay, and gravel. Each of these deposits is described below. i 3.3.1 Pavement Section One of our on-site borings was drilled through AC pavement. The AC pavement in boring B-1 is approximately 2 inches thick and is underlain by approximately 4 inches of base rock. We drilled three off-site borings in SW Greenburg Road. The AC pavement is 11 to 11.5 inches thick and is underlain by 3.5 to 7 inches of base rock. ... [!DESIGN= a"N' 5,x0.-'`"d, 3 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 3.3.2 Topsoil We encountered topsoil in our on-site borings that were drilled in areas that are not paved. The topsoil is approximately 2 to 4 inches thick and generally consists of a mixture of roots and silt. We also observed disturbed loose soil that we interpret as a tilled zone that extends to depths of 6 to 12 inches BGS. 3.3.3 Fill We encountered fill in boring B-3 at the ground surface that extends to a depth of 1.5 feet BGS. This fill consists of approximately 6 inches of soft silt that is underlain by approximately 12 inches of medium dense, brown gravel with silt and sand. The gravel is fine and angular to subrounded. Fill soil generally exhibits variable strength and compressibility properties. 3.3.4 Silt We encountered a layer of silt in the on-site borings we drilled for this project. The silt extends to depths between 10 and 15 feet BGS. The silt is generally medium stiff to very stiff, light brown to brown, moist to wet, non-plastic to low plasticity, and contains varying amounts of fine- grained sand. Laboratory testing indicates the moisture content of this layer ranged from 15 to 31 percent at the time of our explorations. Soil such as this generally exhibits moderate strength and low compressibility. Most of our borings were terminated in the silt layer. We performed DCP tests in the silt layer in borings B-5 through B-8. Iwo 3.3.5 Clay We encountered a layer of clay beneath the silt in borings B-1 through B-4. The clay extends to it depths between 17 and 19 feet BGS. The clay is generally stiff, brown to red, moist, has medium to high plasticity, and contains trace sand. Laboratory testing indicates the moisture content of this layer ranged from 25 to 33 percent at the time of our explorations. Soil such as this generally exhibits moderate strength and low compressibility. 3.3.6 Gravel We encountered gravel beneath the clay in borings B-1 through B-4. The gravel is generally very dense, red-brown to brown, moist to wet, fine to coarse, subrounded, and contains varying amounts of fine to coarse sand. In boring B-2 we observed the upper portion of this layer to consist primarily of sand with subordinate amounts of gravel. The gravel layer appears to be decomposed basalt. Borings B-1 through B-4 were terminated in this layer. Soil such as this generally exhibits high strength and very low compressibility. 3.3.7 Groundwater We observed groundwater in borings B-1 through B-4 at depths between 17.8 and 20 feet BGS. `"` The groundwater appeared to generally be located near the top of the gravel. We also observed perched water zones at shallower depths of 8 to 10 feet BGS. We note that the depth to groundwater may fluctuate in response to seasonal changes, changes in surface topography, and other factors. iyr 3.4 INFILTRATION TESTING We performed infiltration tests in borings B-1, B-2, B-4, and B-6 at depths of 4 to 5 feet BGS. We performed infiltration testing to evaluate infiltration rates at the depths where infiltration is being yew IPDESIGN= ""N "'Px+ar 4 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 wy��.... considered. We also attempted to perform an infiltration test in boring B-8 at a depth of 8 feet BGS, but were unable to perform the test because perched water was seeping into the borehole. I We performed the infiltration tests inside of pipes that we inserted into the boreholes. We used the encased falling head test method and a water head of approximately 3 to 4 feet. We collected representative soil samples below the infiltration test depths for particle-size analysis. Table 1 summarizes the infiltration test results and fines content determinations. The exploration logs and laboratory test results are presented in Appendix A. Plots of the infiltration data we collected are presented in Appendix C. Table 1. Measured Infiltration Rates Depth Infiltration Rate' Fines Content2 Location Material (feet BGS) (inches per hour) (percent) B 1 5 Silt with sand 0.8 84 B 2 5 Silt with sand 0.5 84 B-4 5 Silt 1.0 86 1 B-6 4 Silt 0.9 85 1. Infiltration rate is not factored. 2. Fines content: material passing the U.S.Standard No. 200 sieve The infiltration rates provided in Table 1 are measured rates and are unfactored. Factors of safety should be applied to the measured infiltration rates by the civil engineer during design to account for soil variations, the potential for long-term clogging due to siltation and buildup of organic material, maintenance, influent/pre-treatment control, and consequences of failure. We recommend that a factor of safety of at least 2 be applied to the field-measured infiltration rates. Based on the infiltration rates we measured at the site, it appears that the silt layer we tested has a relatively low infiltration rate. We note that the silt layer was relatively uniform, and we anticipate that infiltration rates at other depths in the silt layer will be similar to what we measured. If on-site infiltration is used for this project, we recommend that infiltration testing be performed during construction to verify that the design infiltration rates are being achieved. We I" recommend that all infiltration facilities be at least 10 feet below the bottom of any adjacent on- site or off-site basements. L 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS We evaluated geologic hazards in the site vicinity based on a review of published literature and am our experience with nearby projects. Individual geologic hazards are summarized in the following sections. omp 4.1 SEISMIC HAZARDS 4.1.1 Liquefaction 1 Liquefaction is caused by a rapid increase in pore water pressure that reduces the effective stress between soil particles to near zero. Granular soil, which relies on interparticle friction for k strength, is susceptible to liquefaction until the excess pore pressures can dissipate. In general, i. IDESIGNY. ANN t5Mk4 14,. 5 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 i loose, saturated sand soil with low silt and clay content is the most susceptible to liquefaction. Silty soil with low plasticity is moderately susceptible to liquefaction under relatively higher levels of ground shaking. Since the soil beneath the groundwater level consists of very dense gravel, it is our opinion that the soil at the site is not susceptible to liquefaction. 4.1.2 Lateral Spreading '" Lateral spreading is a liquefaction-related seismic hazard and occurs on gently sloping or flat sites underlain by liquefiable sediment adjacent to an open face, such as a riverbank. Liquefied soil adjacent to an open face can flow toward the open face, resulting in lateral ground displacement. Since the soil at the site is not susceptible to liquefaction, it is our opinion that lateral spreading is not a hazard at this site. ii 4.1.3 Fault Rupture There are no active faults mapped within approximately 1.4 miles of the site (USGS, 2020). Therefore, it is our opinion that the risk of surface fault rupture beneath the site is low. 4.2 OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS According to DOGAMI's online statewide geohazards viewer, there are no mapped landslides or flood hazards at the site (DOGAMI, 2018). 5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 FOUNDATION SUPPORT 5.1.1 General The preliminary grading plan shows that some building foundations will be at existing grades , and other building foundations will be underlain by up to approximately 11 feet of fill. Based on the results of our explorations and analysis, we recommend that the proposed buildings be supported on spread footings that are underlain by firm native soil or structural fill. Footings should be sized using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. This value may be increased iiito by one-third for short-term loads such as wind and seismic forces. Footings should not be supported on undocumented fill. Also, new structural fill beneath footings should not be placed over soft undocumented fill. It may be necessary to over-excavate soft undocumented fill soil at some locations prior to footing construction or structural fill 66 II placement. Over-excavated areas beneath the new buildings should be backfilled with properly compacted structural fill. All footing subgrade should be evaluated by the project geotechnical engineer or their "" representative to evaluate bearing conditions. Observations should determine whether all loose or soft material, organic material, unsuitable fill, prior topsoil zones, and softened subgrades (if present) have been removed. Localized deepening of footing excavations may be required to penetrate unsuitable material. If native soil subgrade is soft, the subgrade should be recompacted or replaced with structural fill. Mit VMS LGEODESIGNM A" f5` 1°'`"" 6 RelatedNW-2-01:1231 20 w The structural fill that is placed beneath new buildings to raise grades will result in settlement. Once the structural fill has been placed, we recommend that the construction of foundations, floor slabs, and other structures be delayed until settlement monitoring data shows that wW settlement is complete. We recommend that isolated column and continuous wall footings have minimum widths of 24 ON and 18 inches, respectively. The bottom of exterior footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Interior footings should be founded at least 12 inches below the bottom of the floor slab. Ww 5.1.2 Lateral Resistance Lateral loads on footings can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of the footings and by friction along the base of the footings. Our analysis indicates that the available passive earth pressure is 350 pcf, modeled as an equivalent fluid pressure. The upper 12 inches of adjacent, unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. A coefficient of friction value equal to 0.30 may be used when calculating resistance to sliding for footings in direct contact with native soil. Footings in contact with imported crushed rock should be designed using a coefficient of friction value of 0.50. 400 5.1.3 Settlement As discussed in other sections of this report, we recommend that the construction of new rimio foundations, floor slabs, and other structures be delayed until settlement monitoring data shows that settlement resulting from new structural fill to raise grades is complete. If this is done, we anticipate that footings supporting the anticipated design loads and constructed as recommended will experience less than 1 inch of total post-construction settlement and % inch of differential settlement between similarly loaded adjacent footings. wW 5.2 SLABS ON GRADE We anticipate that the existing subgrade soil and new structural fill will generally provide ++�• adequate support for concrete slabs on grade. We recommend that the slab subgrade be evaluated during construction. If any loose undocumented fill or unsuitable soil is present beneath the floor slabs, the subgrade soil should be scarified and recompacted or over- + excavated. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 120 pci can be used for design of the floor slabs, provided the subgrade is prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report. Post-construction settlement of slabs supporting the anticipated design loads and constructed as recommended is anticipated to be less than 1 inch of total settlement and 1/2 inch of differential settlement. We recommend that floor slabs be supported on at least 6 inches of imported granular material to aid as a capillary break and to provide uniform support. The imported granular material should have a maximum particle size of 1%z inches, should have less than 5 percent by dry UR` weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, and should have at least two mechanically fractured faces. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. ►"u'4"IDESIGN N_V 5CaM"r 7 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 Vapor barriers beneath floor slabs are typically required by flooring manufactures to maintain the warranty on their products. In our experience, adequate performance of floor adhesives can be achieved by using a clean base rock(less than 5 percent fines) beneath the floor slab with no w,�r► vapor barrier. In fact, vapor barriers can frequently cause moisture problems by trapping water beneath the floor slab that is introduced during construction. If a vapor barrier is used, water should not be applied to the base rock prior to pouring the slab and the work should be completed during extended dry weather so that rainfall is not trapped on top of the vapor barrier. Selection and design of an appropriate vapor barrier, if needed, should be based on discussions among members of the design team. If requested, we can provide additional information to assist you with your decision. 5.3 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Seismic design will be performed in accordance with ASCE 7-16, which is prescribed by the 2019 SOSSC and 2018 IBC. A Site Class D designation can be used to compute design levels of ground shaking. Per ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8, a site response analysis is required for this project unless the structural engineer determines that exception 2 in the code applies, which is based on the period of the buildings and the method of analysis used by the structural engineer. If a site response analysis is needed, we can perform this additional analysis. If a site response analysis is not needed, the seismic design parameters presented in Table 2 from ASCE 7-16 may be used for design. These parameters were obtained from USGS seismic design maps (SEAOC/OSHPD, 2020). Table 2. ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameters Parameter Short Period 1 Second Period (TS =0.2 second) (T, = 1.0 second) Spectral Acceleration (MCE) S, = 0.867 g S, = 0.397 g Site Class D Site Coefficient Fa= 1.153 Fs,= 1.903 Spectral Acceleration Parameters SMS= 1.000 g SM, = 0.755 g Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters SDS= 0.666 g SD, = 0.504 g Spectral PGA 0.394 g Design Spectral PGA 0.263 g MCE, PGA Adjusted for Site Class Effects' PGA. = 0.475 g 1. From ASCE 7-16. Minimum PGA value to use when evaluating liquefaction and soil strength loss,as required by ASCE 7-16 Section 11.8.3. 5.4 FILL-INDUCED SETTLEMENT The preliminary grading plan shows that up to 11 feet of new fill will placed to raise grades. The weight of this new fill will result in settlement of the existing soil. Once the structural fill has been placed, we recommend that the construction of new foundations, floor slabs, and other GEODESIGNz AN 'Om- 8 RelatedNW-2-01:1231 20 wr structures be delayed until settlement monitoring data shows that settlement is complete. In addition, new fill should not be placed next to existing structures that could be damaged by settlement. 5.4.1 Settlement Monitoring Settlement monitoring should be performed after fill placement is complete using survey markers or hubs installed in the fill areas. The survey hubs should be surveyed at least twice per week until it is determined that fill-induced settlement is complete. The survey hubs should be monitored using survey equipment with accuracy of 1/100`h of a foot and referenced to a stationary datum established at least 100 feet from the edge of fill areas. We recommend installing at least four survey hubs at each building location. Additional survey hubs should be installed at the locations of new pavement, retaining walls, sidewalks, and other structures that could be damaged by settlement. Care must be taken during construction to avoid damaging the survey hubs. +rr 5.4.2 Existing Structures. If new fill is placed next to existing structures, the weight of the new fill could cause damaging amounts of settlement beneath the existing structures. We note that the foundations of the sit existing buildings to the north of the site are within a few inches of the property line. We calculated the amount of settlement that could occur for various fill heights and summarized the aim results in Table 3. If requested, we can update these settlement estimates once a final grading plan has been developed. We recommend that the project structural engineer determine the amount of new settlement that the existing buildings can tolerate. The design team can then determine how closely fill can be safely placed next to existing structures. Table 3. Fill Settlement Estimates Fill Settlement Settlement at Distance from Edge of Fill (in Feet) to Height at Center Edge of Fill Achieve Less Settlement Than: vaoof Fill (feet) (inches) (inches) 1.0 Inch 0.5 Inch 0.25 Inch 0.1 Inch 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0.5 0.25 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 4 1.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 6.5 6 2.1 0.8 0.0 1.4 3.0 10.0 ikor 8 2.8 1.2 0.7 2.2 4.8 12.5 10 3.5 1.7 1.7 3.7 6.8 1 7.5 wry 12 4.1 2.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 20.0 If it is necessary to place fill next to existing structures, other methods can be used to mitigate settlement damage, such as the use of lightweight fill or the installation of ground improvement. Upon request, we can provide additional recommendations for these mitigation methods. eat We also recommend conducting a pre-construction survey to document the condition of existing structures prior to placement of any fill. MDESIGN= "N4145cA°^"r 9 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 via 5.5 ON-SITE PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 5.5.1 Design Assumptions and Parameters We anticipate that on-site traffic will predominately consist of passenger vehicles with occasional delivery trucks and heavy vehicles, such as garbage trucks. Our pavement design recommendations assume the subgrade has been prepared in accordance with the "Site Preparation" and "Structural Fill" sections. Our pavement recommendations are based on the mit assumptions listed below. If any of these assumptions are incorrect, our office should be contacted with the appropriate information so that the pavement designs can be revised. • A resilient modulus value of 3,500 psi for native subgrade based on the soil type and DCP tests. • A pavement design life of 20 years. • Initial and terminal serviceability indices of 4.2 and 2.5, respectively. • Reliability of 75 percent and standard deviation of 0.5. • No growth. • Traffic will consist of 700 cars per day; 5 two-axle delivery trucks per day; and 1 three-axle delivery truck, garbage truck, or similarly heavy vehicles per day. • Construction traffic will not be allowed on new pavement. If construction traffic is to be allowed on the newly constructed pavement, our design pavement sections will need to be revised. irrr 5.5.2 Recommended AC Pavement Design Sections (Post Construction) Our pavement design recommendations for the assumptions and loads provided above are tat presented in Table 4. Table 4. Recommended Standard Pavement Sections rw Pavement Use AC Thickness' Aggregate Base Thickness'"2 (inches) (inches) me' Drive Aisles -Automobile and Occasional Heavy Vehicle 3.0 10.0 Automobile Parking Only 3.0 8.0 1. All thicknesses are intended to be the minimum acceptable values. Additional thickness will be necessary if construction traffic is allowed on the pavement. 2. A subgrade geotextile fabric should be placed between the aggregate base and the subgrade. 1101 The subgrade should be unyielding or compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Areas that exhibit yielding or pumping should be repaired, as described in this report. If silt or clay is present at the subgrade level, a subgrade geotextile fabric should be used to extend the life of the pavement by preventing fines from gradually migrating into the base rock. 5.5.3 Pavement Materials vatA submittal should be made for each pavement material prior to the start of paving operations. Each submittal should include the test information necessary to evaluate the degree to which the irr DESIGN nroNV5c5w-NY 10 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 „,,,, material's properties comply with the properties that were recommended or specified. The geotechnical engineer and other appropriate members of the design team should review each submittal. who 5.5.3.1 Aggregate Base Imported granular material used as aggregate base for pavement should consist of 3/-, 1-, or WWI 1%-inch-minus material (depending on the application) and meet the requirements in OSSC 00641 (Aggregate Subbase, Base, and Shoulders). In addition, the aggregate should have less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. The aggregate base should be compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.5.3.2 AC The AC should be Level 2, %2-inch, dense ACP according to OSSC 00744 (Asphalt Concrete Pavement) and compacted to 92 percent of the theoretical maximum density of the mix, as determined by AASHTO T 209. The minimum and maximum lift thicknesses are 2.0 and 3.0 inches, respectively, for%-inch ACP. Asphalt binder should be performance graded and conform to PG 64-22. AC paving should only occur when ground temperatures are 40 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer. 5.5.3.3 Subgrade Geotextile Fabric A subgrade geotextile fabric should be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and granular material. The geotextile should meet the specifications provided in OSSC 02320 (Geosynthetics) WO for separation geotextiles (Table 02320-4) and be installed in accordance with OSSC 00350 (Geosynthetic Installation). 5.6 RETAINING WALLS 5.6.1 Assumptions These retaining wall recommendations apply to permanent above-grade retaining walls. Our retaining wall design recommendations are based on the following assumptions: (1) the walls consist of conventional, cantilevered retaining walls, (2) the walls are less than 10 feet in height, (3) drains are provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure from developing, and (4)the retained soil is level. Re-evaluation of our recommendations will be required if the retaining wall design criteria for the project varies from these assumptions. "”' 5.6.2 Wall Design Parameters For unrestrained retaining walls, an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf should be used for design. Where retaining walls are restrained from rotation prior to being backfilled, an at-rest ""' equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf should be used for design. A superimposed seismic lateral force should be calculated based on a dynamic force of 7H2 pounds per linear foot of wall (where H is the height of the wall in feet). The load should be applied as a distributed load with the centroid located at a distance of 0.6H above the base of the wall. If surcharges (e.g., retained slopes, building foundations, vehicles, terraced walls, etc.) are r.r located within a horizontal distance from the back of a wall equal to the height of the wall, additional pressures will need to be accounted for in the wall design. Figure 3 presents MIDESIGW N 5 mow' 11 RelatecINW-2-01:1 231 20 NIA additional pressures resulting from some common loading scenarios. Our office should be contacted for additional pressures resulting from alternate loading scenarios. We recommend a vertical live load of 250 psf be applied at the surface of the retained soil where the wall retains gmai roadways. The base of the wall footing excavations should extend a minimum of 18 inches below the " lowest adjacent grade. The wall footings should be designed in accordance with the guidelines in the "Foundation Support" section. At locations where there is a slope in front of the retaining wall, we recommend a minimum 5-foot-wide, horizontal bench be placed between the wall and the top of the slope. 5.6.3 Wall Drainage and Backfill The above design parameters have been provided assuming that drains will be installed behind the walls to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. Backfill material placed behind retaining walls and extending a horizontal distance of Y2H (where H is the height of the retaining wall) rmp should consist of imported granular material meeting the requirements described in the "Structural Fill" section. Alternatively, the native soil can be used as backfill material, provided a minimum 2-foot-wide column of angular drain rock wrapped in a drainage geotextile is placed against the wall and the native soil can be adequately moisture conditioned for compaction. The rock column should extend from the perforated drainpipe or foundation drains to within approximately 1 foot of the ground surface. The angular drain rock should have a maximum particle size of 2 inches, should have less than 2 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, should have at least two mechanically fractured faces, and should be free of iwr organic material and other unsuitable materials. Perforated collector pipes should be placed at the base of the granular backfill behind the walls. The pipe should be embedded in a minimum 2-foot-wide zone of angular drain rock wrapped in a drainage geotextile fabric. The collector pipes should discharge at an appropriate location away from the base of the wall. Unless measures are taken to prevent backflow into the drainage system of the wall, the discharge pipe should not be tied directly into stormwater drain systems. Backfill should be placed and compacted as recommended for structural fill, with the exception of backfill placed immediately adjacent to walls. Backfill adjacent to walls should be compacted to a lesser standard to reduce the potential for compaction-induced earth pressures on the walls. Backfill located within a horizontal distance of 3 feet from the retaining walls should be compacted to approximately 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Backfill placed within 3 feet of the wall should be compacted in lifts less than 6 inches thick using hand-operated tamping equipment(such as a jumping jack or vibratory plate compactor). If flatwork (such as slabs, sidewalk, or pavement)will be placed adjacent to the wall, we recommend that the upper 2 feet of fill be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Settlement of up to 1 percent of the wall height commonly occurs immediately adjacent to the wall as the wall rotates and develops active lateral earth pressures. Consequently, we recommend that construction of flatwork adjacent to wr retaining walls be postponed at least four weeks after construction, unless survey data indicates that settlement is complete prior to that time. wr CDESIGN= xNNV1500uvr 12 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 5.7 PERMANENT SLOPES Permanent cut or fill slopes should not exceed a gradient of 2H:1V, unless specifically evaluated for stability. Upslope buildings, access roads, and hardscapes should be set back a minimum of 5 feet from the crest of such slopes. Slopes should be planted with appropriate vegetation to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after grading. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the face wit of the slope. 5.8 DRAINAGE 5.8.1 Surface The finished ground surface around buildings should be sloped away from foundations at a minimum 2 percent gradient for a distance of at least 5 feet. Pavement surfaces and open space areas should be sloped such that surface water runoff is collected and routed to suitable discharge points. Runoff water should not be directed to the top of slopes. 5.8.2 Subsurface We recommend that foundation drains be installed around the perimeter of the buildings at locations where the finish floor elevation will be lower than adjacent grades. Foundation drains are not necessary at locations where the finish floor elevation will be above adjacent grades. We recommend that footing drains and roof downspouts or scuppers discharge to a solid pipe that carries the collected water to an appropriate stormwater system that is designed to prevent backflow. If drywells are used, we recommend that the top of the perforated drywell sections be at least 10 feet below adjacent enclosed spaces such as basements, elevator pits, etc. 5.8.3 Temporary During grading the contractor should be made responsible for temporary drainage of surface water as necessary to prevent standing water and/or erosion at the working surface. The contractor should keep all footing excavations and building pads free of water during rough and finished grading of the building site. MOW 6.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS "Y"' 6.1 SITE PREPARATION 6.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing Stripping and grubbing will be required to remove any grass, trees, and shrub roots that remain eel after cuts are performed. Root material should be removed from all building, pavement, and structural fill areas. The actual stripping and grubbing depth should be based on field observations at the time of construction. Stripping and grubbing should extend at least 5 feet beyond the limits of proposed building and pavement areas. Excavated roots should be transported off site for disposal or used as fill in landscaped areas. two 6.1.2 Tilled Zone An approximately 6- to 12-inch-thick layer of disturbed loose soil that we interpret as a tilled zone is present over most of the site. The tilled zone material consists of native silt; however, DESIGM AN NV G!YAez*"v 13 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 through years of cultivation, the tilled zone includes slightly higher organic contents and lower densities. When wet, the soil is likely to exhibit very low strength and generally does not provide adequate building or pavement subgrade support. Within all proposed structural fill, pavement, and improvement areas; for a 5-foot margin beyond such areas; and where less than 12 inches of cut is required, we recommend that the top 6 to 12 inches of the stripped subgrade be scarified and re-compacted, cement amended, or removed and replaced, as recommended for structural fill. As discussed in the "Structural Fill" section, the native silt can be sensitive to small changes in moisture content and will be difficult, if not impossible, to compact adequately during wet weather. Scarifying and re-compacting the soil will likely only be possible during extended dry periods and following moisture conditioning of the soil. Cement amendment is an option for conditioning the soil for use as structural fill during periods of wet weather or when drying the soil is not an option. 6.1.3 Demolition 4,0 Demolition will be required on this project to remove existing footings, walls, slabs, utilities, basements, decks, pavement, and other similar improvements that may be found during hit construction. These existing elements should be completely removed from beneath new structures. Any monitoring wells or underground storage tanks on the property should be abandoned in accordance with state and local regulations prior to site redevelopment. w Excavations resulting from demolition of existing improvements should be backfilled with compacted structural fill as recommended in this report. The bottom of the excavations should expose firm subgrade. The sides of the temporary excavations should be cut into firm material ww and sloped no steeper than 1%2H:1 V. 6.1.4 Subgrade Evaluation + ++ A member of our geotechnical staff should observe all footing, floor slab, and hardscape subgrades after stripping and grubbing, excavation, scarifying and compaction (if applicable), and placement of structural fill have been completed to confirm that there are no areas of unsuitable or unstable soil. The subgrade should be evaluated using moisture-density testing, a hand probe, or proof rolling with a fully loaded dump truck(or similar heavy, rubber tire construction equipment). Soft, loose, or unsuitable soil found at the subgrade level should be "" over-excavated and replaced with structural fill. 6.2 EXCAVATION 6.2.1 General Excavations will be required for construction of new foundations, retaining walls, stormwater facilities, utilities, and other improvements. Conventional earthmoving equipment in proper working condition should be capable of making the necessary excavations. We anticipate that temporary excavation sidewalls will generally stand vertical to a depth of approximately 4 feet, provided groundwater seepage does not occur. Excavations deeper than 4 feet will require shoring or should be sloped. Sloped excavations may be used to vertical depths of 10 feet BGS and should have side slopes no steeper than 1%H:1 V, provided groundwater seepage does not occur. We recommend a minimum horizontal distance of 5 feet from the edge of existing improvements to the top of any temporary slope. All cut s DESIGN "N Vr5c6mPAwY 14 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 slopes should be protected from erosion by covering them during wet weather. If seepage, sloughing, or instability is observed, the slope should be flattened or shored. Shoring will be required where slopes are not possible. The contractor should be responsible for selecting the appropriate shoring system. Excavations should not be allowed to undermine adjacent improvements. If existing roads or structures are located near a proposed excavation, unsupported excavations can be maintained outside of a 1 H:1 V downward projection that starts 5 feet from the base of the existing elements. Excavations that must be inside of this zone should be supported by temporary or permanent shoring designed for moment resistance for the full height of the excavation, including kick-out for the full buried depth of the retaining system. While we have described certain approaches to performingexcavations, it is the contractor's pp responsibility to select the excavation and dewatering methods, monitor the excavations for safety, and provide any shoring required to protect personnel and adjacent improvements. All excavations should be in accordance with applicable OSHA and state regulations. 6.2.2 Excavation Dewatering Excavations will be above the groundwater level. However, some perched water could still seep into the site excavations, especially after periods of heavy rain. We anticipate that dewatering methods consisting of pumping water from excavation sumps will generally be adequate. If possible, we recommend that construction be scheduled for the dry season. Water generated during dewatering operations should be treated, if necessary, and pumped to a suitable disposal point. Where groundwater seepage occurs in excavations, we recommend placing at least 1 foot of stabilization material at the base of the excavations. The stabilization material should consist of 4- or 6-inch-minus pit- or quarry-run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand. The material should have a maximum particle size of 6 inches, should have less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve, and should have at least two mechanically fractured faces. The material should be free of organic material and other deleterious materials. We note that these recommendations are for guidance only. Dewatering of excavations is the sole responsibility of the contractor, as the contractor is in the best position to select the appropriate system based on their means and methods. vier 6.3 STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill includes fill placed beneath foundations, floor slabs, hardscapes, and other structures. Structural fill should generally consist of particles no larger than 3 inches in diameter and should be free of organic material and other deleterious materials. Recommendations for suitable fill material are provided in the following sections. 6.3.1 On-Site Soil The on-site fine-grained soil will be suitable for use as structural fill only if it can be moisture INN conditioned. Based on our experience, this soil will be sensitive to small changes in moisture content and may be difficult, if not impossible, to compact adequately during wet weather or I DESIGN= 's II V'5 a'Jsaa,-v 1 5 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 I when the moisture content is more than a few percentage points above optimum. The soil may require extensive drying before it can be used as structural fill. The on-site fine-grained soil should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 to 12 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the material's maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. We recommend using imported granular material for structural fill if the moisture content of the on-site soil cannot be reduced. 6.3.2 Imported Granular Material iiImported granular material should be pit- or quarry-run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine and has less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. All granular material must be durable such that there is no degradation of the material during and after installation as structural fill. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Dl 557. During the wet season or when wet subgrade conditions exist, the initial lift should have a maximum thickness of 18 inches and should be compacted by rolling with a smooth-drum, non-vibratory roller. 6.3.3 Recycled Concrete Recycled concrete can be used for structural fill, provided the concrete is broken to a maximum iigo particle size of 3 inches. This material must be durable such that there is no degradation of the material during and after installation as structural fill. Recycled concrete can be used as trench backfill if it meets the size requirements for that application and the requirements for imported iiii granular material. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 6.3.4 Trench Backfill Material City of Tigard or Washington County trench backfill requirements should be followed for any II public utilities that are installed. Our trench backfill recommendations for private utilities are provided below. Trench backfill for the utility pipe base and pipe zone should consist of durable, well-graded, r granular material that has a maximum particle size of 1 inch, has less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, and contains no organic or other deleterious i'" materials. Backfill above the pipe zone should meet the requirements above, except that the maximum particle size may be increased to 11/2 inches. ill"' Backfill for the pipe base and within the pipe zone should be placed in maximum 12-inch-thick lifts and compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by LASTM D1557, or as recommended by the pipe manufacturer. Backfill above the pipe zone should be placed in maximum 12-inch-thick lifts and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Trench backfill located within 2 feet MI of finish subgrade elevation should be placed in maximum 12-inch-thick lifts and compacted to SIGNii 0 5crn+nx+ar 16 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 mei not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Dl 557. Outside of structural areas, trench backfill material should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 6.3.5 Stabilization Material Stabilization material used in staging or haul road areas or in trenches should consist of 4- or 6-inch-minus pit- or quarry-run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand. The material should have a maximum particle size of 6 inches, should have less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve, and should have at least two mechanically fractured faces. The material should be free of organic material and other deleterious materials. Stabilization material should be placed in lifts between 12 and 24 inches thick and compacted to a well-keyed, firm condition. rir 6.3.6 Cement Amending Wr As an alternative to the use of imported granular material for wet weather structural fill, an experienced contractor may be able to amend the on-site soil with portland cement to obtain suitable support properties. Successful use of soil amendment depends on the use of correct mixing techniques, soil moisture content, and amendment quantities. Specific recommendations based on exposed site conditions for soil amending can be provided if necessary. However, for preliminary design purposes, we recommend a target strength for cement-amended subgrade for building and pavement subbase (below aggregate base) soil of 100 psi. The amount of cement used to achieve this target generally varies with moisture rn„ content and soil type. It is difficult to predict field performance of soil to cement amendment due to variability in soil response, and we recommend laboratory testing to confirm expectations. For building and pavement subbase, we recommend assuming a minimum cement ratio of 6 percent (by dry weight). If organic material is present or the soil moistures are in excess of 30 percent, a cement ratio of 7 to 8 percent may be needed. The amount of cement added to the soil may need to be adjusted based on field observations and performance. A minimum curing of four days is required between amendment and construction traffic access. Consecutive lifts of fill may be amended immediately after the previous lift has been amended and compacted (e.g., the four-day wait period does not apply). Construction traffic should not be allowed on unprotected, cement-amended subgrade. To protect the cement-amended surfaces from abrasion or damage, the finished surface should be covered with 4 to 6 inches of imported granular material. Amendment depths for building/pavement, haul roads, and staging areas are typically on the order of 12, 16, and 12 inches, respectively. The actual thickness of the amended material and imported granular material for haul roads and staging areas will depend on the anticipated traffic, as well as the contractor's means and methods and, accordingly, should be the contractor's responsibility. Portland cement-amended soil is hard and has low permeability. This soil does not drain well and it is not suitable for planting. Future planted areas should not be cement amended, if practical, or accommodations should be made for drainage and planting. Moreover, cement Jai irr C EODESIGN= an tlE 1 ` 'mP""'r 17 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 All ass A, Lamending soil within building areas must be done carefully to avoid trapping water under floor slabs. We should be contacted if this approach is considered. Cement amendment should not be used if runoff during construction cannot be directed away from wetlands (if present). It is not possible to amend soil during heavy or continuous rainfall. Cement amending should not be performed if the ground temperature is less than 40 degrees. 6.4 EROSION CONTROL The on-site soil is susceptible to erosion. Consequently, we recommend that slopes be covered Iwith an appropriate erosion control product if construction occurs during periods of wet weather. We recommend that all slope surfaces be planted as soon as practical to minimize erosion. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the slope face. Erosion control measures such as straw bales, sediment fences, and temporary detention and settling basins should be used in accordance with local and state ordinances. 6.5 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION Trafficability of soil at the ground surface may be difficult during extended wet periods or when the moisture content of the surface soil is more than a few percentage points above optimum. If not carefully executed, earthwork activities can create extensive soft areas, resulting in significant repair costs. When the subgrade is wet of optimum, site preparation may need to be accomplished using I track-mounted equipment loading into trucks supported on granular haul roads or working blankets. Based on our experience, at least 12 inches of granular material are typically required for light staging areas and at least 18 inches of granular material for haul roads subject to I repeated equipment traffic. We typically recommend that imported granular material for haul roads and working blankets consist of durable crushed rock that is well graded and has less than 8 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. Where silt or clay is exposed at the ground surface, the performance of haul roads can typically be improved by placing a geotextile on the subgrade before placing the granular material. The granular material should be placed in a single lift and the surface compacted until well keyed. Although we have I presented typical recommendations for haul road and working blankets, the actual thickness and material should be determined by the contractor based on their sequencing of the project and the type and frequency of construction equipment. The base rock thickness for building areas is IIintended to support post-construction design loads and will not support construction traffic when the subgrade soil is wet. If construction is planned for periods when the subgrade soil is wet, an increased thickness of base rock will be required. 7.0 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION ISatisfactory foundation and earthwork performance depends to a large degree on the quality of construction. Sufficient observation of the contractor's activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. hSubsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface exploration. Recognition of changed conditions often J , irr WitDESIGM. " Ff 5 comn-rr 18 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 nr requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect if subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. We recommend that GeoDesign be retained to observe earthwork activities. We anticipate this will consist of evaluating foundation, floor slab, and pavement subgrade; observing the placement of structural fill and repair of soft subgrade areas, paving installation, retaining wall construction; and performing laboratory compaction and field moisture-density tests. 8.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by Related Northwest and their design and construction teams for the proposed project. The data and report can be used for bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as warranty of the subsurface conditions and are not applicable to other sites. 11 Soil explorations indicate soil conditions only at specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. They do not necessarily reflect soil strata or water level variations that may exist between exploration locations. If subsurface conditions differing from those described are noted during the course of excavation and construction, re-evaluation will be necessary. The site development plans and design details were preliminary at the time this report was prepared. When the design has been finalized and if there are changes in the site grades or location, configuration, design loads, or type of construction, the conclusions and recommendations presented may not be applicable. If design changes are made, we request that we be retained to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written verification or modification. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in this report for consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. tos ♦ ♦ ♦ CEO DESIGN? N 115 CC"P'`NY 19 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to you. Please call if you have questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services. Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. It.E0 PROF-� � v G NFF .../ Ryan T. Lawrence, P.E. / ,,, Associate Engineer r 4-EG• ' � C14 4) 11 2 Q EC}fi� TA. SO EXPIRES: 6/30/22 Brett A. Shipton, P.E., G.E. Principal Engineer ywr a a I I 1 Wr GEO DESIGN ANNV 5wow' 20 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 ww ww REFERENCES ASCE, 2016. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. Publication ASCE 7-16. Atwater, B. F., and E. Hemphill-Haley, 1997. Recurrence intervals for great earthquakes of the past 3500 years at northeastern Willapa Bay, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1576, 108 pp. to Burns, Scott, 1998. Geologic and physiographic provinces of Oregon. p 3-14 in Scott Burns, editor, Environmental, Groundwater and Engineering Geology:Applications from Oregon. Association of Engineering Geologists. Special Publication 11, 689 p. Goldfinger, C., C.H. Nelson, and J.E.Johnson, 2003. Holocene earthquake records from the Cascadia subduction zone and northern San Andreas Fault based on precise dating of offshore rrr turbidities: Annual Reviews Earth Planetary Science v. 31, pp. 555-577. DOGAMI, 2018. Oregon HazVu:Statewide Geohazards Viewer. Obtained from website: http://www.oregongeology.org/hazvu/index.htm. Last updated March 13, 2018. Accessed on December 14, 2020. rr Ma, Lina, Madin, Ian P., Duplantis, Serin, Williams, KendraJ., 2012. Lidar-Based Surficial Geologic Map of the Greater Portland Area; Clackamas, Columbia, Marin, Multnomah, Washington, and Ow Yamhill Counties, Oregon and Clark County, Washington. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Open File Report 0-12-02. Scale 1:63,360. rw Orr, E.L. and Orr, W.N., 1999. Geology of Oregon. Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Iowa: 254 p. Satake, K., K. Shimazaki, Y. Tsuji, and K. Ueda, 1996. Time and size of a giant earthquake in Cascadia inferred from Japanese tsunami records of January 1700: Nature, v. 379, pp. 146-149. SEAOC/OSHPD, 2020. Seismic Design Maps. Accessed from website: https://seismicmaps.org/. Accessed on June 2, 2020. Schlicker, H.G. and Deacon, R.J., 1967. Geology and Surficial Deposits of the Tualatin Valley I"" Region, Oregon. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Bulletin 60. Scale 1 :48,000. USGS, 2020. Faults; Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States. Obtained from website: https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/faults. Accessed on December 14, 2020. wW isik rr wW CDESIGN= 0,11VIScw+rov 21 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 N uJ W u L iiiii • . 'tom Dewey Rd. ,> • .1�y . . _ iv w;; `J'vt. Carle ,. -icr > . iii t..,.. 1 C- la ,ma,�yy 3 .. a - ^'� I f . . o ♦ '. »'- ' re ILl i .. c-. • •' 1,,:, ''''' Li 1 ww. t i .„ li ::L - lYr D —e .. O x ..,.;. ; ;.; , ; : , ': it .. :.,.;' ? ♦ t _ f. ' L tl , — b I `. , t::: @ Kf erg ' . —.... .... �, t ONO .. gyp_ `. N h � M� � N az o ,-; . N.. « N a x . qq, ., , z O N a VICINITY MAP BASED ON AERIAL ? , - 0 2000 4000 , oPHOTOGRAPH OBTAINED FROM /% o GOOGLE EARTH PRO® t, !/t'j/ +1 (SCALE IN APPROXIMATE FEET) G EO z DESIGN_ RELATEDNW-2-01 VICINITY MAP mE i AN NIYI5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE 1 TIGARD, OR a` ii printed By ad y I Print Date 12/29/2020 4:39:49 PM File Name:J:\M R\R IatedNW\RelatedNW-2\RelatedNW-2-DI\Figures\CAD\RelatedNW-2-0I-SPOl.dwg layout:FIGURE 2 4 i dim4.y a - U,. ,,. {. %3.. w ace. t ...A . .>a€ae 'a`�ffi �n 1 a ' ` r t� 6 e , w 1:" 1} .!'4,44 / 3" 444444 • '', f ' 4,' e t a € F 1 • f + s ! { *4 3 vJtJ{I t. -_ f ' # r : t i mrm• 0 z1, 7.z cO OrnMD vDmzm , _o O= mrry A= mZ OOODw O—lZ 5,› Z nnmoo 17, n wv„ A=wZ m_ Z O m r 3 Z o o'co-1A-Din tv Dao Gm 11 2 O. Op OIaO o O — 3 N O -I0 0 r mIm G EODESIGN= RELATEDNW-2-01 SITE PLAN NI AN NIYI5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE 2 TIGARD,OR Mr IMO all lilt IIW t - OW S Ur IIIIIt N lir lilt 111111 U MI V I Printed By:aday I Print Date: 12/29/2020 4:39:54 PM File Name J:\M-R\RelatedNW\RelatedNW-z\RelatedNW-2-01\Figures\CAD\RelatedNW-2-01-det-SILEP.dwg I Layout:FIGURE 3 X=mH X=mH RETAINING I GROUND SURFACE WALL OR GROUND GROUND SHORING SURFACE POINT LOAD,Qp SURFACE 'LINE LOAD,Q L 14 STRIPLOAD,q MI ,-/e-,,,,,,,,, , MI „/.. ,„„,, „ RETAININGIW//71/),44111, I I _ M WALL OR ,.' ii II SHORING - -w IV NJ N I _t_— _ — I FOR m<0.4= RETAINING FOR m<0.4= ah=2�c (fl-SINS COS 2a) a _ 0.28 n2 WALL OR ah h H2 (0.16+n2)3 SHORING —� ah vh QL (0.16+n2)2 oh 3.14 Ni,/\ i/,\ �,/ (p IN RADIANS) ///\�� FOR m>0.4= off.. . /f\\/' , \/\\!\ FOR m>0.4= \f\\/ �\\� v\\���\/�\\f//� a = 7.77m2 r>z s\\v v\v�\/ff�\f/� a Q L 1.2 8m2 n ,\`\ \\/ 4.f/r,//,f//\<(\\/// h Hz (m 2+n2)3 �,f /�\/ff\\ff�\f/ h = H (m 2+n2)z ��' /��\//f///\// EXCAVATION BASE EXCAVATION BASE EXCAVATION BASE RETAINING WALL OR SHORING LINE LOAD PARALLEL TO WALL STRIP LOAD PARALLEL I TO WALL E dh =°h COS2(1.1 4)) X o h 1 DISTRIBUTION OF HORIZONTAL PRESSURES NOT TO SCALE VERTICAL POINT LOAD NOTES: 1. FIGURE SHOULD BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH REPORT TEXT. 2. THESE GUIDELINES APPLY TO RIGID WALLS WITH POISSON'S RATIO ASSUMED TO BE 0.5 FOR BACKFILL MATERIALS. 3. LATERAL PRESSURES FROM ANY COMBINATION OF ABOVE LOADS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE PRINCIPLE OF SUPERPOSITION. GEODESIGNY RELATEDNW-2-01 SURCHARGE-INDUCED LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES AN NIY 5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE 3 TIGARD, OR I Z w a „AR SR MIS NO WS MI OW APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS GENERAL II We conducted a subsurface exploration program that consisted of drilling 11 borings (B-1 through B-11) at the approximate locations shown on Figure 2. The borings were drilled to depths between 0.9 foot and 22.7 feet BGS using solid-stem auger drilling methods. Drilling 1 services were performed by Dan J. Fischer Excavating, Inc. of Forest Grove, Oregon, on December 2 and 18, 2020. The explorations were observed and logged by members of our geology staff. We collected representative samples of the various soil encountered in the iiexplorations for visual classification and laboratory testing. The exploration logs are presented in this appendix. The exploration locations were marked in the field relative to visual site features. The exploration locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used. The exploration elevations were estimated using a topographic map of the site. SOIL SAMPLING We collected soil samples from the borings using the following methods: • SPTs were performed in general conformance with ASTM D1586. The sampler was driven with a 140-pound automatic trip hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 1 foot, or as otherwise indicated, into the soil is shown adjacent to the sample symbols on the exploration logs. Disturbed samples were collected r from the split barrel for subsequent classification and index testing. +w • Shelby tube samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM D1587. The 2.5-foot long, 3-inch-diameter, thin-walled, seamless steel tubes were pushed into the soil in one continuous stroke. Each tube, together with the encased soil, was removed from the ground tiw and sealed. Sampling methods and intervals are shown on the exploration logs. The hammer used to '"" conduct the SPTs was lifted using a rope and cathead system. The hammer was raised using two wraps of the rope around the cathead to conduct the SPTs. imp SOIL CLASSIFICATION The soil samples were classified in accordance with the "Exploration Key" (Table A-1)and "Soil li Classification System" (Table A-2), which are presented in this appendix. The exploration logs ilia indicate the depths at which the soils or their characteristics change, although the change could L be gradual. A horizontal line between soil types indicates an observed (visual or digging action) change. If the change occurred between sample locations and was not observed or obvious, the depth was interpreted and the change is indicated using a dashed line. Classifications are shown 11' on the exploration logs. NW I 1 ESIGNt4 "" `IV'S sM°"N`. A-1 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 AIN LABORATORY TESTING We visually examined soil samples collected from the explorations to confirm field classifications. We also performed the following laboratory testing. MOISTURE CONTENT We determined the natural moisture content of select soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D2216. The natural moisture content is the ratio of the weight of the water to soil in a test sample and is expressed as a percentage. The test results are presented in this appendix. NO PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS We completed particle-size analysis on select soil samples in general accordance with is` ASTM D1 140. The percent fines is the ratio of the dry weight of the material passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve to the dry weight of the overall sample. The test results are presented in this appendix. ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST We determined the Atterberg limits of a select soil sample in general accordance with ASTM D4318. Atterberg limits include the liquid limit, plastic limit, and the plasticity index of soil. These index properties are used to classify soil and for correlation with other engineering wr properties of soil. The test results are presented in this appendix. CONSOLIDATION TESTING rr Consolidation testing was performed on a select soil sample in general accordance with ASTM D2435. This test determines the magnitude and rate of consolidation of soil when it is restrained laterally and drained axially while subjected to incrementally applied controlled-stress rw loading. The test results are used to estimate the magnitude and rate of settlement of the site soil under a specific increase in effective stress. The test results are presented in this appendix. IOW 4110 INN mai sow IseGEODESIGN= ""NV5°'k"`"y A-2 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 . _„ SYMBOL SAMPLING DESCRIPTION Location of sample collected in general accordance with ASTM D1586 using Standard Penetration Test with recovery II Location of sample collected using thin-wall Shelby tube or Geoprobe® sampler in general accordance with ASTM Dl 587 with recovery 11 Location of sample collected using Dames & Moore sampler and 300-pound hammer or pushed with recovery N Location of sample collected using Dames & Moore sampler and 140-pound hammer or pushed with recovery N Location of sample collected using 3-inch-O.D. California split-spoon sampler and 140-pound hammer with recovery X Location of grab sample Graphic Log of Soil and Rock Types r •,'. Observed contact between soil or { Rock coring interval ,:'-;; rock units (at depth indicated) ,li Tr 0 Water level during drilling Inferred contact between soil or rock units (at approximate depths indicated) Y Water level taken on date shown -: — - ,i. ..-o ;t. GEOTECHNICAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS ATT Atterberg Limits P Pushed Sample CBR California Bearing Ratio PP Pocket Penetrometer CON Consolidation P200 Percent Passing U.S. Standard No. 200 DD Dry Density Sieve DS Direct Shear RES Resilient Modulus HYD Hydrometer Gradation SIEV Sieve Gradation MC Moisture Content TOR Torvane MD Moisture-Density Relationship UC Unconfined Compressive Strength ow NP Non-Plastic VS Vane Shear OC Organic Content kPa Kilopascal ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS CA Sample Submitted for Chemical Analysis ND Not Detected P Pushed Sample NS No Visible Sheen PID Photoionization Detector Headspace SS Slight Sheen Analysis MS Moderate Sheen ppm Parts per Million HS Heavy Sheen WI DESIGNZ EXPLORATION KEY TABLE A-1 AN N V 5 COMPANY — RELATIVE DENSITY - COARSE-GRAINED SOIL Relative Density Standard Penetration Dames& Moore Sampler Dames& Moore Sampler Resistance (140-pound hammer) (300-pound hammer) Very Loose 0-4 0 - 11 0-4 Loose 4- 10 11 -26 4- 10 Medium Dense 10- 30 26- 74 10 - 30 Dense 30- 50 74 - 120 30 -47 - Very Dense More than 50 More than 120 More than 47 CONSISTENCY - FINE-GRAINED SOIL Standard Dames& Moore Dames & Moore Unconfined Consistency Penetration Sampler Sampler Compressive Strength Resistance (140-pound hammer) (300-pound hammer) (tsf) Very Soft Less than 2 Less than 3 Less than 2 Less than 0.25 Soft 2 -4 3 - 6 2 - 5 0.25 -0.50 Medium Stiff 4- 8 6- 12 5 - 9 0.50 - 1.0 Stiff 8 - 15 12 - 25 9- 19 1.0 - 2.0 _ Very Stiff _ 15 - 30 25 -65 19 - 31 2.0-4.0 Hard More than 30 More than 65 More than 31 More than 4.0 PRIMARY SOIL DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME CLEAN GRAVEL GW or GP GRAVEL GRAVEL (< 5%fines) GRAVEL WITH FINES GW-GM or GP-GM GRAVEL with silt t (more than 50%of (> 5%and <_ 12%fines) GW-GC or GP-GC GRAVEL with clay coarse fraction COARSE- retained on GM silty GRAVEL No. 4 sieve) GRAVEL WITH FINES GC clayey GRAVEL GRAINED SOIL (> 12%fines) GC-GM silty, clayey GRAVEL (more than 50% CLEAN SAND retained on SAND (<5%fines) SW or SP SAND (aw No. 200 sieve) SAND WITH FINES SW-SM or SP-SM SAND with silt (50%or more of (> 5%and <_ 12%fines) SW-SC or SP-SC SAND with clay tV coarse fraction iiim passing SAND WITH FINES SM silty SAND No. 4 sieve) SC clayey SAND (> 12%fines) SC-SM silty, clayey SAND I ML SILT FINE-GRAINED CL CLAY SOIL Liquid limit less than 50 CL-ML silty CLAY ii (50%or more SILT AND CLAY OL ORGANIC SILT or ORGANIC CLAY passing MH SILT No. 200 sieve) Liquid limit 50 or greater CH CLAY L OH ORGANIC SILT or ORGANIC CLAY HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL PT PEAT MOISTURE ADDITIONAL CONSTITUENTS CLASSIFICATION Secondary granular components or other materials Term Field Test such as organics, man-made debris,etc. Silt and Clay In: Sand and Gravel In: very low moisture, Percent Fine-Grained Coarse- Percent Fine-Grained Coarse- dry dry to touch Soil Grained Soil Soil Grained Soil damp, without < 5 trace trace < 5 trace trace moistow visible moisture 5 - 12 minor with 5 - 15 minor minor visible free water, > 12 some silty/clayey 15 - 30 with with wet usually saturated > 30 sandy/gravelly Indicate [ VESIGN SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TABLE A-2 AN N V 5 COMPANY i Si "• INSTALLATION AND O 2 u w ♦BLOW COUNT J DEPTH u MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Q w I= a •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS FEET Q w 0 w < ITM RQD% 177j COREREC% irr -0.0 u w ~ 0 So 100 252.0 v- ASPHALT CONCRETE (2.0 inches). "' //�-' 0.2 \AGGREGATE BASE (4.0 inches). / 251.s 0.5 Stiff, light brown SILT with sand (ML); 1l moist, silt is non-plastic to low 2.5 plasticity. 1 1 PP=1.75 tsf PP 5.0 PP 14• Infiltration test at 5.0 feet. aptP200 P200=84% PP=2.0 tsf 7'5 very stiff at 7.5 feet Ilia PP PP=2.0tsf PP li A ir+. 10.o stiff; wet at 10.0 feet 111 13 PP=2.25 tsf PP A itlie 12.5 238.0 MU Stiff, red-brown CLAY (CL), trace sand; - 14.0 15.0 moist, clay has medium to high - plasticity. 13 i PP PP=2.25 tsf 7. 3 17.5 a o m / _233.0 - ,° Very dense, red-brown GRAVEL with silt 19.0 q, and sand (GP-GM); wet, gravel is fine to 20.0 or Q o, F. coarse and subrounded, sand is fine to11 42-50/5A iiimt 2 °% 0, coarse (decomposed basalt). 231.1 a Exploration terminated at a depth of 20.9 feet due to refusal on gravel. F- 22.5 SPT completed using two wraps with a > cathead. z 0 u NW u 25.0 0 isi z 27.5 O w F- Q J W 'lir W u - 30.0 w 0 50 100 a DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:L.Gose COMPLETED:12/02/20 z p BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:6 1/4 inches and 4 inches u l,„ C� v RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING B-1 LiC)Z DEStGN=_ {COMPANY ii DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS TIGARD,OR FIGURE A 1 Miii arr (2 0 2 U J A BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION j w H g •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS FEET a w 0 w < RQD% TA CORE REC% ail L7 -0.0 25 ~ 0 50 100 254.0 Medium stiff, brown SILT with sand (ML); moist, silt has low plasticity, sand is fine (2.75-inch-thick root zone). ow 2.5- - PP=2.s tsf PP r NM 5.0- stlff at 5.0 feet 10 Infiltration test at 5.0 feet. 11 - P20011 A • P200=84% - Stopped drilling for the day - (12/2/20)at 6.5 feet. Resumed drilling on il: 7.5 - 12/18/20. iirr - light brown, minor sand at 7.5 feet 2 11 A u. Nil 10.0- medium stiff to stiff, with sand; moist R. Appears to be a zone of to wet, stratified beds of sandy SILT A perched water at 10.0 feet. (wet) at 10.0 feet 12.5- i. 15.0 ...239.0 � Stiff, dark brown-red CLAY(CL), trace 1 s.0 sand; moist, clay has medium to high •° ow plasticity. -o 17.5 / 236 0 1- _� ro :!. , Very dense, brown-orange to gray, silty 18.0 Driller Comment: harder, iiiii C SAND (SM), minor clay, trace gravel; wet eetbut smooth drilling at 18.0 N ";': (decomposed basalt). o _ N w 20.0-., .. 1r WW o `° I- 1 H A z moist at 21.0 feet 11 a n_ 231.5 r o 22.5 "�: Very dense, gray GRAVEL(GP); moist to 22.5 m 5012� 231 u. - 3 Drill rig chatter at 22.5 feet. > - wet (decomposed basalt). 22.7 z Exploration terminated at a depth of 8 - 22.7 feet due to refusal on gravel. vrs 25.0- u. SPT completed using two wraps with a m - cathead. is z 27.5- O w H Q _ w Ili w u - u 30.0 w 0 50 100 a DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY.L.Gose/J.Heidgerken COMPLETED:12/18/20 z p BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:6 inches and 4 inches u yi„ ° u RELATEDNW-2-01 z �uD�s�cN= BORING B-2 . Fc A"N i 15 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-2 s':;' TIGARD, OR "■" o O 2 U INSTALLATION AND J ♦BLOW COUNT DEPTH `-' Q a Z •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w I- 2 FEET a J 0 w < RQD% COREREC% - 0.0 ULLJ 246.0 ~ 0 50 100 -7- Soft, dark brown SILT(ML), minor 245.5 '-. sand; moist - FILL. 1 0.5 '- Medium dense, brown GRAVEL with silt 244.5 rrr - and sand (GP-GM); moist, gravel is fine 1.5 2.5- and angular to subrounded, sand is . fine to coarse FILL. 11 11 Attempted Shelby at 2.5 - • • feet;too stiff. PP=1.2s tsf Stiff, brown SILT(ML), trace sand; moist, PP y P silt has low plasticity (6-inch-thick tilled zone, 4-inch-thick root zone). 111 5.0- 14 PP=2.0 tsf PP 7.5 very stiff at 7.5 feet 18 PP PP=2.5 tsf 10.0- stiff; moist to wet at 10.0 feet 13 PP=2.5tsf PP I 12.5- = DD=95 pcf DD p c CON 15.0 _231.0 2, , Medium stiff to stiff, brown-red CLAY 15.0 8 PP=2.0 tsf .__ (CL), trace sand; moist, clay has medium PP A • PL=49% to high plasticity. _ w 9.0 co o/ Very dense, brown GRAVEL with silt and 212.0 Driller Comment: tougher 1 7.5-o- drilling and chatter at 17.0 sz Y ,: ; sand (GP-GM); wet, gravel is fine to feet. �o coarse and subrounded, silt has low o plasticity, sand is fine to coarse mod (decomposed basalt). ,,; 20.0-��GlYo 225.9 50 1"A 111 Q Exploration terminated at a depth of 20.1 i- - 20.1 feet due to refusal on gravel. z a SPT completed using two wraps with a ii O 22.5- cathead. > - z ID 52 25.0- 0. I m - z 27.5- in w - J W ✓ - 30.0 rc 0 50 100 . - a DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:L.Gose COMPLETED:12/02/20 > z ai u BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 inches u RELATEDNW 2 01 BORING B-3 CDESIGNz z N �j ''NCOMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-3 TIGARD,OR NW o O 2 U INSTALLATION AND � J ♦BLOW COUNT DEPTH u Q a- Z n- •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w H 2 FEET J 0 Ili . � RQD% �CORE REC% am 0.0 U CC 236.0 I- VI 50 100 Very stiff, light brown SILT(ML), minor sand; moist, silt has low plasticity (6- - inch-thick tilled zone, 4-inch-thick root is _ zone). 2.5- 24 PP=2.0 tsf PP 11 ` 5.0- `6• Infiltration test at 5.0 feet. PP P200=86% �aat = P200 PP=2.0 tsf 7.5 stiff; moist to wet at 7.5 feet sxe 14 PP=1.5 tsf PP 11 A 10.0 226.0 _„, 4 Stiff, red-brown CLAY (CL), trace sand; 10.0 moist, clay has medium to high PP11 A PP=1.5 tsf plasticity, rail 12.5 ilir E 15.0 medium stiff; moist at 15.0 feet 6 PP=1.0 tsf c t 17.5� 1 / _ O / _217.5 ill* C _oA Very dense, red-brown GRAVEL with silt 16.5 Driller Comment: tougher -!6,--. drilling and light chatter at N -,A. L and sand (GP-GM); wet, gravel is fine to 18.5 feet. w 20.0�op coarse and subrounded, sand is fine to Q �:oCP coarse (decomposed basalt). 62 trill o r ;V1 11 A z ��6{{s{{{ 1C. a 4?.?t o -22.5 -P \trace clay at 22.5 feet r 22.7 3.3 MD so/2, OMu _ Exploration terminated at a depth of z,, 22.7 feet due to refusal on gravel. s iir 23.2 25.0- SPT completed using two wraps with a - cathead. - NM r - z 27.5- 0 I a _ J W a. W u a 30.0 0- 0 50 100 u, a DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:L.Gose COMPLETED:12/02/20 iiiu > z -p BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:6 1/4 inches and 4 inches u N CDESIGNz v RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING B-4 o AN NV 5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-4 TIGARD,OR Iwo o O_I u w •BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND 1-i— Z J COMMENTS DEPTH v Q a °- •MOISTURE CONTENT% = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w FEET w 0 If < (TJT] RQD% F71 CORE REC% H —0.0 251.0 0 50 100 Soft to medium stiff, brown SILT (ML), trace sand; moist to wet, sand is fine (2.25-inch-thick root zone). DCP test at 0.5 foot. 2.5— ! 4 iiiii s.o— medium stiff, light brown-orange, minor 7 sand; moist at 5.0 feet 11 A 60 244.5 Exploration completed at a depth of 6.5 6.5 7 5— feet. _ 46,. SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. I - -:4 10.0-- A, ise., 12.5— i 15.0- - ivu 17.5-- F Y iiii O M L _ a; 20.0— a O H E d — H 22.5— MO 0 - v z 0 v - *iv 25.0— u. ,:J _ 27.5— 0 i. g cc Wr u, u a 30.0 z 0 50 100 d DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:J.Heidgerken COMPLETED:12/18/20 Y. z p BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 inches u o vim GEQ.DESIGN RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING B-5 ? c AN N VI5 PANy DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A 5 TIGARD,OR irr o O INSTALLATION AND = u w ♦BLOW COUNT 17-1- z COMMENTS DEPTH (4 Q •MOISTURE CONTENT% MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w F- 2 Q FEET Li,a < FTTI RQD% CORE REC% "' ~ if) o 50 100 —0.0 - 237.0 Stiff, light brown-gray with red mottled SILT(ML), minor sand and organics (rootlets); moist, silt is non-plastic to DCP test at 0.5 foot. low plasticity (12-inch-thick tilled zone, 2.5— 4-inch-thick root zone). _ — y1. PP=2.otsf PP PP 14 Infiltration test at 4.0 feet. P200 P200=85% 5.0— A • PP=2.25 tsf 231.5 Exploration completed at a depth of 5.5 5'5 feet. 7 s— SPT completed using two wraps with a _ cathead. tt�M l 0.0— — „nF 12.5— .=am 15.0-- 414 17.5— H O — - 20.0— H Q — h z a 22.5 111161, - z 0 ww 25.0— 0 z 27.5— 0 W - 6' ✓� u 30.0 0 50 100 DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:L.Gose COMPLETED:12/02/20 sou z BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:6 inches iota o C�7DE�31GN?u RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING B-6 u AN NIV 5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-6 TIGARD,OR 0 C) w •BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH (-4 <eL — 0- •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION > H 2 FEET 0- w 0 'EC < RQD% 1771 CORE REC% w 246.0 0 50 100 0.0 Very stiff, light brown-gray SILT(ML), minor sand; moist, silt is non-plastic to DCP test at 0.5 foot. low plasticity (8-inch-thick tilled zone, 4- --,, inch-thick root zone). 2.5— PP •Aii22 PP=2.75 tsf 5.0 21 PP=2.25 tsf PP A 239.5 Exploration completed at a depth of 6.5 6.5 feet. 7.5— SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. io.o— Mir 12.5 — 15.0-- - 17.5 f-- rsi 20.0— Zr H o_ I-- 22.5— o tow 6? 25.0— u two z 27.5— LL, 30.0 ,re 0 50 100 DRILLED BY:Dan J Fischer Excavating,Inc LOGGED BY:L.Gose COMPLETED:12/02120 z BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 inches 9 GEO DESIGM RELATEDNW-2-0 1 BORING B-7 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS AN It5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 FIGURE A-7 TIGARD,OR 8 0 — U 1-1-1 A BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND F— Z COMMENTS DEPTH (-.) ><:t u Jo- 20- •MOISTURE CONTENT% MATERIAL DESCRIPTION FEET 5.z- w cn Lur.1 < rrni RQD% 1771 CORE REC% 0.0 236.0 0 50 100 Very stiff, light brown with gray mottled SILT(ML), minor sand; moist, silt is non- DCP test at 0.5 foot. plastic to low plasticity (6-inch-thick tilled zone, 2-inch-thick root zone). 2.5— — 28 PP=1.25 tsf PP 11 OA 5.0— light brown with orange mottles at 5.0 19 PP=3.0 tsf • feet PP 11 7.5— at medium stiff; wet at 8.0 feet PP • PP=1.0 tsf 226.5 Exploration completed at a depth of 9.5 9'5 feet. SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. 12.5- - 15.0- - 17.5— F— a; 20.0— a- -z 22.5— IA z L.? °- 25.0 z 27.5— LL, 0-• 30.0 0 50 100 DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc LOGGED BY:L.Dose COMPLETED:12/02/20 5 BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:6 1/4 inches • MDESIGNN RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING 6-8 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS AN N V 5 OMF'ANY DECEMBER 2020 FIGURE A-8 TIGARD,OR "' o O i u w ♦ BLOW COUNT DEPTH " .I Z a • MOISTURE COMMENTS FEET d MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w UJ I— 2 CONTENT ¢ w ¢ Milu w I— Lrl B-9 0.0 250.0 0 50 100 II ASPHALT CONCRETE (11.0 inches). +rr 249.1 Aggregate base well keyed based - Exploration terminated at a depth of 0.9 on foundation probe. - 0.9 foot due to potential utility conflict. CORE DETAILS: 'r" No patch observed. 2.5— No crack at core. rri - Mt 5.0— dill 7.5— rr - MN B10 0 50 100 0.0 256.0 0 50 100 „s ASPHALT CONCRETE (11.0 inches). 255.1 -Qn.5 AGGREGATE BASE (7.0 inches). 0.9 �.o 1- ? � 254.5 ilik o Medium stiff to stiff, light brown SILT 1.5 - (ML), minor sand; moist, sand is fine. • 2.5— 8 • w I-- _ iiiii o z stiff at 3.5 feet a 1 14 iiiii 1- �?• 5.0 251.0 > Exploration completed at a depth of 5.0 5.0 CORE DETAILS: z - feet. No patch observed. I.,, o No crack at core. k(' u _ AI F SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. m 0 7.5— MI N zz o _ w Mil u, u a a re 0 50 100 w o. N DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:J.Heidgerken COMPLETED:12/18/20 z o BORING METHOD:core drill/solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:5 inches/4 inches u y„ u CDESIGN=c, RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING 2 AN N V J COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-9 TIGARD,OR —*44tamorie Qi u • BLOW COUNT DEPTH --1) z —1 • MOISTURE <0- — °- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >1-u I— 2 CONTENT% COMMENTS FEET 0- 1.J.J 0 Le, < w vl Ilie B-1 1 0.0 2 57.0 0 50 100 ASPHALT CONCRETE (11.5 inches). Lao. P.AAGGREGATE BASE (3.5 inches). 1.o — 2 5 5.7 Medium stiff, light brown SILT(ML), 1.3 trace sand; moist, sand is fine. 5 • 2.5— stiff at 3.5 feet 2 5.0 2 52.0 Exploration completed at a depth of 5.0 5.0 CORE DETAILS: feet. No patch observed. No crack at core. 111 SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. 7.5 0 50 100 az 0 F2 a. a_ "4..‘ DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:J.Heidgerken COMPLETED:12/18/20 >z BORING METHOD:core drill/solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:5 inches/4 inches 09 GEO DESIGNk' RELATEDNW-2-01 BORING (continued) TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS AN N v 5 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 FIGURE A-10 TIGARD,OR • rr 60 50 CH or OH "A" LINE x 40 — w Z r H • u 30 H fiir Q CLorcL J a 20 1 0 MH or OH CL-ML ML or OL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT F- N 'Y1rs a KEY EXPLORATION SAMPLE DEPTH MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX NUMBER (FEET) (PERCENT) -62 • B-3 15.0 27 49 17 32 } 2 0 iit u ' iY% lit, CDESIGNz RELATEDNW-2-01 ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS AN N 15 COMPANY DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-1 1 a TIGARD,OR wr '"+rxiasa+taw,.,�,uuui,v,,...,•••i wuwrw:�+f,u�.a,. ,w«.. U_ • 1 rw 2 immummumi 3 H 4 z w U iMr a 5 i z Q (M 6 7 8 9 10 100 1 ,000 10,000 100,000 STRESS (PSF) z o KEY EXPLORATION SAMPLE DEPTH MOISTURE CONTENT DRY DENSITY NUMBER (FEET) (PERCENT) (PCF) • B-3 13.0 28 95 O r GEODESIGN� RELATEDNW-2-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS z AN N v 5 DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS FIGURE A-12 TIGARD,OR au SAMPLE INFORMATION SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS MOISTURE DRY EXPLORATION SAMPLE ELEVATION CONTENT DENSITY GRAVEL SAND P200 LIQUID PLASTIC PLASTICITY NUMBER DEPTH (FEET) (PERCENT) (PCF) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) LIMIT LIMIT INDEX (FEET) B-1 5.0 247.0 26 84 r B-1 15.0 237.0 25 B-2 5.0 249.0 29 84 iiii B-3 2.5 243.5 28 Hirt B-3 13.0 233.0 28 95 B-3 15.0 231.0 27 49 17 32 tie B-4 5.0 231.0 26 86 B-4 15.0 221.0 33 B-6 2.5 234.5 20 IB-6 4.0 233.0 24 85 B-7 2.5 243.5 15 IB-8 2.5 233.5 22 B-8 8.0 228.0 31 B-10 2.0 254.0 22 B-11 1.5 255.5 24 I IO N r., I ,L, ---. H Z 5 d 1 I I o u > Z ti 5 u v m zz 0 w I a J 1' > z 5 u a WIDESIGNz RELATEDNW 2 O1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA AN N ( 5Y DECEMBER 2020 TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS g TIGARD,OR FIGURE A 13 1 j I I 1 m _X CT Z W a a Q t 1 I I z i s I I s t s E k t 1 wir rr APPENDIX B NEARBY EXPLORATIONS Figures, exploration logs, and laboratory test results from nearby geotechnical explorations are presented in this appendix. IWO 610 611 aka I MIDESIGM. AN IV'5 ' "v B-1 RelatedNW-2-01:1 231 20 Printed By:aday I Pont Date:10/20/201 5 2:27:52 PM File Name:J:\E-L\Evergreen B\Evergreens-3\Evergreen8-3-0I\Figures\CAD\Evergreen B-3-01-5P01.dwg I Layout FIGURE 2 ' CREEivetp. RogO / �� ta �. --.... - 11/ J a? / €.. H }ue 1 \ Mt J a r%p// All' . &:� /� tt fl _ TMV f r 1 / ,gib '" J/ " !a. / IR J ✓/f, N 1 l7 l y r r y�/rye ,.r ✓ \ \ t 1R, t Y/J /, O J 1 illit ltti1,441001,1%,r,..4,..0i,T3 / ./ '".„,,9 f' 0 f,f \\\ ,,'' ,,,,_ // MSS S 6 / i �� � '�ow zt 41... aa, u. r; / I �3 �� r^ Y ° J, III I(IIII(tilliNl El s CO /, Igk ,11 p � { ; tl J Ira I ", lr € k 1,/ / 1I111H1III�II�1 L rr _, ,„ ,- . eN ,: f lr r! 4y1 ' �11 :'r j r., ' r r r f13 :' 1 /1 r / I ` ca In 1 1 ifr �m N 0 v AIlf!{1111{ • I 1 ' vim, o CI chi J Z• 0 LA ?o Z- O II p E�''! L. / z z .-- B n— PM B GB ` n z L. 2 & 0 J '{' m m O 1111► #H j ° Z I _ IIIIIIIIdiiAi © ., / - n m O OPM 3 MI G EODESIGN= EVERCREENB-3-01 SITE PLAN 15575 Sw Sequoia Parkway-SuiIe 100 Portland on vua OCTOBER 2015 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Off 503.9688787 Fax 503.968.3068 T�GARD�OR FIGURE 2 t- z rrr 9 O= u w ♦BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH u Q d — a •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS FEET a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w o 2 w < HI I I RQD% V/a CORE REC% iii —0.o cc "� I— N 0 50 100 Very stiff, brown with orange mottled - SILT with sand (ML), trace organics (plant roots); moist, sand is fine to - +rw - medium (7-inch-thick root zone). 2.5— r • 6 5'0 stiff at 5.0 feet A 7'5 _ brown, without organics at 7.5 feet 9 II ♦ • iiii lo.o— medium stiff at 10.0 feet 11 — 6 - tit 12.5— Wild - 15.0— medium stiff to stiff, brown with orange 11 9 - mottles, minor gravel at 1 5.0 feet A • Ai 17.5— icy 20.0— m 5b/s'� Possible cobbles at 20.0 j , - Exploration terminated at a depth of 20.3 feet. - 20.3 feet due to refusal. Surface elevation was not o measured at the time of - Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. exploration. w Q 22.5— SPT completed using two wraps with a c cathead. z - Latitude: 45.45087 Fc - Longitude: -122.77429 (determined from hand-held GPS) tiom 0 25.0— u Z u w O 0 a 27.5— u a i- YYY 0 30'0 0 50 100 m W DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 z u ,, BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches w O, EVERGREENB-3-01 BORING B-1 Z GEODESIGNZ z 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT cCO Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-1 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR 1i1r1 z ow LI p 01 v INSTALLATION AND Z A BLOW COUNT DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION j w H •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS FEET Q J 0 w < []1[] RQD% V//,)CORE REC% CC w I IA — rW —0.0 u 0 50 100 Very stiff, light brown with orange mottled SILT with sand (ML),trace organics (plant roots); moist, sand is at - fine to medium (7-inch-thick root zone). 2.5— 8 iiito [ A 5.0 stiff, brown at 5.0 feet rrr All 7.5 medium stiff to stiff, without organics 8 at7.5feet ill' 10.0— medium stiff at 10.0 feet _ • - 12.5- - - P ,ice - m 1 s.o— soft to medium stiff; sand is fine to coarse at 1 5.0 feet A as , 17.5— . Possible cobbles at 20.0 Y 20'0 20.1 0/1 A feet. Sampler was possibly Exploration terminated at a depth of bouncing off cobbles.at �iw _ 20.1 feet due to refusal. 20.0 feet. o Possible water level at 20.0 N feet. — Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. 22.5— SPT completed using two wraps with a Surface elevation was not measured at the time of Q — cathead. exploration. z - Latitude: 45.45084 - Longitude: -122.77390 - (determined from hand-held GPS) uiis o 25.0— u z u 7) 0 isio u — 27.5— u _ I m a 30.0 0 SO 100 m „z, DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 iiill' w u w BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches w 13`'I' ° G EODESIGNZ EVERGREENB-3-01 BORING B-2 z Fc 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 m PottlandOR97224 OCTOBER 2015 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR FIGURE A-2 z `m o = u w •♦BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH u Q a Z a •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w g FEET o J < I I I I I RQD% VA CORE REC% is w H N err —0.0 u o 50 100 o! ASPHALT CONCRETE(3.0 inches). r 0.3 _ \AGGREGATE BASE (5.0 inches). ` 0.7 - Stiff, brown SILT with sand (ML), trace organics (plant roots); moist, sand is 2.5— fine to medium (7-inch-thick root zone). il°1r s.o— medium stiff to stiff at 5.0 feet B . k 7.5 stiff,without organics at 7.5 feet 9 ♦ • I - 10.0- medium stiff at 10.0 feet 11 6 h _ 12.5- - 1s.o— soft to medium stiff to stiff at 15.0 feet 4 17.5— H,, Y 20.0— ' hard, red-brown with black mottles, 41 minor gravel; sand is fine to coarse .• 20.0 feet o -- 21.5 Surface elevation was not Exploration terminated at a depth of measured at the time of 22.5— 21.5 feet due to refusal. exploration. Q 0 Z Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. a - SPT completed using two wraps with a._ cathead. 0 25.0— Latitude: 45.45052 Z - Longitude: -122.77396 N - (determined from hand-held GPS) Lu 0 L.) s 27.5— u a m O 30.0 0 50 100 m z DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 Li, w L., ce BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches iio EO G Z EVERGREENB-3-01 BORING B-3 Z G �ESIGN_ 0 1557539 SW SequoiaParkway-Suite100 FIGURE A-3 m Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 201 5 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Off 50 . 68.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR z ego 0 —0 I u w ♦BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH u Q a z a •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w I— 2 FEET a w 0 1/1 w < I1TI1 RQD% V/CORE REC% z w 1— UI Ole 0.0 C.) 0 50 100 Stiff, brown with light brown and - orange mottled SILT with sand (ML), trace organics (plant roots); moist, sand air - is fine to medium (6-inch-thick root 2.5— zone). A o• ito — 5.o— medium stiff, brown with light brown iiiiu mottles at 5.0 feet IL lk 7.5— = brown at 7.5 feetlei F 10.0— Imo 12.5- - m -0 rn YY 15.0— soft to medium stiff; sand is fine to coarse at 1 5.0 feet 11 A a, iwr o V 17.5— j',i iil 20.0 — 20.0 Heavy chatter at 19.5 feet. Y - Dense, brown with orange and black (� 41 Possible water level at 20.0 * mottled SAND with silt and gravel (SP- ' A feet. o SM); moist, fine to medium. �J — Exploration terminated at a depth of 21.5 Surface elevation was not measured at the time of 22.5— 21.5 feet due to refusal. exploration. +rri o Z - Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. SPT completed using two wraps with a - cathead. Y 0 25.0— Latitude: 45.45066 Z0. - Longitude: -122.77351 N - (determined from hand-held GPS) w o *IiW u d 27.5— u — isS a H — Ait `bi _ m c 30.0— 0 50 100 m iz, DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 iiiiiiw U cui c BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches w i"" ° G EODESIG NZ EVERGREENS 3 O1 BORING B-4 z 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway Suite loo PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT FIGURE A-4 Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 2015 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR iYr Z O= u w A BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND F— Z w COMMENTS DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION j w f- ° •MOISTURE CONTENT FEET a w 0 w < RQD% VA CORE REC% w F N ' 0.0 0 50 100 Stiff, brown with light brown and orange mottled SILT with sand (ML); moist, sand is fine to medium (6-inch- - thick root zone). 2.5— s.o— brown with light brown mottles at 5.0 feet A 7.5 medium stiff to stiff, brown with black wog mottles at 7.5 feet ' A • 4W )0.0— medium stiff at 10.0 feet sue 12.5- ----- 110, 15.0— stiff; sand is fine to coarse at 15.0 feet Very dense, gray and brown SAND with 16.3 Az silt and gravel (SP-SM); moist, fine to 17.5— ' -: coarse. zo.o— with black mottles at 19.5 feet P200 11 • -zz-son°. P200=30% — Exploration terminated at a depth of 20.6 Surface elevation was not measured 20.6 feet due to refusal. exploration. the time of 22.5— Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. -- o SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. Latitude: 45.45039 0. Longitude: -122.77349 : o 25.0— (determined from hand-held GPS) u _ z u N W +rr u a 27.5— u d a 30.0 0 5o 100 DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 dYYI w u cc BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches GEODESIGNZ EVERGREENB-3-01 BORING B-5 z 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT m Portland 24 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-5 Off 503.968.8787 Fax Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR Z r o O= U Li., •♦BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND DEPTH u Q d Z a •MOISTURE CONTENT% COMMENTS = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w 1= g FEET a Lu 0 w < TM RQD% I//CORE REC% - cc 0.0 u w I— N 0 50 100 Stiff, brown with light brown and - orange mottled SILT with sand (ML), trace organics; moist, sand is fine to mil: medium (6-inch-thick root zone). 2.5— . !] 1, i AO iiii 5.0— medium stiff to stiff, brown,without organics at 5.0 feet A- 7s— medium stiff at 7.5 feet I. iYn _ 11 6 - st 10.0—_ soft to medium stiff at 10.0 feet I] _ 4 - - 12.5— 0 C iiiii = 0, 15.0— -a - 4 w 11 0 V 17.5— Possible water level at 18.0 _ medium stiff to stiff, gray at 18.5 feet feet. zo.o— very dense, brown and orange with Y _ black mottles at 19.5 feet Dense, brown and gray SAND with silt 20.5 32 o ' ; - and gravel (SP-SM); moist, fine to J.: coarse. 22.5— rrr o Z very dense at 23.0 feet II so/s•A a Exploration terminated at a depth of 23.5 Surface elevation was not a p p measured at the time of - 23.5 feet due to refusal. exploration. r o 25.0— u. - Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. SPT completed using two wraps with a o - cathead. 2 - Latitude: 45.45030 27.5— Longitude: -122.77297 - (determined from hand-held GPS) - 1 - r u; 0 30.0 0 50 100 m IN w DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:10/12/15 c u „re BORING METHOD:solid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 1/4 inches w iiiii Z G EODESIG NZ EVERGREENB 3 01 BORING B-6 0 m 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 ' PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT FIGURE A-6 Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 2015 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR r Z ON O 0i u w Z a •MOISTURE COMMENTS DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w I— g CONTENT FEET Q w w Q (oho) s w I LrI — or u TP-1 0 50 100 0.0 1Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with • wit - sand (ML), trace organics; moist, sand is ® • fine to medium (18-inch-thick tilled -1\zone, 8-inch-thick root zone). Jr 1.5 2.5— Stiff to very stiff, brown SILT with sand PP ® PP=>4.5 tsf +m - (ML); moist, sand is fine to medium. brown with light brown and orange 5.0— mottles at 4.0 feet lit - I brown with light brown mottles at 6.5 iiiii 7.5— feet ,L brown at 9.0 feet `6 10.0 Exploration completed at a depth of 10.0 ® No groundwater seepage observed _ 10.0 feet. at the time of exploration. No caving observed at the time of tali Latitude: 45.45081 exploration. 12.5— Longitude: -122.77436 - (determined from hand-held GPS) Surface elevation was not o measured at the time of exploration. TP-2 o so ,00 0.0 o so ,00 Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with MO - sand (ML), trace organics and debris (brick rubble, glass, and metal); moist 1- ---I (18-inch-thick tilled zone, 7-inch-thick 20 2.5 \root zone) - FILL. j Stiff to very stiff, brown SILT with sand o (ML), trace organics; moist. PP ® PP=>4.5 tsf w - brown with light brown and orange 0 5.0— mottles at 4.0 feet r z i - lr o 7.5_ brown at 7.0 feet u an p O iiiil. u 10.0 u - Exploration completed at a depth of 10° No groundwater seepage observed O - 1 0.0 feet. at the time of exploration. ENo caving observed at the time of imp - Latitude: 45.45067 exploration. • 12.5— Longitude: -122.77436 (determined from hand-held GPS) Surface elevation was not 4 measured at the time of Z - exploration. iiiiiii w u z > 0 50 100 w w 11W a EXCAVATED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:09/24/15 = w d EXCAVATION METHOD:backhoe(see document text) ry lige ° G EODESIGN u _ EVERGREENB-3-01 TEST PIT a v~i 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Lii Portland 24 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-7 Off 503.968.8787 Fax Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR w z O I Z •MOISTURE DEPTH =u a 0-MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w i— g CONTENT COMMENTS FEET < w I— Q (%) 11) TP-3 I 0 50 100 - Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with • _ sand (ML), trace organics and debris ® • (shingle); moist (18-inch-thick tilled - \zone, 7-inch-thick root zone) - FILL. j/ 1.5 z.s— Stiff to very stiff, brown with light Pp ® PP=>4.5 tsf brown and orange mottled SILT with - sand (ML), trace organics; moist. i _ light brown and brown at 4.0 feet El _ brown with light brown mottles,without s— organics at 6.5 feet - brown at 8.5 feet 10.0 10.0 completed at a depth of No groundwater seepage observed Exploration ® p p10.0 feet. at the time of exploration. No caving observed at the time of LLatitude: 45.45052 exploration. 12.5— Longitude: -122.77349 Surface elevation was not - (determined from hand-held GPS) measured o at the time of - exploration. TP-4 o so 100 0 50 100 0.0, L Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with _ sand (ML), trace organics; moist (16-to - 18-inch-thick tilled zone, 6-inch-thick F root zone). Trace ashes at 1.9 feet stiff to very stiff, brown with light 7.0 - brown and orange mottles at 2.0 feet N o pp ® • PP=4.5 tsf a▪ s.0— rn brown with light brown mottles at 5.0 F- - g z feet Tree roots(3/4-inch diameter)at d = ® 6.0 feet O u 7.5— zI - u_ v, - 0 0 u U 70'0 Exploration completed at a depth of 10.0 No groundwater seepage observed `°, = 1 0.0 feet. at the time of exploration. No caving observed at the time of Latitude: 45.45038 exploration. 12.5— Longitude: -122.77330 (determined from hand-held GPS) Surface elevation was not measured at the time of w - exploration. U - u j 0 50 100 i w a EXCAVATED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:09/24/15 a a w a EXCAVATION METHOD:backhoe(see document text) I N • G EODESIG Nz EVERGREENB-3-01 TEST PIT L7, 1 5575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT � Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-8 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR z o Qi u w z —1 •MOISTURE DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >w H g CONTENT COMMENTS FEET a w 0 z w w Q (%) I— N wr u TP-5 0.0 0 50 100 Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with totii - sand (ML), trace organics; moist (14- - inch-thick tilled zone, 5-inch-thick root Trace ashes at 1.5 feet - zone). Tree roots (3/4-to 1-inch 2.5— stiff to very stiff, brown with light PP M • diameter)to 2.0 feet aiik - brown and orange mottles at 1.3 feet PP=>4.5 tsf _- brown with gray mottles at 3.5 feet 5.0— Ww 7.5— brown at 7.0 feet ,,0. 10 0 No groundwater seepage observed _ Exploration completed at a depth of to.o ® at the time of exploration. _ 10.0 feet. No caving observed at the time of exploration. Latitude: 45.45054 Surface elevation was not 12.5— Longitude: -122.77310 (determined from hand-held GPS) measuredat the time of exploration. ation. ow TP-6 o so too 0.0 o so too 4.11 - Medium stiff to stiff, brown SILT with _ sand (ML), trace organics; moist (18- inch-thick tilled zone, 6-inch-thick root ® • zone). Trace ashes at 1.7 feet 2.5— stiff to very stiff, brown with light iii c. - brown and orange mottles at 1.5 feet o pp ® PP=>4.5 tsf LLi - rw 0 s.0— brown with gray mottles at 5.0 feet Z n iiiii 0 u 7.5— N _ without organics at 8.0 feet o kiss 8 _ brown at 9.0 feet 10.0 - Exploration completed at a depth of 10 0 No groundwater seepage observed _ 10.0 feet. at the time of exploration. E _ No caving observed at the time of — Latitude: 45.45035 exploration. 12.5— Longitude: -122.77288 - (determined from hand-held GPS) Surface elevation was not measured at the time of z exploration. rid Lu u > 0 50 100 w w . ¢ EXCAVATED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating,Inc. LOGGED BY:TJS COMPLETED:09/24/15 a cc w d EXCAVATION METHOD:backhoe(see document text) N ailo G EODESIGNZ EVERGREENB-3-01 TEST PIT 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT 1- Portland OR97224 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-9 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR Atli ': SAMPLE INFORMATION SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS MOISTURE DRY iy� EXPLORATION SAMPLE ELEVATION CONTENT DENSITY GRAVEL SAND P200 LIQUID PLASTIC PLASTICITY NUMBER DEPTH (FEET) (PERCENT) (PCF) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) LIMIT LIMIT INDEX (FEET) B-1 2.5 12 Nit B-1 7.5 26 /,' B-1 15.0 30 B-2 5.0 20 B-2 10.0 27 B-2 20.0 29 B-3 2.5 16 B-3 7.5 27 B-3 20.0 27 B-4 2.5 18 B-4 7.5 27 B-5 2.5 19 I B-5 7.5 27 B-5 19.5 33 30 B-6 2.5 17 TP-1 0.5 11 TP-3 0.5 12 IY TP-4 3.5 20 o o TP-5 2.5 13 Q o TP-6 1.0 9 1- z I 2 ,... 0. Iu7, 0 0 V CI.--, u d I- m 0 M m W W C u w w I w GEODESIGNz EVERGREENB-3-01 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA E = 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Portland OR 97224 OCTOBER 2015 FIGURE A-10 Q Off 503 968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR J -1 nomad By achy I Print Date 12/16/2015 80406 AM , ,.,cA_ _ rgre.ni,,0,spoi,pvem,ntdwg'Layout FIGURE 2 File Name-J:\E-L\evergreenb\evetgreenb-3\evergreenb-3-01\Igu \ D\E .. ...,:.'..4..,..aie.... •,f.,„,kii.11,,,,." :.:cZ.s.:‘,.1;::::;,,fi:';',*.7.,,ii)i,!"!::', "::y"...V.N.•;:iteilf!':. ;',...,..:-,.:141 4•14-,,,:,,,, _ .,,,, ' ,,,,,!:,...„:„.e" .' !1.';. ,',,,,• •=„:"" r,*:4,.,;,:„.''-,r:.' .°:;:Yif;•i:=•':,..„:01X.:;11iu.;-.1';:i: '''''''';',...!J".'..,!-:,,i;',:', ;2;',.., ,,-,','.:4•.:!. ,"'il'-;','. :' ' ;,:y,,.51,,,: -ii•ell;' ,•„.,01'...., '',,:i...-,'- ' -. ..k!i:'.,'-';:2;i1•:•.;'Ni '': ';,..: :',•::1',1:1'..11.:'''. .'.''''::•L''''''',..j,.:".'1,-.. '..Nti'i:.. 11!1'-...•".•'.›,...,..,°`,.`"•',;;;,',,- :'"'''',...,,,,,: *"..•11.:: ' .11!•;,. 1„,,m,,,,,'-=';,;"' '''....,„ r=';',., s,„ • Ci;"'•..1'-"`";,"'"'4,-.;.' =.14';'.;"2:;14; ;;.;.",'• . ;„.,-..a0;4".111 ;;;!;;;'''-";' • 4;";',;' ' " "•?;:,."'; •="=","'-";'- ' -,..".7*-". ' = .. .;;;',= ';e " ';-"';';I: "-".. ';'''''4'.7"-"","":;"'-='f;''.''"' -; ' •.=';..." '';', •' •,,,;; e'-'' , ,. N;;;.-."-t,',.%;;,,, ,• ; ,.= ;'V; ifl,:;:,' ''''',.',..:--' i ."- .).-`,::,,,-- - — 2' ,':::',::::',.}.,:i'„: ,,,,:-( :f*;:..;.....- :4,...C'',„, ...1.?%.•4....4.4.:".i:<..;..,•''', ,'.;„-.. •.''..;','''',F;1;.44•14:t:.'44„,'=',.,?:''.-','Z''..:'),:411.t ,. ,,•''.'' " ft• ,e'' '.'.4 1.;:::"..',",'...;•,• ..s,,,,...,,,.*, ,-;..5....4....' ,'. ,:.;*,...,..4'4.0'0g:46'-• ,,-='!.:1)!•-i,.4.:'..7.4=. —., ..,:-„-4,,,i:=1. 4.4,...z.,Ny..•„.,,,,. ''.. t.,,,,,,,,,rft. • 4,' . ., . , .''' '.-.. .S. i 4,;,, *f••.iiii,N...is:14.'11›,11I, ..',1 ,„,,.. ,, - . ,, ,,,,L.,, ;,. . ,i, , .- , ,,,...• ,.;,,y., ''.-- . .N,-.,--.-.:,.., :..-'. . -...-'',,„,- .-.. ,-,..4.'%:4-ii-....-,.1 -,,,- -,,,.:-:,,,. , ., !,..„,„-...-..-,:::.,...... , .,.....-. . ',..,—,,,:iJ.,,.. .,,,.i.,,:.-.,:‘,.4,-. .'• .-.....,...,'.,,. ,.."?' .. . .,,,$"1„,$ $4 '",.,, ,..i..,74%;.•.;,. .„7•,,,...,..,--..,.,' •i'.".".0.P1='=4,7.:=4,,ii=444,',4'1 . ,. , -Is.,,,.....,t, -', .1, , „..s- ",<4.1',- ' 7."1!;;IX...t:r",i. .i..'4,,,-',11.i.V. 1•4:',„....' -- ,".1...;„;Y:i .;•.-4L"N.,..=:"'i. 2 . . ril ,4 41.-.. 1 1" ,..1.1.,r,....; •4 F.mie.z.c.... ''''''''' .::'-:•,j'i,it; ",:....e..;,,t l',"'`„':'.:''' " -,7';',;.,•;' ,:,..:;'''.;'.::. 1: T_:,,-,p,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.„ - ,,,,,, ..... . . . ., .„,, „.....: ,, .,,, „.,- ...,,-, ,,,i.d•1'fi3..:...- „• :.• ' .--:. ,. .,,.. .:.,;.;,„:',.i2..',..,,:',"::'.;;,.i.,7•I„...,!,•....,.....v.,,,,,.144,:z.,,"1 ,ill,•• .1 ji;:`,C..;:r.f:.ill IN, 3:. ,. . . •,' 1'''f9i'''''i'i'i4;'Pi.•;,;..*IV';'.4.': •I<A•:?:1-i4=!.ii1..1i1!:341ti4Zi,,,,i,,,,.;1;,!•.;:1„.4;::;:i;',.•,i:-1t 41:iNti'-...4;i;;k.%;it:.2,i',f2;.i6"„f'y-.!;74ii*:4 11:;'id: r-i 1-,ij?a'::t7e.._'C,'j.I.'1,'1tf'67'". iti';i'-:;,7,.2(i.:.F.,'''1,.,!'''/'''4'':i.-1.;:;:,lx:.it;4;;4fiH's-•'::'Nfi,'','ff-'';„4',:..i;:.'Y',:.'.-.:;.:?,;-;;',•;'24,•;i„'v';!T!.t.:''!i.-,1..Ci:.,i k',,1^.,',',.,..,,,,:.,.:'1. ,7'-`,i1':-:.'-1;•.,l:2i,z.i..:1..''..',.',•„,;..',:•:-':7,.''.>-.....'"1-;.1:",.1...:e..".iii..,::'i:'-.l,::t::..-:,i:l;:t.•.•,,•;',,',.,-,.T;;'42i:i"::-*,;.!1 2 7 , i : , : " L :, .04$ =„ i;t:':1E,-;:ri!" . -illq*:;,:iii',1•,:e.,',•. ' '''''''''''''k'•Iftiigrtiitqlir4:t';''V'7411.'.0zf;.t9lgfiqPltgglt':i45,4trl,N. I.t,=tk„,...:1,A,!:1'if=L.'t.',t4;.:•',f„;'17.1',;','Jt:Vill.;',4!.:1t,;i,kiil''7,ft'Si'k;.A.4'.;.'.g;`,!;:',1.;1414 •:y .... . .'- ....•. 0,.., .•-i,•:(-•',;.':-., rii-'t ..: ,,;:.-, . ,4 VS, fr j'"frIlsY44,444 ';,:-.'.:!'-'' '.'',... :',',V."'$'14L1L,.." „ OM ::,,,,_. '!:1"4"0:$$N$4:.",,,-,:-- ,,ritirli$44'''''7, '-'4.,.._..:: ''',''''Inqr$01..-":",'.,','",-:".°5 'II?::"4::::n$,:',"!"-r:4'',.•1,y,--,,,i6S21$$$,:$,L.:$1$11'1141.$4 "'"-'"''-‘...":'"..--iii,...447444*•"'";''''''"`;',,,,''';',;,=-=';;;:-,,,V.,10%.4".$4,=441;,41.4 i•ril‘r,77.,1,,,,t1T.''.,;.•nr.'.!"=!.." '-i 449;- Ilirt .r. , • '--W,tri-Ptt'i..P.:" i,!;-.7 ,. 00 -;;" '2':-. 41-44.4'..". -,,;,„,,,:A.,`1;T,..= ,- f, ,""; •''' ; '; 4 ;,-;=, ""iF,;;; '''•,,filf.,,,'',.; - -l'• :,..44.;',,;,1'..; ' .,.. •;„i'•*'" 3 1410± "i'i.,„'! 0,36;,..';'..!:-'-: . ,'•••',•=`'','"."'..'.••• ...tii..''' - ...,,'';',:*.f,'`..'''''''4:=)"•-'' ". moo ,J1,..:•••;•„,,:,.i,„„....16jr.. ..,1%- ..;,!-.••,,.•:,,•••_ :„.q.,....,,'..,;;;.1.',.,,,,..k!..,.1,,•',. ,,' . ' ,..0.L•z?:11'.11;!',• 1.,L'i.. --,,,-,-•:;i L'',„.,4,f-!,),,1'4.., ,,ii„,,,,- , ,-.y':11::.4'.Clif:'.4r ,-,::.'.i4'.'• '': -:'',::,::..-•:1`44:3','.:':....,...-i ..,',' ' '''":1N1r.1:fife '' "',,,,,, ,t•.'*ii,Nt',,f:... ..,,,,-'-',"..-, 4,...=.1,10.4,44.4',....,,t4,4.-,-,./..,4',".' ,•14,,,-,,,.. ....''.' , ,,,'i44,1„NI.4' -',• i',. . -.e.A•'i.ir. .A,'-, :',:,-,-.'-'',',-; ".`i:°',':'.., ..... ' .,,,r.,,, , tit'::;;;I'';._.i.,1,-114,;.1.1f1t1,1.1-7, ' ',1.1;, i7!,,-".1. , '1'10.,t,'..,111.*•°:111..:';":17.,!!'..S. It OPP ',,.! wo:till,-t'1%'''' tett ieg' '=•4440 4..1'''..";.:":".'''''"' ,,,Y11 - , ...•' ' 4:1.:..' t..!:'.4:. •'' " it''•' --4..4:11,-i.L'";;;;;;;r='''''". .. -,;;;;,;;;;;;-"C.,*".4,;=',"/:sy,;,1'' ;;;;:".„ ' .; . 4'-0,A1.14;" ' ;; ,"''..,'.-";"4,1;IF';',"=''',-Yr0-41-;.'ki";.;,:•'',..; .;,-,;:i;=;;',I",;!:',6.,;•;`,".11";;;j-"ke„c.":.;„•;,,, - ,',14#4,1t.;;;:i. ' 5,",,;,,913414-404/0i1M.4,=,,,,,,,I;;IV;•',;';',==';',""i;"4;,,ir;:;"' -r-'.°"•', ;"' - ''‘ ';"-0;',4;11""'"..141-1=C I'''' '',-I; "';"',, ,;:-'",,,+ ';,„,:-- "." 41;'' • ' ' ';' ' ilak -.1 ? ,.".,M. ,.". ' • ; .. ;„114,1:4;:i-, , ,- .., III_41 ,. ,., :i.;•le . . . . .-" ,r.4 .4=5;""+.1;-1%.,==;"';',"11-lit,""''. -.' . '.,,,,.4":. :: ,r,- , . !,1,1i.k,!=r4,W;;;;;=;9,;! •,.=",,,,,,,,,I.,3 ":1',.,,,,,'=" ' .; 1,11 9 '' " '4''9C4''ji'''iqe,l'i''9.:`9.9..i149,41.4.',4;94O4f,:','.: .O;9,449,let'„ . ' ',91 . OM 1 ',14:;r:i..;''',it„ Ff, '': iiiiltiP-N;' 0„92 94499''99'9.'''''‘''',!'',f;',',1...'%''''''.-,C,49P,t,'-'''''',...l'94.',,;31':,',i19:'4....lf'r...ilie.; I',;",;"1",,, ,;;;,;„1- ',:',,-,;";,,,,,:iiiA,!1:;,;.2'1LiffilAN110141.4P.;:,k;;',:q'',,CilCkt"4","1."4"1"",'!'•==. , '"Atte..;;;;„ ti-;••A,- ,= • .,4:-•-;=,.." ,,,e-let.4';',--"i'',1',:i X.O.t.W.,="l:-it,',',;.:4o!i.';=1.04.1;5116-;i,r;,,t;;;;; ;:".'-,'"',".;;===FINTI,V;' ' " :±-",;%-,;,-,;,X0 - ="9"11:4,!.,f1;1034e43.:43;421#,N21`. -, ;.,"1:1 14;--;','"1 - ;!,,•'==:;1''':::'47-;= OM ';';'-:;"40EN1Q- "!"-tf.''.:":11',C.11,'-‘4.';-•--.:1,,,;:2".,4'2"..-iiiV62";%,'1!'!.' 14="it=-11,-, ,".44-"Alh,""?:";""ir ';,'';-1"-f;;e',;° -'0;;;44Plit';',0,0;="4;;P:1"-P,;itte,"kE=,,;;„,;;;;4-W''0,00-"4;;ti-tii-",;; 0,..1:7;;;; ;;"1 ;;;,i,,'-';f247,;.7";.—;',".";.,17.,..1i,;;ii.=",""; l!'"44A;;;I:';:=24,;....;...';',;';;;;?..'•„:0;ktit; - ."""";;;;;1,4";;;41"'"" ' 11,;".4;',';1..4.`1,44,01.7.4„4-,:otr,,,,,,,, , _.,.,,.,,,,, , ,,,,,,, ,,1,,, ''''''.'e'•:',.'''' ''',i1c,:',.i.1'.4'.'-'.,..''..4''4,P.I.'''''''*:"'11 r4'::':".:':11"": ': ''' ''''F'''' ''': -1::'''11:"'"In.,:'-'4'''' ' ' ,rX"'!":A'34:014141.1310 rt$INqt.,$r, __"-,',4"'1,111 -4 '''''';;,,l.'.14'.:-:" ',' I, i'$1: ,,I '' ,:,r$,0:„.%':''1':':'i,';',;1-;l::::'::;::•'.:.:;:.;1",_'i,",'' ,:1' ;,',,;1,1:',:" 1.;"14 r'h"4$";p-""14."-,""J0,-,1=";1";;i,$-,,A/9t •*il"..."'O-r:1$2,'1,. A: '.,.,:1L"•-"',,--$•.,;4$-"1'3,'"'"1',!'''„';"4.;,'1-'"11,' , 1 I NO 0'-^ rn CI $11. m m m >, -rz/ " (-) z z;, o z ,. ts) x> K r3 -0 WM o o > < 8 z r;•., ._ z r, > K CI m r-7, m Z m- „.,> rr, >,- m 70-0 .01 0 7o PIM i 0 r, -0-1 co -; 7d 0 0 . 0 o 73 n - > 1 ow GE SITE PLAN ODESIGNW EVERGREENB-3-01 DECEMBER 2015 PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT FIGURE 2 Off 503 968 8787 Fax 103 96$3068 TIGARD,OR ...„.,.. — . .. .. . -,. • z o 0= U A BLOW COUNT ~H Z • MOISTURE DEPTH u MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >o H 2 CONTENT% COMMENTS w < u w I— C-1 0 50 100 0.0 ASPHALT CONCRETE (13.5 inches). Stiff, brown SILT(ML), minor clay; moist. 1.1 11 Ar 2.5— - 14 Jr Exploration completed at a depth of 4.0 4.0 feet. CORE DETAILS: 5.0-- No patch observed. Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. No crack on core. SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. Latitude: 45.450846 Longitude: -122.774554 (determined from GPS) 7.5— ^� 0 50 100 C-2 0 so 100 o.o ASPHALT CONCRETE (1 3.5 inches). Very stiff, red-brown SILT(ML), minor 1.1 sand, trace clay; moist, sand is fine. r449/1 U 2.5— — stiff at 3.0 feet a N 12. 0 F' Z Exploration completed at a depth of 4.5 4.5 d 5.0— feet. CORE DETAILS: No patch observed. Hammer efficiency factor is unknown. No crack on core. SPT completed using two wraps with a cathead. o Latitude: 45.451002 Longitude: -122.774516 7.5— (determined from GPS) gat r• O M — Z t� W U j 0 50 100 DRILLED BY:Dan J.Fischer Excavating.Inc LOGGED BY:JCH COMPLETED:12/11/15 Wig BORING METHOD:core drillisolid-stem auger(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:5 inches/4 inches GEODESIGN EVERGREENB-3-01 BORING 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 Portland OR97224 DECEMBER 201 S PROPOSED SW GREENBURG ROAD DEVELOPMENT Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR FIGURE A-1 twt u x C.) z W a a NIB I ® ® NIS ME ® dB En ® OM NMI 111111111111111111101111111111111111111/11111111111111111111111111111111111111 Sill APPENDIX C INFILTRATION TEST DATA Plots of the infiltration test data we collected from borings B-1, B-2, B-4, and B-6 are presented in this appendix. We performed the infiltration tests inside pipes that we inserted into the boreholes. We performed the testing using the encased falling head test method. We performed the testing with a water head of approximately 3 to 4 feet. We collected water level readings using an electronic water level indicator data logger. air a. 1. a. w rw I I err IDESIGN= AN <TSccia+PnNv C-1 RelatedNW-2-01:123120 I I II I IIIIII f IIII I I Infiltration Test: Boring B-1 at Depth of 5.0 Feet 20 Test 1 15 mm, Average 10 O Q1 n. 5 to v i . U I _ �� 1, 1 ir, I / 1 ., 1. :/ .� i ' i cc 0 5 cB c 10 -15 -20 f 3.18 3.16 3.14 3.12 3.10 3.08 3.06 3.04 3.02 3.00 2.98 Pressure Head (feet) u, fir.., .. fir... ;. Infiltration Test: Boring B-2 at Depth of 5.0 Feet 10 -ie5I I 8 6 i k O - 4 a " 2 0 a) ra oc 2 0 _4 c _6 -10 3.24 3.22 3.20 3.18 3.16 3.14 3.12 3.10 3.08 Pressure Head (feet) ... F i i 1 Infiltration Test: Boring B-4 at Depth of 5.0 Feet GO ----'-',;:l Test 1 50 - .,..,Average s"--; 40 0 _c. Cii 0- 30 v, cu o c z--- 20 cu no cc c , o 10 1 i ._ f A j1 / 2 7 ' , , ii , .4_, o 011 it .! , 4 1 i i it ,' 1 , I) : ri ! it df, ,I I ' . '1114 pi 4 , 14i 1, i , lip i it i _ 1 ( r 4 1 1 JO i 01 d if i I -10 1 -20 4.50 4.45 4.40 4.35 4.30 4.25 4.20 Pressure Head (feet) r t ,., u r i ,y u- - Infiltration Test: Boring B-6 at Depth of 4.0 Feet 10 Test 1 8 6 - 4 a) Q ai 2 0 aJ 3 cc 2 co -4 -6 -8 -10 4.30 4.25 4.20 4.15 4.10 4.05 Pressure Head (feet) C .cnE a) I .JALSAIIK I AI I „A I I A I 'ai!•• . .•410 JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC woo �rw APPENDIX E EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS AND DETAILS off 44 .aaf sits n•. ' .. C 2 < ARCHITECTURE 1605 NW HOYT PORTLAND OP 97209 503 100 2200 }aG In, ��¢¢]]1 }alref f F L glneenr�LLC ` >' :� �e.n..r ri wrnu�n �nnrr,nrnmaium:uay.ua.wviu mn. L ctT > ‘--- 1 1 T =nm.env u vw FLAN NEW wrxn....�..sr..m::aa.w:....e.m:.....n. II �k �9��� g��'`v.f� , J ......,.�.�. ... .. .., y T k Kra S.REn'm1v1e ...v.mr . PROFIT F. ..: (Pf 1 ..)-1»19 n... .. _....:' � a �,�. _ .®® m.Mw me m:. TERRACE OF FPO N.I1 y STANDARD EROSION CONTROL �y7 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE O6vnwae Sv9in IIRF WASH (DRIVETHROUGH) Ckn,WA &nice, NOTES FOR SITES LESS THAN i L7e.AV n�`.h...ica GLENN ,. • ACRE O PROTECTIVE FENCING O .AS.. O .5 O .max.. APARTMENTS w_N� .., „, .. - RELATED NW .gym, 1 ...,... i,, c� • iv\ '- L -�.' 35 9 ., �..,w`�` 9640SW GREENBURG ' _ ati_ Tigard,OR 97223 µ a rRN SKI.. DESCRIPTION. p : 1 1 1 �. + -�- + W nr N BASIN.�Fa. FRDI�TEW ...�s..w\ wsm:c cn.os ,' IfT SEDIMENT FENCE . CONCRETE WASHOUTµ INLET PROTECTION INLET PROTECTION cxanWm sa.„m QanWAz Sa9:es TYPE 4 c7®nwac S* TYPE 5 �nWa1Q """ I. o 'S�E o. 9 DRAW,_ HOE ) 07,-7z r��x. .: eIN p.w�o�wn Baal W EROSION AND SEDIMENT V) CONTROL DETAILS H En C 1 .4 ESC COVER SHEET FOR TERRACE GLENN APARTMENTS C2C ARCHITECTURE 1565 NW HO.PORTLAND.OR.20S N 'sti I STANDARD EROSION AND SEDIMENT + ILr. ATm.DRI'.ST CONTROL PLAN DRAWING NOTES: ^ Janet rnR I:vAFOeeHDA LLC CONTACT RYAN HOOD 208 PDR ND.DRB7D GOLDS MUSA DISCI TOM.ANDS... .R ANDR�HSEMCCIMPTFIEHT THE T'NOTATE: ION "" EMAIL.A «DATED.CT INSPECTORMR ..C..p1r MN ES _ gw^ , T m`EAT:MADE EDCBOTCH.ET/N ACCORD..WITH°� COIL °.D C RW , .,„„,wSMNTPP,m�N.„..u,w„, ,xRNCP.N. �Rw ( �M 811RVEYNO PM MQUIR.NNrs.(swam.e..LCAwRa 2M.USE WATER.mn AGENT DR011.OUT CONTROL TB...AS ITEM R.ERR.0 IIc H TT.A COT a TIN EWE NM 1.0012SDN STYE GO POKE TTA.AT.OR .A wL.o (.R-owEA,.AM THET""COWART "N.R P.E. TITHE LOCALMUNR215.Lxr.WR MALTY...ADS MEG_ MINT._ aTre Tm 'DmxxamNEwE,onDo.m ND`EEDAro AREOs �� VICINITY MAP TAT BE 12.0.50 BT.PERMIT RETSIBANT BUT»AVERTON.0.7006e06 fAVf1AN xol.isO<uE'"�M.IDi IE«.u NmrowNE RTLEMENT THE ESCP.FAILURE TO 116.1.10 MN s T.(FOR TAN.,asmocc.a"A., EMAIL.mmNER�NmRNTRENOINTRI.COIN .CONTOL(N ESCPPR.LT INSCRIBED PETIT ESC,ISA VIOLATION MO°�`A..oNEAwA REMOVAL IS NARRATIVE DESCRIPTIONS "LLC...°Ns TI..Rnra.A+REA�wx RE PROJECT LOCATION: EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS RE 9550 sw Guam..Ram To owCLEAR PRACTICAL TO PREVENT T wan wpm lo PAs Haromx xyl.c.n.F., OPERATING TN T...SESTET OPERATE AND T M)MMU.E&9 umi a:x�TsomT.LaNraTwE-Lxa.nAnE DEVELOPED WITH AN ITISTINC MR....NT PRSIONTAL HOME...PROPOS.WITH 4.0052.PA.PART.N.ORM,WITH THE WT.,. vtl ARM man NxamlDASNwMOF ERTSTOx.(ssmAE ENSURING TYSwAT mI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Dn FT. EVDDI .Ewa 00EOULE A 7.6, TTHHEE UTAVE'LOTOMOCOVERED W.TREE,,TRIMS MO ORO.MYER. T ca«nUewrs AT TNETMeNDar EALN LTvswv SOIL COT...THE 151..Cr LOCA.IN THE DEVELOPED CONDITIONSEASUMP [WSW,iN QUA ArI¢ SECTxOx xAL�iumA.xlPTswm�L (A.A:ws.µ06523.50R.G ANDp50,35°CAIe APE.,..2,335.3 RETUNDS).vo Tie uu WAX(EeLeiEa ARea. °WATERS. A>.E.0) T E oux.waenxOr Rev lMmDWTsrts. 1(N 11.0(DIL .... .. e. ',TATTER. COT.oretaAx C .6 NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION AND ACTIVITY TIME TABLE RAIL RARITY THE TWA DE VEGETATIVE MIA USED.(50TOULE TSEDITTIO FENCE REWIRE TRAPP. ORE' A._( A _D BMP MATRIX FOR CONSTRUCTION PHASES �swam ARI A,E OTHER (SUCH AAc WOK.N:wTTwT"e TROVE M aT,mnxturePx nXxs w u9-m x ( .(wr LEBASTTeuo2(AE i wTTNn.,TA m.EETIE °(w..1 arm eL..0 M.uTT 163156 ST:o'wwwwssHnoRro MAT �: I TD.NAR 1wnND I AE,NTAR. I.Lo.RLTROR PI.wvAnaA I. ....1 1,4.4454.0,E AND HMIDSEAIE cporarr, nvnrxB cLrsn HAs arm ROTTED FAIL PERCEPT MOAT 13 CONTROL ROTHE.,FLOW RATES AND .(Asoet"E FPCLn M TOTAL SIT ApEA=3.87RArnE5(DEVELOPED CpN7Na5ARG1 EMOTION AT ...0161.01 AAI CH...Aro sI.NRN6S.I..DUE IUIR4 BRBRPRANr SEDIMENT THAT HAS Lm THE roxsTnucnax sTTE. 3 AT C) MUST RE RETEMATED.PIVEST..THE CAUSE..SENT.RE..To , OTTROL.T.T IS NFIT...6 THE SITE PFAMETT AND AT. IMELLNI.T STET TOPE..A TONNE!.Of THE OLSOLEIGE WONG THE SOT '73.s=r . • MTAL DISTURBED ANSA=2.070 ACRLS(WIM UM.EXTEI.ON) Au DEEs O Rnx:OCESTUCTION 2.00103.ANT N....CLEAN.OF SN/PERNT SHALL BF ENTOTIED NTT.. .'.. ' I SITE SOIL a/SSIFIGTION(.PR RAN.RESOURCES soma 80TIRIONALLE NA RT.SITE BOUND./TIE'("(EDUILE.0."so°r THE r armTwWTw OF STATE TAROS RED TDgRA,E.,o�uE I - • TERRACE INRUSw�DIrWME.D WAN UIRUcONTT x,» MO.MATRE "'"� GLEN. oxs MNG WATER.BODE �A G M RWA 1.1 D.TM5 IM ,D LL"s"'�aH APARTMENTS camas.POWOLF xxxlvs CONSTRUCT.AMY..CEASE PM 101 OAT OR TORE GIOIA CO..6 CE . ° INSPECTION FREOLIENCYE )E;"Irs oPARR. COMPOST INrnww RaITIT.TnATPORN..INES.TONDLSE ,,.,.0..,.„,°F"rB. N.OI SEW CONDITION MINIMUM FREQUENCY �GXn MM!W n.nM DED SORB FROM sr DIDHE TITA µ � VEGETATE.CO OTHER COVER OF ERPTTO 51.5 IS ESTABLISH.ATICE mµAls2iEaREAT.Dn Q. . . . . nwi.re.. DO,ry.RMo. VA.SRUCTID s (SO...A.7.D.RXs))1.°� RELATED NW T ACN,E 011.0 ROMTOW PayIsoOR.RRND. COPE..NISH.T,WASIGVATER TOM CIEANDUT OF 5.00,PA..,E...03106112.0011 DTI. AN MUGS DOWD D. PE CON..WITH RMIT. ..0TTOMETMITA0AMMOml.0 F THE. Ay topr pox may How,WHSWES OF xxx-npx DAM 2. A.RLw.15OMRwNO. CONFOUNDS REg TIA ITO.PERMIT THIS EAT ENO T.. otemenSMEEN CATIEOOTT.. SPILLS, EDro 10 (m�II"Re MDT. s.MOTHEE}TT,Aros,rnA�;�« DITREENTIES OR OMISSI.6.5 Tx°DCPERI.RCIIRETars SUPER.. x_ • IMANrIOwTTo.asDEIN.®OT.. MIEAMwTNEsm. ESARNUSENwE TO An.......AST.X..03 E.Tl.. I.wIREND.IsoFMIs.LAN. ....,,%.T 6 FLUID,NO OTHER 0113 FRON INHALES ENO Gar AT 3 9640 SW GREEN BURG MDR SOLVENT TANG COMPOUNDS TTON T. • 00.4 EA.,.E0211 a Tigard,OR 97223 .PERIODS «ET TR DET. REQUIRED FOR WORK WITHIN SP OF WATER OF THE STATE. •. F.11.0 R.WHICHTHE LL B`�1. R '".C"01544MUST OTRIE PO°I'TATA . SIE�.IMES BMP THAT wnL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY DRaWD MT..MTGE.ACT OTT 141j. DDM �AN NTLOCATIONRELMWE NO RATIONALE STATEMENT au.. `61.31.. D.DRY O.Na PG,OP CONDITIONS.R EEa; „ EVIE"T �5MNP,DRmNSWs D .,D �01... 310DQ. MA BEST TO COMPLETE ETT.EROSIONANDSUM, was.. omen.. CORTTOL PLAN 50.OF TA ABOVE LISTED TANTE.NOT 0805.BECAUSE THEY W.F DETERMRTD TO NOT EFFECTIVE.MANAGE EEGS.PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT C.TROL T HOLD A PRE-0.11.00011.01/GOF ROI.TOKTRECTIONEL.C11.11.11.21.311T FOR THIS PROACT INTED ON SFS-C.0 sot CONDITIONS,INCLUDING SOIL CONDITTO. TY TO THE 51.AND AND-RIM IS A NEED TO REY�T..ESC NAN.AN ACTON PLAN WILL BE SUBMITTO. LIrA,nN. M.wRD.n,,ET.,,,HEEmAT,TP CDIBTR�A,RRs»EDR AT,1oDRR PERMITTEE'S SITE INSINITIAL PECTOR: Roca COMPANY/AGENCY:XX PHONE:TOOSSSED LOCAL AGENCY-SPECIFIC EROSION FAX: E-MAIL:XXIOC CONTROL NOTES: DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIENCE:WOCX ATTENTION EXCAVATORS* EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN INDEXNr' ' I. .YOU TO FLOW RILES TOE.. TROSE RUTS ARE Hr Hug C1.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL COVER SHEET "I" A°OM`" "'"F"`' NOm.TT mnR AT LEAST Two E.T.SDAYS,xTO.031anre AR ETA.ATION.CAT SO za.. CI.1 CLEARING AND DEMOLITION EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN C1.2 GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN C1.3 BUILDING CONSTRICTION AND SITE PAVING EROSION AND SEDIMENT ` o� CONTROL PLAN C-+�!':J C1.4 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS L..M...T....WJ I- LLL EROSION AND SEDIMENT VT CONTROL COVER SHEET I- ,.,.., W C1 .0 u- r....._= g. 1..„ m imint--,---- irrft t - it— L.-- tr.- I , ,., i I EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEGEND gpm'nits srrE Es wr wmiecn ROOD 0.041000.[5 IT WM.SOO FEET Or SEXSSTIVE AREAS OR 1.11.4.„ I=1 ' ,,, PRE CONSTRUCTION,CLEARING,AND DEMOLITION NOTES' - ARCHITECTURE - t-.-•. 'l STIP MST 144.4.0.0T P.O.ICE mr.sr CONSMUCr 1645 NW HOYT',VIAND OR 9720 / ' 'VI. 503 444 MO sTo 51-4e4y,Ro • ' .. • • JTE / ;* X / ,,,,',,,,,,,,,A,r OarISTRUCT/ON MEASURES1.01-0SEAPPLED „ i t4ArrpillE01.01111.011.110,10,TME PROJECT AnOrrpl.ME,,,513RE/121101.,BUT NST / X )k( \ e SLOPE[44.5(WITH OM,PROTECTION1 OEM WM 9JRFACF ROUGHE.G...... NOTE TO[0..1,00.CCOOPATE TkEE REMOVAL MO IDIESUMG GAS SERVICE T • BUNN.ISE WTI OWNal ,..-..... CCOMPLATE WORX W1-111 i X r ED w.....Vr.TY X X moTVER \ FArtS coemarrat , / , • SHALL 0011STROCI A R07 ,,. . ‘ cals-nurrEsx ernmE ',, . , tr.1.44r \ _. tri 3 , MARA 1 A , 1,INANN Ail,INAG: . ., ASHINGTON S llAf ROAD Q E ' / , , /' 0 0 -0— 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ,...........1r,,,c4 TERRACE 0 "' X X X X • GLENN , X wrvinoun k0 rFET FRC. C7 • ,, PROVER,ME KW Ce X ' APARTMENTS (-, / - x x , . ...„ ... -. x . , • X x x / — --......... ow— / , • >, , , RELATED NW XX 1,,r,'X''' ' / ... i t >0< / . .,/lx. ; MIR.POWER DIMING CM,.TO BE ,,/ X X ' Tigard,9 640 S OGREEN2 B3 U R G i,t77Wf.';c-\\ ' '777' .. OMR SUMS 1. ' --",......, , :.•1 ............ ...... ,,,=,,,,,,..,,,,, , 1 . ......t ge,c...... MUM.WOW,SET FOLLY Ilte3 DI MIS ARM [ --,..y. PROPERTY UNE HERE , 4 • .., , • ., X _ : ' ,,.. •AI iiii ,,' • • ,.. NT._ —• 4, „...,Cs. ..,....." 0 0 4 0 0 ,_4. ,, 0 ..0_,_ 0 0 0 _ ,0_, 0 , .1- .£1441R,MIER ilk0,1 „, DEMOLMON WONG SET F‘.".omECTLIff':''''''''''.:FC:if":3ZIF:''00"71'''=Cartel"07a YU" PROFERMR.HERE PROPERTY ENE MERE 11111ORM III.KU MOCA t , ' Lt NNLNA AC.-1,1,1 ‘NIV N i w CLEARING AND DEMOLITION (I) EROSION AND SEDIMENT F- CONTROL PLAN PLAN SCALE Igmj C 1 •1 GRADING AND UTILITY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONSTRUMOX .21111.618.1110.2BIA.CrarraEG ORO..mmH A.Mw M OY.0.FTRlnsm NOTES: vETY�.EArrn'rtvwos. OCIMI SwL 11011� ETMAtuNemer Tra sa.N c2 < vv...Ssmnw MHa.HALL BE MACED INA6.3ENnr� .w:cv.BOY CONC.. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEGEND 23, aTMLRmsEwnomzm rs,auu:rrsss uu.'eDD.,"HE w rtnAHIDUT HOD62 KBE ...YE nwRw660115 �nua XAMVE TE M. MrN>;.Sa E.RE .mm srO.co111/1 OUN.TSTNe I. mu amewrem. R unc1 aoRE...6.1Gzs.n r.Mr ME.ms'wau�rmsiON�x.101.MvsaES r.I m+ou+E Tun WW1 mBO m ^t WATER ARCHITECTURE ` M`. rvenanl Ran.,x XnmsPN�m,NETIM. :❑. e> 2,GaETRRnrennN °r woo, 9.0ADNG sTRM MAww warr.xrPMgm M..P s RM.2..<M.I.5.1 RM.,INTO 16IR NW NOYT PORTLAHO.OR YTTDY znv (wERr wErcmO TOE STC.wMEN MI. O raw mfT nmrEcnON 503 NR4R00 8 COXSTRI.T.ENTRANCES SO.OE 111.6122.21.312...MG OF aga+vw inxawez SEED eEOPmG Aro aREWmm�nStaE tMs �RnrID RImLeE mCN RFAamGuwuRlE rozN,S ru,mmEcnCxN mEVEx, �o-snmwr1.r' ...S.M.Mtalrv. A,MNhRwASEEaN6 wzm AmrGWo .wEws ARE rcMraux ma»E om. ,xf ru,ERru.mTME STORM WATER SYSTEM rxrNnlnroTMEg McanWR. "'�� MP�A.NwnE.10.2. M..2arOffREo.rnrn�CrmnronwM.uraonsrE.Ev Pro wKTxi mA omen nvrRwEOERAsys .srR.w HnaRaG,noon pm.cm WATER lRuo¢roamrwn SoruAGE a SEoaaxr MD SEINMNT-4.. 0 J,.er lum C erin,.LLC uruR orNrARo Ezzruw.gx srs*oE STD ST2.182.0 tYP 3,332 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLBM IMPLEMENTATION:AEer etc l Must BE m Ae.2 zUrnwxu.MP / . mtirerr.'zxw KTrvma. MOP mcdRRMBrHEraE yuRtHxwxwERATpNswu a 3„232e32.02 rMv° THESE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PUNS / \ ♦,�\ rnAIN MATE.,E MO REWM ME.oaTpN tr.sramH NuA wzu BE worm, ASSUME"DRY WEATHER"CONSTRUCTION."WET WEATHER-CONSTRUCTION MEASURES NEED TO BE • (moW rm u®.NZHrdwrw)sHM.E APPLIED BETWEEN OCTOBER IST AND MAY 3IST EST.mrAMENr Or RIM GRACE A. Na • rsHowx cm TrasE Mrs / i / '' wrmwrflY MATTOG 9uu ffm it V .YE OVER MxnEszunzuEWIOTOBER, qa: �b \\.. M OVER N.em„�mru'n0.Tuerz <..R.NE \ \*•4` ..ALL.RPMWn.N.EMnmEs 5.0 OE@6TM10.MO W.VM°20.11011 SHEET NOTES q`y\ TO mE STO.W.M.r 5262.1312..16.uo SOB wnw. 1 IMF.NO1ES OSM. p.,1s BOB BROS.2mmRa / ( IMxmh i77 4'\ \�� 336. swu W marnux®HTar..262.cvnvmc �I LLav)-xmzs \`\\ mmmMd m \\\4 rwwHTION rosrrauA,rox / 1/ .'\\\\\ / //�n \� \\\\ WET WEATHER SESRCHEROSION CONTROL NOTE: = / / LR \ P\ II mMPBEWAEP.OLIGEFNLro<M.BEM1..xN1BUB..nnwONEWERMnTm 33 11.266SEGEEIRERPM.03 0RM.axMORTORL.SED aMM.xT .REEo..R1.a.oa NMN6.NLM N,a NYP�,E 0 N�M„H2r.L N�R..LL.r0M rrGRUN.,ULLYA, R a„ 0Naa � NM 6P mPMN .E 0Pr3 833M�o TERRACE \ \\.\ '''''' ''''RR.EEr.-7:17 ALrm.,rG,M MMRL.r'''''' AAwT _ , mn,pffw�Oo.L WMr,LnaMNN� �cewnx�mOo�� / .T�n.RD.Mn..Rm',EnmTNEEroRaERHaarY rEr�,aR GLENN c //� e� `' I APARTMENTS . /I -- \ v,, a: i. 1 / , M .LLmENmNL,>oxE I ASHINROAD SQUARE / :, j/( \ �R \ „ FO 50 R, m,.„,�„_:�,.A i 0 RELATED NW / °\ \+ FS0.2-wm O J ?\ ,`v: • • a •' • Au o/ / \ f \,, V` ---- --- - N� —. — .,--V— �O�.ONmr,RNo® 9640 SW GREEN BURG or/ . / \.? \\ „ - —�•- �� --T �; a / // � — y— ———-� /—— Tigard,OR 97223 !Ill- O — ^ m O aA (1 2/ , / '' L--- ;.. M E, I a2 RERH:r.E, r MM -0 , f� 1 1 11 I n 1 • LL� OWWI N. 1. r •.. • ,.• 4 zML • ` OW _ • — • Part .: Y -r 2 T 32'.1 - PSR E!{R—DAR— PXx— ILGYZV vnr eE—._R. PWt—j v P R —ERR — Xx 1 T—, I Nmn RLe Ew g'• PM — PYnx PRR DR ' r.M1upzNn t• J+'ieL��j [.11 Q N r a; m'A newarr .Mwmw: / No® I.MAQO PLAN SCALE W GRADING AND UN ROSI :'/! N C DIMEN CTION EROSION AND I/ SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN • J� _ 1 Ma xP n. . . , a C1 .2 GRAONIG AND MDT EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONSTRUCTION CONAIGUIUTION MOWS WEANIER.PERIODS,NGORSTAWARALE. 02 < NOTES. RACE Fro EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEGEND moR ONE Or TUE AREAS aOUD SB SEE m ERR OF Loom. slx Her Oi mum RTESS.roEE CLEARED wires IT VAJrS AUT110/128, ERE LrneN DTnuMCE SSE RESTORATIO NNA MIUSL PE T MACES ER PRIATE "1 DWARF 1 AC I ,wo 4O.E,E.SFED,AC E5,,.wr IRE OR,L EROSION CONTROL LTA,NOU,S SHALL �wD m> � "w w� ARCHITECTURE MI PUN"m 't B..TPANA D,wr,..w�. p easnraGMEI-mm,KTieH 1 WAS.EAMP.l En AEON, SxmINO mow ruaDc OR OTHER AMR..MEASURES ELASTIC wieMv.wwo,,,,,,uM RiINa.BYTO • 16A5 NW HOYi PORTLANO.OR I)M9 x.TURF RE EEsnr EOA BY AVG, TIE BTCR1 WAR SYSTEM s SOJ 4A zzm0 TIRE I.AwETORemVE Tm�rtnAS,OR PERANNm SEEDING.AllrwW TIE OIMTaLETxn AMOeu„T.�FOR THE DuRANoN Or THE RROIECT. IBA USE aa:BAN As oiwecAMs,BERMS.Aro DR AT woREcncxromEreD O NEW INLET wmrtCr�Ov SURFACE RpNM,rtD Br FEW amen-wAumG w THEE.OF MUER AwMONA1NFAwuS INCLUDING,BUT NA UTrtw TO,n.WASHES,STREET RUNOFF MON REAOANGDILOwRGE BMWS ARPRow NMEMENTA SURFACE RaIarxINGOmira SEED ter.;AND .naR„ ERG ANSWM/N MAY BE BE REQUIRED TOENSRETRt u PAYED -0—Q•5®MEXI.ORCL REM.RUNOFF WLam ATmoTmvu SEaA�R,wrtM.mROra AREAS AN Tar CLEAN wamEmuwTIINaTEE vwrzcT. THE /ERVING REAL COAT,wTEMNsromET,TA WATER ' FM TO MENA!,TT. mmwtuxOT� A . -MATING CONTOURSr3•• USE OF AMAMI.MEET PROSICTIdtMEASIAIES ALL INLET PRmtcnox BM NEST NANAGEN.r PRACTICE •TEMPORARY SLOPE STABARATION NEASUPS SAIALS RAW.COVERING 10 SATORATED MATERIALS TUC ARE MAULED oFE-srrt MUST BE TRANSPORTED Ai 0,1•17 cormnucr J ' cm.AvmmWD,p1ASNs SHEETING,STRAW m.a,w woOD CAWS.ORWATAR-n Tuns nwrt mw.CA or SEaBrNr.ro smns1,... RpwNRr MACONTROL 1=A^Ilrn.II5,.555....e.III_ NAM NATIONAL POLLUTANT DILOuaCE EUMINnM SYBBI m TYPICAL I EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL WNP IMPLEMENTATION:/ 1 r1 ALL BASE ESC MAASUP.,fD.ET mort.wr•maMEER SWIM,CaDwit. APPROVED IN A11111111.1111.10100,PRIOR COMMENCEMENT OS / / • m CONSTRUCTION tOcwTBiN %SmmRt F.RE.AwnlEum,eO THESE EROSIIXE AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS f / \ A DOFtaTr Ei¢.BV n sB..EENAtEFrrrra.I+wRTm ASSUME TRY WEATHER,ONSiRUCT10N'NET WEATHER.CONSTRUCTION MEASURES NEED TO BE ac ® SFOYU.w Try Pws wOwINO NALERBmmr BBBEEcR.N.E EEIN APPLIED BETWEEN OC'IOBER 1ST AND MAT 315i. SNAIL N.�OVER A..PROSw was BY a.OBER I. .RrTAeF / • ' TO NA STORM WATER ssrD+nmcTwmw AND SITE PAVING PRIOR SHEET NOTES / P AcrmnEs 6 MEET Nx BtwtIN�NRUCL nRroBTEErrawwING R.wxG xoTESAwoETrss wRERosnuwwmmt I / i. # \� STABILIZATION / / i /I' `• •• W imunnwN. \ ET WEATHER EROSION CONTROL NOTE. .`' $ s / . aRM ` ; °SO" °"°. ew T ION I CONTROL DWI B / II a i ,FfE / BAWD.DIE MST.MID EXPEDITED BRE COMMONS EMIG THE WEE WEATHER EROSION P.VEHEY.1.691.5 .4) \ (SEE FROS1011 MIEVENMON ANS SEDIMENT CO..Y...AND DESIGN MANUA,.OWN.0 FOR REQUIAENENTS, , F.W.A.WATER FOCIIIIIES.FIF•PEEDIIND SMALL BE MS..°IN ALL BROS MOS.TO DIDIER FLOW OR InurnAnox,FREE Ram.nuoi gull MOT BELSED IN•AEAs sum.TO ERNEADoR FIB.MATONS 4.- EINIER BE SEEDED 01.114E DES/GFO OR RACED EPSOR TO PUNTING OF PLUGS,CUTTINGS RM..RUSHES,OR lNE WEATHER MEASURES PRI°°ro° �� Aw TERRACE T 'i;l // I GLENN 1 o APARTMENTS zig WASHINGTON S / '''\4/\ x \ I wR,M. SQUARE / BUILDING 1 MALL ROAD ,.e. I // W ,� • O RELATED NW cri / `�" — 7 O 9640SW GREENBURG / � - __ Tigard,OR 97223 // 1ETE_E.i.1 A tetra II T I l/ l 7 ' .x� ,. S.4 4. . •,iW,4,�a,:.44:ll NI "403i.3,646.se.h•�*L6:44.1`fl . mat spa t d,4,4, i,, 19134 I / •Y,•aa.a�R mkyq 4' ;�Ly6�1,0.4•$,�,g &N,a•� 3a a../1®a.y9,ba•a*sio 1 0 �N. ;� l/ ,` ,"> '' 8®r��a�tm?,�yrr.3,��®mow®ora�;a,�6' k r.,��+V,;ax.'s? 9. qp :'w (: NYMRM. RB�RM. ERR D rb c• l j lye' ii'. . m® ®®_' s* I " - / Ao®� • OrP BUILDING 2 I �: ,FE.zATBYI I //5 TONwRwnN rrty i C , P.WDBIRY. p / n // wAt A / / \ J aAw e�h �rll I•rv_ 11 •.a, I ,/ < a $, ! .Ate i•.a�;;xx x.4.;, .x x.. .v • I .:+A`..'R. ,.A @ a,,-. +6 R�a'a...a t •'�•9 3 A,A;b,:^a Q.•. ,.�r,6,,Os'a 2f h'$•?9, r z' :x yY` It7 w.Bmy.RN.R.TwDECIN,RINRN:RREA.O. - N :2•s,Ra.2 .F: a,.o,$a, ,a,a,•.;ga:e.,a o„r.ap,,•,,,,s.a�s•,w<aar Yr N,, ..y '.F .s,aw#..r......,�a.,.*.,.,cast.. ..as ?e..... .,,s,,:o.,ea.„..,,,s.*a .,,. /.. ";�!iaaa•a ca,„a;,.•n,,;,a,a:>�-.�....,..„e.,,,a•9..;, .t s.+, :„..ve,;�a •,.... >` „..,'. .• ,, 1 a„baD'.s B°•9:4.6..y,.,... a...,,, ..„..,.a;$:.8a R,r,o,e.O A:•9 k ;r �" I r �•.+-.�-m_,9-.. ��A:'d.w,'3�a .;_ ,:,..1 �«.w •. .��x z x ,r��'.-�.r'�X�Ce�'v _ �'� . • ila 0 f I f' i wAR1.w Es n W BUILDING CONSTRUCTION warrrR TrB FENCE AT TINE OF PLAN SCALLEE�I y AND SITE PAVING EROSION �I AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN wLI zD C1 .3 MO MIN VW MS NM MI IIT'- t- -- r-------- se se „, form -r---- C 2 < ARCHITECTURE 1645 NW HOYT PORTLAND OR MO, 503 444 2203 1.T...'::. Ilk RIPL - . = .7,1.4:472.,===..7.470,,,,.;,.,,,,., ,,...r.........,," 11- 1--,.. —6-- •-..."7.".--".:.=::::::::-.-zz-..-==.--7,=:.;".,17.-'---4:4--- .-..- 1 1 .......... I, I , - ---i f •il4r,47.17...=.7========7:,1.'"' I I :7- .-----,.----// '>.>,,f','r b4,:,-,' - -11 •j - I - I PLAN NEW ...,=,,,, ,,., ,,,,,, e. ,,,...,,,,n.....,..............,.................,,...,......,."....... m.44.\ Li:-- , ,-•...-- .—-..• ,F77717.77.:,-, "'X',:.,==`,..,===',X,..1:1,7,-.^-,'-',,,'"'L..*"1:,=== MIE111191 .*7:,,,A:;,-4,...,,,,,,,,,, ••=memuimm -.4,-.7iTESZ,-.7.-717,f..°7.•-----'thr..4:::::-.a-.71...15-74.:Zii::: III ESINIEM 1 L .......: _ , , , ;.., r:27,:= '=r"'mtola%trZL==Z7rZrZT:;'n=:.%Z=TL'.... lIX WittliattrI4' ;'? ..,.. 4LZW";'?1' , ::--:;....;Z.724::7WOE'' // -Y---,--— "k,V9,ir44,i'AWV:itn4°,1t, Tn. P Cl_El..E ..a.ES 17,,-— Li-710EL ----------------------, , ...404(1,16.010.1.TO MCI)-IKIV Firriii7a a MULL 10,P1411 0E90 BOW ............,................... TERRACE STANDARD EROSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE cie,,,,,,e7rs,,„,,, I II* WASH (DF2I VF -T HROUGH) T NOTES FOR SITES LESS THAN 1 cl...w.Ors,mo. GLENN -0,40,0 C)0 PROTECTIVE FENCING '-' 0 on scoa 0ACRE no scur APARTMENTS RELATED NW — ,,...,.... , ....-, 9640 SW GREENBURG I 1 7r.1-70.1 Z.7.7,4 ZnaimaiNME ,Ec.- --• ' ';:` - ..... .....,----. ry_w_LLp ''ZIASI:,'' MOH NLET 4.. \ 1 , ' CA 1,-11 BASIN INSER1 T4.74.'41.1...IWAT... VZIFIsVmsrlgT.V<T,.. ...Fifth& CONCRETE WASH011 I- INLET PROTECTION INLET PROTECTION -mir SEPIMENT FENCE CleanWater4"Smvices ClealMid:rs ,„ TYPE 4 (3,...w4,yirse,y4' •4: TYPE 5 , CleanWaer Servires FEtio7r.7:srg-r==ZoTolgr'" ''''-'"-... '-'.-.' ..'".''.-.. ,• .,„,,,,, ''''''''-"-.. ° --.`-. nf,z,ow ..,o4,1`T=cr.oUsso.."`"7:mor""A.; 0 ''''' ® b SCALE C) MO SCNE 0 MD SOLE LF.,...igggftift?.: Nze . EROSION AND SEDIMENT VS CONTROL DETAILS F. EX t C1 .4 , r! • JTE Janet Turner Engineering, LLC iwr APPENDIX F O&M PROTOCOL Oft mai CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS StormFilter Inspection and Maintenance Procedures , . �}4 4 ti - maw 7".8 ff 4-4111 The Stormwater Management 5tcrm Fi Iter� "W Maintenance Guidelines In addition to these two activities, it is important to check The primary purpose of the Stormwater Management the condition of the StormFilter unit after major storms for StormFilter® is to filter and prevent pollutants from entering our potential damage caused by high flows and for high sediment accumulation that may be caused by localized erosion in the Aim waterways. Like any effective filtration system, periodically these drainage area. It may be necessary to adjust the inspection/ pollutants must be removed to restore the StormFilter to its full maintenance schedule depending on the actual operating efficiency and effectiveness. conditions encountered by the system. In general, inspection 41w Maintenance requirements and frequency are dependent on the activities can be conducted at any time, and maintenance should pollutant load characteristics of each site. Maintenance activities occur, if warranted, during dryer months in late summer to early may be required in the event of a chemical spill or due to fall. iwr excessive sediment loading from site erosion or extreme storms. It is a good practice to inspect the system after major storm events. Maintenance Frequency The primary factor for determining frequency of maintenance for Maintenance Procedures the StormFilter is sediment loading. tow Although there are many effective maintenance options,we believe the following procedure to be efficient, using common A properly functioning system will remove solids from water by equipment and existing maintenance protocols. The following trapping particulates in the porous structure of the filter media ow two-step procedure is recommended:: inside the cartridges. The flow through the system will naturally decrease as more and more particulates are trapped. Eventually 1. Inspection the flow through the cartridges will be low enough to require oaf • Inspection of the vault interior to determine the need for replacement. It may be possible to extend the usable span of the maintenance. cartridges by removing sediment from upstream trapping devices on a routine as-needed basis, in order to prevent material from 2. Maintenance being re-suspended and discharged to the StormFilter treatment Ow • Cartridge replacement system. • Sediment removal The average maintenance lifecycle is approximately 1-5 years. Inspection and Maintenance Timing ow Site conditions greatly influence maintenance requirements. At least one scheduled inspection should take place per year with StormFilter units located in areas with erosion or active maintenance following as warranted. construction may need to be inspected and maintained more often than those with fully stabilized surface conditions. ww+ First, an inspection should be done before the winter season. During the inspection the need for maintenance should be Regulatory requirements or a chemical spill can shift maintenance determined and, if disposal during maintenance will be required, timing as well. The maintenance frequency may be adjusted as samples of the accumulated sediments and media should be additional monitoring information becomes available during the ow inspection program. Areas that developknown problems should obtained. P P 9 be inspected more frequently than areas that demonstrate no Second, if warranted, a maintenance(replacement of the filter problems, particularly after major storms. Ultimately, inspection kiwo cartridges and removal of accumulated sediments)should be and maintenance activities should be scheduled based on the performed during periods of dry weather. historic records and characteristics of an individual StormFilter system or site. It is recommended that the site owner develop iwo a database to properly manage StormFilter inspection and maintenance programs.. i -. wW iiii ft 2 'wig - Maintenance Decision Tree <k The need for maintenance is typically based on results of the inspection. The following Maintenance Decision Tree should be used as u a general guide. (Other factors,such as Regulatory Requirements, may �,�„ ', "'a ., ii o ` need to be considered). x �z Please note Stormwater Management StormFilter devices installed '�" '' -i , t. {° downstream of,or integrated within,a stormwater storage facility "'" typically have different operational parameters(i.e.draindown time). In these cases,the inspector must understand the relationship between a' 3-. ems ,s the retention/detention facility and the treatment system by evaluating '_`� , site specific civil engineering plans,or contacting the engineer of record, '" ` ` and make adjustments to the below guidance as necessary. Sediment las :Ip'IT:-..?'1/4--' . deposition depths and patterns within the StormFilter are likely to k ,. £ be quite different compared to systems without upstream storage . , '1i and therefore shouldn't be used exclusively to evaluate a need for b.. 4, * �� x maintenance. us Inspection Procedures 1. Sediment loading on the vault floor. a. If >4" of accumulated sediment, maintenance is The primary goal of an inspection is to assess the condition of the required. iii cartridges relative to the level of visual sediment loading as it relates to decreased treatment capacity. It may be desirable to conduct this 2. Sediment loading on top of the cartridge. inspection during a storm to observe the relative flow through the a. If >1/4"of accumulation, maintenance is required. wt filter cartridges. If the submerged cartridges are severely plugged, then typically large amounts of sediments will be present and very 3. Submerged cartridges. little flow will be discharged from the drainage pipes. If this is the a. If >4"of static water above cartridge bottom for more tabcase,then maintenance is warranted and the cartridges need to be than 24 hours after end of rain event, maintenance replaced. is required. (Catch basins have standing water in the cartridge bay.) Warning: In the case of a spill,the worker should abort , „ inspection activities until the proper guidance is obtained. 4. Plugged media. Notify the local hazard control agency and Contech Engineered a.While not required in all cases, inspection of the media Solutions immediately. within the cartridge may provide valuable additional + + information. To conduct an inspection: Important: Inspection should be performed by a person who is b. If pore space between media granules is absent, familiar with the operation and configuration of the StormFilter maintenance is required. oat treatment unit and the unit's role, relative to detention or 5. Bypass condition. retention facilities onsite. a. If inspection is conducted during an average rain fall 1. If applicable, set up safety equipment to protect and notify event and StormFilter remains in bypass condition lila surrounding vehicle and pedestrian traffic. (water over the internal outlet baffle wall or submerged 2. Visually inspect the external condition of the unit and take notes cartridges), maintenance is required. `'' concerning defects/problems. 6. Hazardous material release. ill 3. Open the accessportals to the vault and allow the system vent. P Y a. If hazardous material release(automotive fluids or other) 4. Without entering the vault, visually inspect the inside of the is reported, maintenance is required. unit, and note accumulations of liquids and solids. ail 7. Pronounced scum line. 5. Be sure to record the level of sediment build-up on the floor of the vault, in the forebay, and on top of the cartridges. If flow a. If pronounced scum line(say >_ 1/4" thick) is present is occurring, note the flow of water per drainage pipe. Record above top cap, maintenance is required. wr' all observations. Digital pictures are valuable for historical documentation. 6. Close and fasten the access portals. to 7. Remove safety equipment. 8. If appropriate, make notes about the local drainage area relative to ongoing construction, erosion problems, or high loading of „ It iiiii other materials to the system. 9. Discuss conditions that suggest maintenance and make decision as to whether or not maintenance is needed. '- Maintenance ii ► , Depending on the configuration of the particular system, , r r maintenance personnel will be required to enter the vault to "t °' . '' 4 war perform the maintenance. . '7 Important: If vault entry is required, OSHA rules for confined „1 ,` 4:- ; ,, space entry must be followed. � a �� wrr ` a, Filter cartridge replacement should occur during dry weather. :II i It may be necessary to plug the filter inlet pipe if base flows is so ,1, : , occurring. " ' .. . ..‘41‘14" •'''* Replacement cartridges can be delivered to the site or customers = facility. Information concerning how to obtain the replacement 4,,,, cartridges is available from Contech Engineered Solutions. _ � ' Warning: In the case of a spill, the maintenance personnel should abort maintenance activities until the proper guidance .. $u um is obtained. Notify the local hazard control agency and .� .y� Contech Engineered Solutions immediately. a -- .,' - fit' To conduct cartridge replacement and sediment removal 7'�� :� I I. maintenance: „* 1. If applicable, set up safety equipment to protect maintenance , ,,,,, .'.` �,. ._ Ipersonnel and pedestrians from site hazards. ~ 2. Visually inspect the external condition of the unit and take notes concerning defects/problems. 3. Open the doors(access portals)to the vault and allow the ow system to vent. 4. Without entering the vault, give the inside of the unit, Important: Care must be used to avoid damaging the including components, a general condition inspection. cartridges during removal and installation.The cost of aur repairing components damaged duringmaintenance will be 5. Make notes about the external and internal condition of p 9 p 9 the vault. Give particular attention to recording the level of the responsibility of the owner. sediment build-up on the floor of the vault, in the forebay, C. Set the used cartridge aside or load onto the hauling lei and on top of the internal components. truck. 6. Using appropriate equipment offload the replacement cartridges(up to 150 lbs. each)and set aside. D. Continue steps a through c until all cartridges have been ° ' 7. Remove used cartridges from the vault using one of the removed. following methods: Method 2: Method 1: A. This activity will require that maintenance personnel enter A. This activity will require that maintenance personnel enter the vault to remove the cartridges from the under drain the vault to remove the cartridges from the under drain manifold and place them under the vault opening for „o manifold and place them under the vault opening for lifting (removal). Disconnect each filter cartridge from the lifting (removal). Disconnect each filter cartridge from the underdrain connector by rotating counterclockwise 1/4 of underdrain connector by rotating counterclockwise 1/4 of a turn. Roll the loose cartridge, on edge,to a convenient a turn. Roll the loose cartridge, on edge, to a convenient spot beneath the vault access. kilo spot beneath the vault access. B. Unscrew the cartridge cap. Using appropriate hoisting equipment, attach a cable C. Remove the cartridge hood and float. from the boom, crane, or tripod to the loose cartridge. 'r D. At location under structure access, tipthe cartridge on its Contact Contech Engineered Solutions for suggested 9 attachment devices. side. ,,,,, B. Remove the used cartridges(up to 250 lbs. each)from the E. Empty the cartridge onto the vault floor. Reassemble the vault. empty cartridge. F. Set the empty, used cartridge aside or load onto the __ hauling truck. G. Continue steps a through e until all cartridges have been removed. so iWi 8. Remove accumulated sediment from the floor of the Material Disposal vault and from the forebay. This can most effectively be The accumulated sediment found in stormwater treatment accomplished by use of a vacuum truck. and conveyance systems must be handled and disposed of in yW, 9. Once the sediments are removed, assess the condition of the accordance with regulatory protocols. It is possible for sediments vault and the condition of the connectors. to contain measurable concentrations of heavy metals and 10.Using the vacuum truck boom, crane, or tripod, lower and organic chemicals(such as pesticides and petroleum products). install the new cartridges. Once again, take care not to Areas with the greatest potential for high pollutant loading ter damage connections. include industrial areas and heavily traveled roads. 11.Close and fasten the door. Sediments and water must be disposed of in accordance with iiii 12.Remove safety equipment. all applicable waste disposal regulations. When scheduling 13.Finally, dispose of the accumulated materials in accordance maintenance, consideration must be made for the disposal of with applicable regulations. Make arrangements to return the solid and liquid wastes. This typically requires coordination with Yw used empty cartridges to Contech Engineered Solutions. a local landfill for solid waste disposal. For liquid waste disposal a number of options are available including a municipal vacuum truck decant facility, local waste water treatment plant or on-site treatment and discharge. Related Maintenance Activities - Performed on an as-needed basis ,sn t k a , si• k Y 5 _ f r y� p StormFilter units are often just one of many structures in a more R �.. • K� y� comprehensive stormwater drainage and treatment system. iwr In order for maintenance of the StormFilter to be successful, it is imperative that all other components be properly maintained. - t' The maintenance/repair of upstream facilities should be carried out prior to StormFilter maintenance activities. a In addition to considering upstream facilities, it is also important to correct any problems identified in the drainage area. Drainage lyii area concerns may include: erosion problems, heavy oil loading, l's. , i Bra,R and discharges of inappropriate materials. t,� eat � 1 1:41 ,<• 1 it.M.V.*'""'1. iil 5 $ Rx°q Pn Yf .,..14,iiz....4..„,;,,,,,., 1i;,f...y1:114::::014' : gq X ^s. 0.-. k Ka[ I Inspection Report +�Yr Date: Personnel: Location: System Size: Months in Service: System Type: Vault Li Cast-In-Place Linear Catch Basin Manhole Other: Sediment Thickness in Forebay: Date: Sediment Depth on Vault Floor: Sediment Depth on Cartridge Top(s): Structural Damage: fir Estimated Flow from Drainage Pipes(if available): Cartridges Submerged: Yes No Depth of Standing Water: StormFilter Maintenance Activities(check off if done and give description) Trash and Debris Removal: Minor Structural Repairs: LH' Drainage Area Report Excessive Oil Loading: Yes No -- Source: Fz, Sediment Accumulation on Pavement: Yes No Source: Erosion of Landscaped Areas: Yes No Source: Items Needing Further Work: of Owners should contact the local public works department and inquire about how the department disposes of their street waste residuals. I Other Comments: L Review the condition reports from the previous inspection visits. Y�i StormFilter Maintenance Report Date: Personnel: Location: System Size: it System Type: Vault Cast-In-Place Linear Catch Basin Manhole Other: List Safety Procedures and Equipment Used: - System Observations Months in Service: Oil in Forebay(if present): Yes No Sediment Depth in Forebay(if present): 6161 Sediment Depth on Vault Floor: Sediment Depth on Cartridge Top(s): Mr Structural Damage: Drainage Area Report Excessive Oil Loading: Yes No Source: Sediment Accumulation on Pavement: Yes No Source: Erosion of Landscaped Areas: Yes No Source: StormFilter Cartridge Replacement Maintenance Activities Remove Trash and Debris: Yes III No I I Details: Replace Cartridges: Yes I No 7 Details: Sediment Removed: Yes No Details: Quantity of Sediment Removed (estimate?): Minor Structural Repairs: Yes No Details: Residuals(debris, sediment) Disposal Methods: Notes: iatir li o iYr ass Its! 0 RECYCLED PAPER C=:I; NTECH® ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS ©2020 CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC, A QUIKRETE COMPANY 800-338-1122 www.ContechES.com MOP All Rights Reserved. Printed in the USA. 1 }' Contech Engineered Solutions LLC provides site solutions for the civil engineering industry. Contech's portfolio includes bridges, drainage, sanitary sewer, stormwater and earth stabilization products. For information on other Contech division offerings,visit www.ContechES.com or call 800.338.1122. Support • Drawings and specifications are available at www.conteches.com. • Site-specific design support is available from our engineers. NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS A WARRANTY APPLICATIONS SUGGESTED HEREIN ARE DESCRIBED ONLY TO HELP READERS MAKE THEIR OWN EVALUATIONS AND DECISIONS,AND ARE NEITHER GUARANTEES NOR WARRANTIES OF SUITABILITY FOR ANY APPLICATION.CONTECH MAKES NO WARRANTY WHATSOEVER,EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, RELATED TO THE APPLICATIONS,MATERIALS,COATINGS,OR PRODUCTS DISCUSSED HEREIN.ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED BY CONTECH. SEE CONTECH'S CONDITIONS OF SALE(AVAILABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM/COS)FOR MORE INFORMATION. 800.338.1122 www.conteches.com StormFilter Inspection and Maintenance Procedures 4/20 �.�k .°L 1) Seyiy. t ; and } P J ,:_ `j�ygl i. �. ,K StormTech R-ni.fli� �+4, a{�rr T.#� �-5 r�� 4'ix 1#�a 'F- ki�..�W G�-:5�: ![��- Aft M 12.1 ISOLATOR ROW INSPECTION r twoRegular inspection and maintenance are essential ":If''' b to assure a properly functioning stormwater system. Inspection is easily accomplished through the manhole or ` ;' optional inspection ports of an Isolator Row.Please follow 'r am local and OSHA rules for a confined space entry. t / Inspection ports can allow inspection to be accomplished P completely from the surface without the need for a MI confined space entry. Inspection ports provide visual access to the system with the use of a flashlight.A stadia ," rod may be inserted to determine the depth of sediment. If upon visual inspection it is found that sediment has accumulated to an average depth exceeding 3"(76 mm), cleanout is required. aiii A StormTech Isolator Row should initially be inspected Looking down the Isolator Row immediately after completion of the site's construction. While every effort should be made to prevent sediment from entering the system during construction,it is during irri this time that excess amounts of sediments are most likely to enter any stormwater system. Inspection and ', ` • maintenance,if necessary,should be performed prior � 0 , - - ..R ► to passing responsibility over to the site's owner.Once =r,;,4i _„ 47- t'i 5 iimi in normal service,a StormTech Isolator Row should be „:,.;a.w►,o ' '„', inspected bi-annually until an understanding of the sites --- r- , V characteristics is developed.The site's maintenance \ f ^- ow manager can then revise the inspection schedule based on experience or local requirements. i 12.2 ISOLATOR ROW MAINTENANCE ,� • . �"4 t • ow JetVac maintenance is recommended if sediment has i x ' , 1 been collected to an average depth of 3"(76 mm)inside fi �', °� 4 the Isolator Row. More frequent maintenance may be 4 r 1 9 a , 4 , 0, , o : required to maintain minimum flow rates through the A typical JetVac truck(This is not a StormTech product.) aa Isolator Row.The JetVac process utilizes a high pressure water nozzle to propel itself down the Isolator Row while scouring and suspending sediments.As the nozzle is retrieved,a wave of suspended sediments is flushed " back into the manhole for vacuuming. Most sewer and pipe maintenance companies have vacuum/JetVac r _ combination vehicles. Fixed nozzles designed for culverts r` woo or large diameter pipe cleaning are preferable. Rear facing `, . jets with an effective spread of at least 45"(1143 mm) are best.The JetVac process shall only be performed ', on StormTech Rows that have AASHTO class 1 woven ow geotextile over the foundation stone(ADS 315ST or equal). ,A A:N f NRT� IYM Examples of culvert cleaning nozzles appropriate for Isolator Row maintenance.(These are not StormTech products). NA Call StormTech at 860.529.8188 or 888.892.2694 or visit our website at www.stormtech.com for technical and product information. 31 iwri r i.� 1�? r0 i . .4 i & e fx,. ,. 4i 1,;/' 44/11 STORMTECH ISOLATORTM ROW-STEP-BY-STEP 12.3 ECCENTRIC PIPE HEADER INSPECTION MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES Theses guidelines do not supercede a pipe ism Step 1)Inspect Isolator Row for sediment manufacturer's recommended l&M procedures.Consult A)Inspection ports(if present) with the manufacturer of the pipe header system for specific I&M procedures. Inspection of the header system ,r„ i. Remove lid from floor box frame should be carried out quarterly.On sites which generate ii. Remove cap from inspection riser higher levels of sediment more frequent inspections may be necessary. Headers may be accessed through risers, iii. Using a flashlight and stadia rod, measure access ports or manholes. Measurement of sediment iiiir depth of sediment may be taken with a stadia rod or similar device.Cleanout iv. If sediment is at,or above,3"(76 mm)depth of sediment should occur when the sediment volume proceed to Step 2. If not proceed to Step 3. has reduced the storage area by 25%or the depth of rr B)All Isolator Rows sediment has reached approximately 25%of the diameter of the structure. i. Remove cover from manhole at upstream end of Isolator Row 12.4 ECCENTRIC PIPE MANIFOLD MAINTENANCE i+rr ii. Using a flashlight,inspect down Isolator Cleanout of accumulated material should be Row through outlet pipe accomplished by vacuum pumping the material from the header.Cleanout should be accomplished during dry 1. Follow OSHA regulations for confined weather.Care should be taken to avoid flushing sediments sr space entry if entering manhole out through the outlet pipes and into the chamber rows. 2. Mirrors on poles or cameras may be used Eccentric Header Step-by-Step Maintenance to avoid a confined space entry Procedures so iii. If sediment is at or above the lower row of sidewall holes[approximately 3"(76 mm)] 1. Locate manholes connected to the manifold system proceed to Step 2. If not proceed to Step 3. 2. Remove grates or covers wr+ Step 2)Clean out Isolator Row using the JetVac process 3. Using a stadia rod, measure the depth of sediment 4. If sediment is at a depth of about 25% pipe volume or A)A fixed floor cleaning nozzle with rear facing 25% pipe diameter proceed to step 5. If not proceed nozzle spread of 45"(1143 mm)or more is to step 6. es preferable 5. Vacuum pump the sediment. Do not flush sediment B)Apply multiple passes of JetVac until out inlet pipes. backflush water is clean 6. Replace grates and covers 4s. 7. Record depth and date and schedule next inspection C)Vacuum manhole sump as required during jetting or Step 3)Replace all caps, lids and covers Figure 21-Eccentric Manifold Maintenance Step 4)Inspect and clean catch basins and manholes 1,2,6 upstream of the StormTech system following local "W' guidelines. Figure 20-StormTech Isolator Row(not to scale) imp= 4146 3,4,5 q 111111111 IIIIIIIP� �� 1�8) 1)A) 2 tJ NSW iiii 41fr .., I #I r q r o��r iw��Iiw ' Please contact StormTech's Technical Services ____l�l_��i��Iil��i� it il�______ _li��lilrkil Department at 888 892 2894 for a spreadsheet to estimate cleaning intervals. MI i( 32 Call StormTech at 860.529.8188 or 888.892.2694 or visit our website at www.stormtech.com for technical and product information.