The URL can be used to link to this page

Report (85) SLT DQA-k- O(O \CA-CiC1 UCAT`r\ %Ni , Engineering RECEIVED PBSEnvironmental OCT 2 4 nu On OF TIGARD BUILDING DIV/SIO ? Drainage Report Project Location: Tigard Hampton Inn & Suites SW 69th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Project Type: Commercial and Public Improvements Corps Project Number: NWP-2016-100 DSL Project Number: 59310 Stormwater Design Manual/Guidelines: Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management Clean Water Services, 2007 Low Impact Development Approaches Handbook Clean Water Services, 2016 NOAA SLOPES V, 2014 Prepared by/Engineer/Applicant: Tim Leavitt, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer PBS Engineering and Environmental, Inc;,. 314 W 15th Street CC (1 ~� Vancouver, Washington 98660 OFFICE COPY (360) 567-2119 PRQiFs „cp ��GtN / ccs ; E •117 LEA`�� EXPIRES: 12/31/18 f May 2017 PBS Project No. 70976.000 � I Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 PLAN NARRATIVE 2 DESCTRIPTION OF APPLIED LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT 3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL 6 CONCLUSION 6 REFERENCES 7 SUPPORTING DATA Appendix A—Geotechnical Report Appendix B—Maintenance and Operational Manuals Appendix C—Site Maps Appendix D—Water Quality and Quantity Calculations Appendix E—Conveyance Calculations Appendix F—Stormwater Plan and Details May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 1 • Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. General The proposed Tigard Hampton Inn & Suites is located in Tigard, Oregon at the corner of SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street. The subject property occupies 80,703 SF (1.85 acres) on Washington County Assessor parcels ISI36DD02100, ISI36DD02200, ISI36DD02300, ISI36DD02400, ISI36DD02500, and road right-of-way (ROW) (Site). The proposed project includes the construction of one 4-story Hotel with an approximate 22,900 SF building footprint, associated parking lot, sidewalk, utility, stormwater facilities and landscape improvements. In addition, the adjacent public ROW(SW 69th Ave., SW Clinton St. and SW 70th Ave.) will be improved with new landscaping, sidewalk, curb/gutter, asphalt pavement roadway, and stormwater management facilities. 2. Existing Stormwater Facilities on and Adjacent to the Site No formal stormwater facilities currently exist. A surface water drainage channel traverses the Site, flowing from east to west. This drainage channel appears to collect surface runoff from both undeveloped property to the west, as well as the Site. Although culverts exist at the east and west terminus (property line of the Site and beneath both SW 69th and SW 70th Streets) of this channel, there is no readily apparent evidence of flows to and from the Site. The adjacent public ROW is aged infrastructure, with no formal stormwater facilities: • SW 69th Ave. road is paved with roadside surface water drainage channel flowing toward the south. • The SW 70th Ave. is an undeveloped gravel road and no observed surface water drainage route. • SW Clinton St. has both asphalt pavement and gravel sections, with roadside surface water drainage channel. There is an existing City of Tigard (COT) 12" concrete culvert inlet at the SW corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue which runs west along SW Clinton Street and discharges into Clean Water Services stormwater facilities. PLAN NARRATIVE 1. Stormwater Pollutants Generated by Project The pollutants generated by the project are: sediment, debris and total phosphorus. 2. Name and Status of Each Receiving Water Tualatin Watershed, Fanno Creek, temperature and nutrients 3. Known NPDES Permit or other Water Quality Degrading Activities nearby Durham STP by Clean Water Services, NPDES-DOM-A3, Permit#972631 4. Identify if project is in a groundwater management area or EPA-designated sole source aquifer The project is not in any groundwater management area. May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 2 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 5. Total Acres Contributing Impervious Area Clean Water Services requires all impervious areas to be treated and have flow control provided if there is discharge offsite. The pre- and post-development impervious areas are shown in the table below. Project Areas Impervious Area(acres) Pre-development Post-development Subject Property 0 1.60 Public ROW 0.36 0.91 DESCTRIPTION OF APPLIED LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT 1. Private Site Working in collaboration with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and COT officials, the project proposes to maximize opportunities to manage site-generated runoff onsite to the full extent possible onsite. Roof runoff will be collected and routed internally, and conveyed to either vegetated flow- through planters or outfall to the Site asphalt pavement. Site pervious and impervious surfaces will sheet flow or collected via catch basins and piping, and conveyed to onsite infiltration planters. The design of these infiltration planters includes maximizing the storage time of runoff, in order to increase opportunity for onsite infiltration. These proposed infiltration planters provide both treatment and flow control for site-generated surface water runoff. 2. Public Right-of-Way The proposed project includes public ROW improvements that dramatically improve the management of surface water runoff. As noted previously, no formal stormwater management facilities presently exist. The proposed project includes the construction of new infiltration planters to treat and retain the ROW-generated surface runoff. ROW runoff is routed through curb and sidewalk cuts, where flow will enter into the infiltration planter for management. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN This project is required to satisfy the design guidelines of NOAA, Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species (SLOPES V), and Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management(CWS). NOAA SLOPES V guidelines requires all stormwater quality treatment practices and facilities to be designed to accept and fully treat the volume of water equal to 50% of the cumulative rainfall from the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. The 50% factor is based on the Water Quality Design Storm Factor map (NOAA SLOPES V, page 27). The 2-year, 24-hour May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 p p Environmental 3 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 storm, according to the local isopluvial map, is 2.44 inches. Consequently, the water quality design storm is 1.22 inches. The flow control guidelines for CWS and NOAA SLOPES V requires the post-development peak flow rate to be less than or equal to the pre-development peak flow rate of the 42% of 2-year(NOAA SLOPES V, page 28), the 2-year, the 10-year, and 25-year 24-hour storm event(CWS, chapter 4 page 7). Industry standard HydroCAD software was used to calculate the peak flow rates for each design storm event. The on-site soil is identified as Quatama Loam, hydrologic group C, per the NRCS Soil Survey in Appendix C. Infiltration testing was performed in February of 2016 by PBS Engineering and Environmental (PBS) at approximately 5 feet below ground surface. No measureable infiltration was observed during the 4-hour test. Groundwater was not observed in test wells. For more details see the project Geotechnical Engineering Report in Appendix A. The proposed stormwater system consists of catch basins, infiltration planters and flow- through planters. Due to the lack of onsite infiltration, the proposed stormwater facilities have the capacity to treat and detain the calculated surface water runoff. We also anticipate some, but limited runoff retention onsite to occur. Calculated runoff generated by the design storm events is anticipated to be discharged AT or LESS than pre-development calculated runoff flow rates. 1. Assumptions used to Complete the Analysis Software and documents used to complete the analysis: • Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management(CWS) • Low Impact Development Approaches Handbook(LIDA) • HydroCAD Software The following assumptions were made to perform the analysis in HydroCAD: • Storms follow Type 1A distribution and have a 24-hour duration. • The following Curve Numbers (CN) were utilized for on-site conditions: - CN = 86 (pervious surfaces) - CN = 89 (gravel roads) - CN = 98 (impervious surfaces) Curve numbers for the site were determined using the Soil Conservation Service Technical Release Number 55 (NRCS TR-55). Stormwater quantity control was determined using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Method (SBUHYD). Rainfall depths per CWS used to calculate quantity control: Design storm (isopluvials): half of 2-year storm (water quality) = 1.22 inches 42% of 2-year storm = 1.02 inches 2-year storm = 2.44 inches 10-year storm = 3.45 inches 25-year storm = 3.90 inches May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 4 t 1 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 2. Water Quality Analysis and Design According to the CWS all impervious surfaces require treatment. NOAA SLOPES V design guidelines require the treatment storm to be half of the 2-year 24-hour storm event(1.22 inches).The proposed treatment methods for onsite runoff are infiltration planters and flow- through planters, which are approved methods by CWS. The proposed treatment method for the public improvements is infiltration planters. Each planter is individually sized and targets pollutants of interest. See Technical Appendix C for the basin map (see map for areas treated by each water quality facility), Appendix F for the stormwater plan (length/width/depth/slope and other relevant specifications of each BMP) and Appendix D for calculations (volume of stormwater runoff to be managed and treated, flow capacity and residence time). 3. Water Quantity Analysis and Design All runoff generated by proposed impervious areas will be managed per the CWS and NOAA Slopes V guidelines. The ROW stormwater facilities does not have the capacity to meet the flow control requires; therefore, the onsite stormater facilities are over sized to compensate for the difference. The stormwater facilities onsite have the capacity to store and discharge at the pre-development flow rates of 42% of the 2-year, 2 year, 10-year and 25-year storm events. The table below show that the post-development runoff and pre- development runoff rates. Each planter facility has an overflow that provides a high-flow bypass to the gravel section layer. All the onsite flows are management by a flow control manhole. Pre-and Post-Development Flow Rates 42% of 2- 2-year 10-year 25-year year(cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Pre-Developed 0.12 0.79 1.38 1.65 Post-Developed w/Flow Control 0.10 0.79 0.86 0.90 Downstream analysis is not necessary since the discharge flow rates will be less than or equal to the pre-development flow rates. See Technical Appendix C for basin map, Appendix F for stormwater plan and Appendix D for calculations. 4. Conveyance Analysis and Design Storm conveyance piping was specified following CWS standards for sizing, construction and accessibility. Analysis of the conveyance system assumed that the beginning water surface elevations and beginning storage elevations were at zero (no presence of water in the system). It is assumed that the conveyance piping is constructed as designed and/or equal to or greater than minimum allowable slopes. The proposed 6-inch, 8-inch and 10-inch pipes are sized based on the 25-year, 24-hour storm event. See Appendix E for conveyance calculations (length/slope/size/percent capacity of pipes). May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 Pp Environmental 5 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 5. Summary The proposed project is split into multiple basins and the runoff from each basin drains to a specific stormwater facility. Each facility is sized to treat and detain stormwater. The stormwater enters the facility, filters through the soil medium, stored in the gravel layer and discharges to the public storm system at the post-development rate via flow control manhole. Each planter facility has an overflow that provides a high-flow bypass to the gravel section layer. See Appendix C for basin map and Appendix F for stormwater plans and details. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL The Site owner/operator shall be responsible for operations and maintenance of all onsite stormwater infrastructures and facilities. Site Owner: DVKOCR, LLC Alkesh Patel 1419 W Main Street Vancouver, WA 98604 (360) 687-8881 Alkesh@trupadi.com Public Right-of-Way Owner: City of Tigard Rob Block 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 (503)718-2607 rob(a�tigard-or.gov The City of Tigard is responsible for all operations and maintenance within the public right- of-way. Maintenance and operation manuals can be found in Appendix B. CONCLUSION The proposed private development and public improvements are being managed and treated via infiltration planters or flow-through planters. All proposed stormwater facilities are chosen based on best management practices approved by CWS and recommended for consideration by NOAA officials. The proposed project stormwater system design meets all relevant design criteria by CWS and NOAA SLOPES V. May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 6 • Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 REFERENCES Clean Water Services. Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management. June 2007. Clean Water Services. Low Impact Development Approaches Handbook. 2016. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Programmatic Conference and Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation for Revisions to Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species to Administer Maintenance or Improvement of Stormwater, Transportation or Utility Actions Authorized or Carried Out by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Oregon (NWR-2013-10411). March 14, 2014. PBS Engineering and Environmental. Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report. February 4, 2016. May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PB Environmental 7 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX A Geotechnical Report May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental Engineering + PBSEnvironmental Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street Tigard, Oregon Prepared for: DAVCKOR LLC Attn: Alkesh Patel 1419 West Main Street #100 Battle Ground, WA 98604 February 4,2016 Project No. 70976.000 1500 D Street,Vancouver,WA 98663 360.690.4331 Main 866,727.0140 Fax www.pbsenv,com Bend I Boise I Coos Bay I Eugene I Portland I Seattle I Tri-Cities I Vancouver V IMMoomommostmomoymon Engineering + PBSEnvironmental February 4, 2016 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street Tigard, Oregon Project No. 70976.000 Prepared for: DAVCKOR LLC Attn: Mr. Alkesh Patel 1419 West Main Street, #100 Battle Ground, WA 98604 Prepared by: .o PR©fiA' • 0 E6 'UN'y 3A EXPIRES. 12/31/20161 Tony Rikli, PE Geotechnical Staff Engineer Reviewed by: yan White, PE, GE Geotechnical Discipline Lead This document was prepared for use only by the Client,only for the purposes stated,and within a reasonable time from issuance, but in no event later than three years from the date of the report.Non-commercial,educational,and scientific use of this report by regulatory agencies is regarded as a"fair use"and not a violation of copyright.Regulatory agencies may make additional copies of this document for internal use.Copies may also be made available to the public as required by law.The reprint must acknowledge the copyright and indicate that permission to reprint has been received. f 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope 1 1.2.1 Literature and Records Review 1 1.2.2 Subsurface Explorations 1 1.2.3 Soils Testing 1 1.2.4 Geotechnical Engineering Analysis 1 1.2.5 Report Preparation 1 1.3 Project Understanding 2 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 2.1 Surface Description 2 2.2 Geologic Setting 3 2.2.1 Regional Geology 3 2.2.2 Local Geology 3 2.3 Subsurface Conditions 3 2.3.1 Soil 3 2.3.2 Groundwater 3 2.3.3 Infiltration Testing 4 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 3.1 Geotechnical Design Considerations 4 3.2 Shallow Foundations 4 3.2.1 Footing Preparation 4 3.2.1 Spread Footings and Stem Walls 4 3.2.2 Footing Embedment Depths 5 3.2.3 Minimum Footing Widths/Design 5 3.2.4 Crushed Rock Pads 5 3.2.5 Foundation Static Settlement 5 3.2.6 Lateral Resistance 5 3.3 Seismic Design Criteria 5 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential 6 3.3.2 Other Seismic Considerations 6 3.4 Floor Slabs 6 3.5 Ground Moisture 7 3.5.1 General 7 3.5.2 Perimeter Footing Drains 7 3.6 Pavement Design Analyses 7 4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 8 4.1 Site Preparation 8 4.1.1 Proofrolling/Subgrade Verification 8 4.2 Subgrade Protection 8 4.2.1 Wet-Weather/Wet-Soil Conditions 8 4.2.2 Dry Weather Conditions 9 4.3 Excavation 9 4.4 Slopes 9 4.5 Structural Fill 9 4.5.1 On-Site Soil 9 4.5.2 Borrow Material 10 4.5.3 Select Granular Fill 10 4.5.4 Crushed Aggregate Base 10 4.5.5 Utility Trench Backfill 10 February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental i Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 4.5.6 Stabilization Material 11 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS 11 6.0 LIMITATIONS 11 7.0 REFERENCES 13 SUPPORTING DATA Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Appendix A— Field Explorations Table A-1 Terminology Used to Describe Soil Table A-2 Key to Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols Figures Al —A6 Logs for Borings B-1 through B-6 Appendix B—Laboratory Testing Figure B1 Atterberg Limits Test Results Figure B2 Consolidation Test Results February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental ii • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General This report presents the results of the PBS Engineering and Environmental Inc. (PBS) geotechnical engineering services for the proposed hotel development in Tigard, Oregon. The site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The exploration locations in relation to existing and proposed site features are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. 1.2 Purpose and Scope The purpose of PBS' services was to develop geotechnical design and construction recommendations in support of the proposed new structure. This was accomplished by performing the following scope of services: 1.2.1 Literature and Records Review PBS reviewed various relevant published geologic maps of the area for information regarding geologic conditions. We also reviewed previously completed reports near the site that were available in our files. 1.2.2 Subsurface Explorations PBS completed six borings within the proposed development area. Borings B-1 and B-2 were advanced to depths 6.5 below the existing ground surface (bgs) in the proposed parking area and borings B-3 through B-6 were completed to depths of up to 36.5 feet bgs within the proposed building footprint. Borings were logged and representative soil samples collected by a member of the PBS engineering staff. Infiltration testing was conducted at a depth of approximately 5.0 feet bgs in borings B-1 and B-2. 1.2.3 Soils Testing Collected soil samples were transported to our laboratory for testing that included natural moisture contents, Atterberg Limits testing, and consolidation testing (refer, Appendix B— Laboratory Testing). 1.2.4 Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Data collected during the subsurface explorations, literature research, and laboratory testing was used to develop specific geotechnical design and construction recommendations. 1.2.5 Report Preparation This Geotechnical Engineering Report summarizes the results of our explorations, testing, and analyses, including information relating to the following: • Field exploration logs and approximate exploration locations • Infiltration test results • Laboratory test results • Earthwork and grading, cut, and fill recommendations: — Evaluation of the site soils for use as fill — Temporary and permanent slope inclinations for utilities — Structural fill materials and preparation — Wet and cold weather considerations February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon • Shallow foundation design recommendations: — Minimum embedment — Allowable bearing pressure — Estimated settlement — Sliding coefficient • Groundwater levels and considerations • Subsurface drainage requirements • Seismic design criteria in accordance with the current (2014) Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) • Slab and pavement subgrade preparation • Recommended pavement section thickness 1.3 Project Understanding PBS understands that preliminary plans include development of approximately 1.9 acres of land consisting of several parcels (#1S136DD02400, #1SI36DD02300, #ISI36DD02200, #1S136DD02100, 1S136DD02500) near SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street (site, subject property) in Tigard, Oregon. The site is currently undeveloped and vegetated with mature trees and brush. The property slopes down to the west, with elevations ranging from 277 to 297 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). PBS understands that the project will consist of constructing one approximately 23,000 square foot(footprint) four-story wood frame hotel building, with slab-on-grade floors and conventional shallow foundations. The remainder of the site will consist of associated asphalt concrete (AC) pavement parking, driveways, and landscaping. Based on our experience with similar projects, estimated maximum building loads will be on the order of 350 kips for columns, 5 kips per linear foot for walls, and less than 150 pounds per square foot (psf) for floors. The extent of site grading is currently unknown; however based on our understanding of the proposed development and existing topography, cuts and fills could be on the order of 5 feet. The purpose of PBS' services was to evaluate the subsurface conditions within the site and provide geotechnical information needed to develop recommendations for use in design and construction. 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2.1 Surface Description The subject property is located on the northeastern side of the City of Tigard, bounded by SW 70th Avenue to the west, SW Clinton Street on the south, SW 69th Avenue to the east, and residential development to the north. The 1.9-acre site is lightly vegetated, slopes down to the west, and lies approximately 0.2 mile south of an unnamed small tributary drainage and 0.4 mile northeast of Crystal Lake in Tigard. Existing concrete foundations and slabs with sporadic concrete chunks and red brick were observed in the southeastern quadrant of the development area, possibly due to the previous structure that was demolished around July 2005. February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 2 • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 2.2 Geologic Setting 2.2.1 Regional Geology Schlicker and Deacon (1967) map the site geology as Quaternary Willamette Silt. Quaternary Willamette Silt is characterized as bedded silt and fine sand with occasional clay, lenses of pebbly, fine-to medium-grained sand, with locally scattered granite and quartzite cobbles. The unit is approximately 50 feet thick near the center of the Tualatin Valley and thins toward the valley margins. 2.2.2 Local Geology Locally, the site is mapped as Quaternary fine-grained boring lavas (QTb) according to Beeson, et. al. (1989). The QTb was deposited through a series of local vents from Mt. Sylvania. Concerning our borings, the clay and silt deposits encountered at the site are consistent with QTb. 2.3 Subsurface Conditions 2.3.1 Soil Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling six borings designated as B-1 through B-6. The borings were advanced to depths of up to 36.5 feet bgs and completed on November 23 and 24, 2015. Borings were drilled by Western States Soil Conservation, Inc., of Hubbard, Oregon, using hollow-stem auger drilling techniques ( B-1 and B-2) and mud rotary drilling techniques on (B-3 through B-6). Infiltration testing was conducted at a depth of 5 feet bgs in borings B-1 and B-2. The explorations were logged and representative samples collected by a member of the PBS geotechnical engineering staff. Boring logs summarizing the subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations are presented in Appendix A. PBS has summarized the subsurface units as follows: SURFACE Topsoil approximately 6 inches thick was observed at the surface of MATERIALS: the borings. FILL: Borings B-5 and B-6 encountered fill material consisting of medium stiff to hard CLAY/SILT (CL/ML) to very dense clayey GRAVEL (GC) and poorly graded GRAVEL (GP)to 14 and 10.5 feet bgs, respectively. CLAY/SILT Medium stiff to hard brown CLAY/SILT (CL/ML)was encountered in the borings to the termination depths of 36.5 feet bgs. The soil types are based on visual-manual classifications using ASTM D 2488-09a guidelines. Consistency, color, relative moisture, degree of plasticity, and other distinguishing characteristics of the soil layers were noted. The terminology used in the soil classifications and other modifiers are defined and presented on the attached Table A-1 included in Appendix A. 2.3.2 Groundwater Static groundwater was not observed at the time of our explorations. Nearby well logs and regional groundwater mapping by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) indicate groundwater present at depths of approximately 20 feet bgs or deeper. Shallow zones of perched water may be present seasonally. We recommend that the contractor determine the February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 3 • • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon actual groundwater levels at the time of construction to determine potential groundwater impact on the construction. 2.3.3 Infiltration Testing PBS completed infiltration testing in B-1 and B-2 at depths of approximately 5.0 feet bgs through a hollow-stem auger. The tests were completed in general accordance with the City of Portland 2014 Stormwater Management Manual. The auger was advanced to the test depths and was filled with water to saturate the soil. Following saturation, the water was allowed to drain while the water level was recorded at regular time intervals. No measurable infiltration was observed over the 4-hour test period. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Geotechnical Design Considerations The majority of the project site is underlain by medium stiff to hard clay soils to depths of approximately 36.5 feet bgs. Undocumented fill was also encountered in B-5 and B-6 to a depth of 14 and 10.5 feet bgs, respectively. Conventional foundation support on shallow footings (spread) is feasible. Because the fill encountered at the site is undocumented, we recommend additional measures be implemented into the project design to help reduce the impacts of its presence. These should include installation of 1-foot-thick crushed rock pads beneath the footings and designing stem walls to free-span a distance of 5 feet. Alternatively, walls could be supported on grade beams designed to span between column footings. Specific recommendations are provided in the following sections. Without complete removal of the undocumented fill and replacement with structural fill, a risk of settlement still exists. The grading and final development plans for the project had not been completed when this report was prepared. Subsequently, we have not evaluated the impacts of site grading on the static and seismic stability of the existing slopes, and have estimated settlement of the underlying soils based on the estimated loads using our engineering judgment. Once completed, PBS should be engaged to review the project plans and update our recommendations as necessary. 3.2 Shallow Foundations The following sections provide a more detailed discussion of our analysis and recommendations. 3.2.1 Footing Preparation Excavations for footings should be carefully prepared to a neat and undisturbed state on firm native soil. A representative from PBS should confirm suitable bearing conditions and evaluate all exposed footing subgrades. Observations should also confirm that loose or soft materials have been removed from new footing excavations and concrete slab-on-grade areas. Localized deepening of footing excavations may be required to penetrate loose, wet, or deleterious materials. 3.2.1 Spread Footings and Stem Walls Due to the presence of undocumented fill, we recommend that continuous footings and/or stem walls be structurally designed to free span a distance of 5 feet. Given the variability of the fill, strengthening the footings and stem walls should prevent excessive foundation differential settlement. February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental 4 • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 3.2.2 Footing Embedment Depths We recommend that all footings be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The footings should be founded below an imaginary line projecting upward ata 1 H:1 V (horizontal to vertical) slope from the base of any adjacent, parallel utility trenches or deeper excavations. 3.2.3 Minimum Footing Widths/ Design Continuous wall and isolated spread footings should be at least 24 inches wide. Footings should be sized using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). This is a net bearing pressure and the weight of the footing and overlying backfill can be disregarded in calculating footing sizes. The recommended allowable bearing pressure applies to the total of dead plus long-term-live loads. Allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for seismic and wind loads. The building foundations must be installed on a minimum of one-foot-thick crushed rock pads, as discussed in the following Section 3.2.4 of this report. 3.2.4 Crushed Rock Pads Due to the presence of undocumented fill, we recommend footings be founded on one-foot-thick crushed rock pads. Crushed rock pads should be planned to extend a minimum of six inches laterally beyond the edges of footings. For an 18-inch-wide footing, the crushed rock pad should be 3.5 feet wide. Following excavation, prior to installing crushed rock pads, footing subgrades should be compacted with multiple, overlapping passes of a vibratory compactor. Crushed rock pads should be prepared following the recommendations specified in Section 4.5.4—Crushed Aggregate Base of this report. 3.2.5 Foundation Static Settlement Footings will settle in response to column and wall loads. Based on our evaluation of the subsurface conditions and our analysis, we estimate post-construction settlement will be less than one inch for the column and perimeter foundation loads.. Differential settlement will be on the order of one-half of the total settlement. 3.2.6 Lateral Resistance Lateral loads can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of footings and grade beams, and by friction at the base of the footings. A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for footings confined by native soils and new structural fills. The allowable passive pressure has been reduced by one-half to account for the large amount of deformation required to mobilize full passive resistance. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12-inch depth of adjacent unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. For footings supported on native soils or new structural fills, use a coefficient of friction equal to 0.35 when calculating resistance to sliding. These values do not include a factor of safety (FS). 3.3 Seismic Design Criteria The seismic design parameters, in accordance with the 2014 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC), are summarized in Table 1 as follows: February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental 5 • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon Table 1: 2014 OSSC Seismic Design Parameters Parameter Short Period 1 Second Maximum Credible Earthquake Spectral SS = 0.98 g Si = 0.42 g Acceleration Site Class D Site Coefficient Fa = 1.11 Fv = 1.58 Adjusted Spectral Acceleration SMS = 1.09 g SM1 = 0.67 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters SDS = 0.73 g 5D1 = 0.45 g Design Spectral Peak Ground Acceleration 0.29 g g—Acceleration due to gravity 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is defined as a decrease in the shear resistance of loose, saturated, cohesionless soil (e.g., sand) or low plasticity silt soils, due to the buildup of excess pore pressures generated during an earthquake. This results in a temporary transformation of the soil deposit into a viscous fluid. Liquefaction can result in ground settlement, foundation bearing capacity failure, and lateral spreading of ground. Based on a review of the Oregon Statewide Geohazard Viewer(HazVu), the property is located in an area of low liquefaction hazard. We did not encounter potentially liquefiable soils in our explorations. As a result, our current opinion is that the risk of structurally damaging liquefaction settlement at the site is low. 3.3.2 Other Seismic Considerations Other site-specific seismic hazards considered include earthquake-induced landslides, ground shaking, fault rupture, seiche and tsunami inundation, lateral spreading, and earthquake shaking. Based on the topography, geology, and closest freeface to the site, we consider the risk from earthquake-induced lateral spreading, seiche and flood inundation to be low. Strong earthquake ground shaking will occur during a design-level seismic event on the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ). The site lies between the Canby-Molalla Fault and the Oatfield Fault, which, according to DOGAMI HazVu, may also induce strong shaking at the site. Based on our current understanding of the project, our opinion is that effects of earthquake ground motions can be accounted for by using code-based design procedures. 3.4 Floor Slabs Satisfactory subgrade support for building floor slabs can be obtained from the near-surface clay subgrade prepared in accordance with our recommendations presented in the Site Preparation, Wet Weather/Wet-Soil Conditions and Crushed Aggregate Base sections of this report. A minimum six-inch-thick layer of imported granular material should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade. Imported granular material should be composed of crushed rock or crushed gravel that is relatively well graded between coarse and fine, contains no deleterious materials, has a maximum particle size of one inch, and has less than five percent by dry weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve. Floor slabs supported on a subgrade and base course prepared in accordance with the preceding recommendations may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci). February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 3.5 Ground Moisture 3.5.1 General The perimeter ground surface and hard-scape should be sloped to drain away from all structures and away from adjacent slopes. Gutters should be tight-lined to a suitable discharge and maintained as free-flowing. All crawl spaces should be adequately ventilated and sloped to drain to a suitable, exterior discharge. 3.5.2 Perimeter Footing Drains Due to the relatively low permeability of the near-surface site soils and the potential for perched groundwater at the site, we recommend perimeter foundation drains be installed around all proposed structures. The foundation subdrainage system should include a minimum 4-inch-diameter perforated pipe in a drain rock envelope. A non-woven geotextile filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent, should be used to completely wrap the drain rock envelope, separating it from the native soil and footing backfill materials. The invert of the perimeter drain lines should be placed approximately at the bottom of footing elevation. Also, the subdrainage system should be sealed at the ground surface. The perforated subdrainage pipe should be laid to drain by gravity into a non-perforated solid pipe and finally connected to the site drainage stem at a suitable location. Water from downspouts and surface water should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. This water must not be allowed to enter the bearing soils. 3.6 Pavement Design Analyses The provided pavement recommendations were developed using the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) design methods and references the associated Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) specifications for construction. Our evaluation considered a maximum of two trucks per day for a 20-year design life. The minimum recommended pavement sections are provided in Table 2. Table 2: Minimum AC Pavement Sections AC Base Rock Traffic Loading Subgrade (inches) (inches) Pull-in Car Parking Only 2.5 9 Stiff subgrade as verified by PBS Drive Lanes and Access Roads 3.0 9 personnel The asphalt cement binder should be PG 70-22 Performance Grade Asphalt Cement according to ODOT SS 00744.11 —Asphalt Cement and Additives. The AC should consist of'/-inch hot mix asphalt concrete (HMAC) and the maximum lift thickness should not exceed 3 inches. The AC should conform to ODOT SS 00744.13 and 00744.14 and be compacted to 91 percent of maximum theoretical density(Rice value) of the mix, as determined in accordance with ASTM D2041. Heavy construction traffic on new pavements or partial pavement sections (such as base course over the prepared subgrade)will likely exceed the design loads and could potentially damage or shorten the pavement life. Therefore, we recommend construction traffic not be allowed on new February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon pavements, or that the contractor take appropriate precautions to protect the subgrade and pavement during construction. If construction traffic is to be allowed on newly constructed road sections, an allowance for this additional traffic will need to be made in the design pavement section. 4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Site Preparation Construction of the proposed building will involve clearing and grubbing of the existing vegetation and/or demolition of existing pavements. Demolition should include removal of existing foundations, utilities, etc., throughout the proposed new building footprint. Underground utility lines, or other abandoned structural elements should also be removed. The voids resulting from removal of foundations or loose soil in utility lines should be backfilled with compacted structural fill. The base of these excavations should be excavated to firm native subgrade before filling, with sides sloped ata minimum of 1 H:1 V, to allow for uniform compaction. Materials generated during demolition should be transported off site or stockpiled in areas designated by the owner's representative. 4.1.1 Proofrolling/Subgrade Verification Following site preparation and prior to placing aggregate base for the shallow foundations, building pad, or pavement sections, the exposed subgrade should be evaluated either by proofrolling or another method of subgrade verification. The subgrade should be proofrolled with a fully loaded dump truck or similar heavy, rubber-tire construction equipment to identify unsuitable areas. If evaluation of the subgrades occur during wet conditions, or if proofrolling the subgrades will result in disturbance, they should be evaluated by PBS using a steel foundation probe. We recommend that PBS be retained to observe the proofrolling and perform the subgrade verifications. Unsuitable areas identified during the field evaluation should be compacted to a firm condition or be excavated and replaced with structural fill. 4.2 Subgrade Protection 4.2.1 Wet-Weather/Wet-Soil Conditions Due to the presence of fine-grained soil (i.e. silt and clay) in the near-surface materials within the construction area, construction equipment may have difficulty operating on the near-surface soils when above the optimum moisture required for compaction. Soils that have been disturbed during site preparation activities, or unsuitable areas identified during proofrolling or probing, should be removed to firm ground and replaced with compacted structural fill. Protection of the subgrade is the responsibility of the contractor. Track-mounted excavating equipment may be required during wet weather. The thickness of the haul roads to access the site for basement excavation and staging areas will depend on the amount and type of construction traffic. The material used for haul roads or site access drive should be stabilization material described below. A 12-to 18-inch-thick mat of stabilization material should be sufficient for light staging areas. The stabilization material for haul roads and areas with repeated heavy construction traffic typically needs to be increased to between 18 to 24 inches. The actual thickness of haul roads and staging areas should be based on the contractor's approach to site work and the amount and type of construction traffic, and is the contractor's responsibility. The stabilization material should be placed in one lift over the prepared, undisturbed subgrade and compacted using a smooth-drum, non-vibratory roller. EnEngineering+ February 4,2016 9 9 Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 8 4 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon Additionally, a geotextile fabric should be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and stabilization material. The geotextile should meet specifications ODOT SS Section 2320.10 and SS 02320.20, Table 02320-1 for soil separation. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with ODOT SS 0350.00—Geosynthetic Installation. Site earthwork and subgrade preparation should not be completed during freezing conditions. We recommend the earthwork construction at the site be performed during the dry season. 4.2.2 Dry Weather Conditions Medium to high plasticity clay subgrade soils remaining beneath footings, slabs, or pavements should not be allowed to dry significantly. Clay soils should be covered within 4 hours of exposure by 4 inches of crushed rock or plastic sheeting during the dry season. Exposure of these materials should be coordinated with the geotechnical engineer so that the subgrade suitability can be evaluated prior to being covered. 4.3 Excavation All excavations should be made in accordance with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and State regulations. The contractor is solely responsible for adherence to the OSHA requirements. Trench cuts should stand relatively vertical to a depth of approximately four feet bgs, provided no groundwater seepage is present in the trench walls. Open excavation techniques may be used in the clay and silt, provided the excavation is configured in accordance with the OSHA requirements, groundwater seepage is not present, and with the understanding that some sloughing may occur. The trenches should be flattened if sloughing occurs or seepage is present. If shallow groundwater is observed during construction, use of a trench shield or other approved temporary shoring is recommended for cuts that extend below groundwater seepage, or if vertical walls are desired for cuts deeper than four feet bgs. If dewatering is used, we recommend that the type and design of the dewatering system be the responsibility of the contractor, who is in the best position to choose systems that fit the overall plan of operation. The near-surface soils at the site can be excavated with conventional earthwork equipment. Sloughing and caving should be anticipated. 4.4 Slopes If the project will include slopes or open excavation, temporary and permanent cut slopes up to 10 feet high may be inclined at 1.5H:1 V and 2H:1 V, respectively. Access roads and pavements should be located at least five feet from the top of temporary slopes. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the face. 4.5 Structural Fill The extent of site grading is currently unknown; however, we estimate cuts and fills will be limited in depth/thickness to less than 5 feet. Structural fill, including base rock, should be placed over subgrades that have been prepared in conformance with the Site Preparation and Wet-Weather/Wet-Soil Conditions sections of this report. Structural fill material should consist of relatively well-graded soil, or an approved rock product that is free of organic material and debris, and contains particles not greater than 4-inches nominal dimension. 4.5.1 On-Site Soil On-site soils encountered in our explorations are generally suitable for placement as structural fill during moderate, dry weather when moisture content can be maintained by air drying and/or addition of water. The fine-grained fraction of the site soils are moisture February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 9 • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon sensitive, and during wet weather, may become unworkable due to excess moisture. In order to reduce moisture content, some aerating and drying of fine-grained soils may be required. However, due to the difficulty required to dry fine-grained soils to near optimum moisture content, re-use of native soil as structural fill may not be feasible except during dry summer months. Even then, it may require several days of constant mixing in order to achieve the desired moisture content. If used as fill for mass grading, the on-site material should be free of any organic or deleterious material with grain size less than 4-inches in diameter. The fine-grained material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of approximately 8 inches and compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 4.5.2 Borrow Material Borrow material for general structural fill construction should meet the requirements set forth in ODOT SS 00330.12— Borrow Material. When used as structural fill, borrow material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of approximately 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 4.5.3 Select Granular Fill Selected granular backfill used during periods of wet weather for structural fill construction should meet the specifications provided in ODOT SS 00330.14—Selected Granular Backfill. The imported granular material should be uniformly moisture conditioned to within about 2 percent of the optimum moisture content and compacted in relatively thin lifts using suitable mechanical compaction equipment. Selected granular backfill should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 to 12 inches and be compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 4.5.4 Crushed Aggregate Base Crushed aggregate base course below floor slabs, spread footings, and asphalt concrete pavements should be clean, crushed rock or crushed gravel that contains no deleterious materials and meets the specifications provided in ODOT SS 02630.10— Dense-Graded Aggregate, and have less than 5 percent by weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve. The crushed aggregate base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 4.5.5 Utility Trench Backfill Pipe bedding placed to uniformly support the barrel of pipe should meet specifications provided in ODOT SS 00405.12— Pipe Zone Bedding. The pipe zone that extends from the top of the bedding to at least 8 inches above utility lines should consist of material prescribed by ODOT SS 00405.13— Pipe Zone Material. The pipe zone material should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer. Under pavements, paths, slabs, or beneath building pads, the remainder of the trench backfill should consist of well-graded granular material with less than 10 percent by weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve, and should meet standards prescribed by ODOT SS 00405.14—Trench Backfill, Class B or D. This material should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557 or as required by the pipe manufacturer. The upper two feet of the trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Controlled February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 10 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon low-strength material (CLSM), ODOT SS 00405.14—Trench Backfill, Class E, can be used as an alternative. Outside of structural improvement areas (e.g., pavements, sidewalks, or building pads), trench material placed above the pipe zone may consist of general structural fill materials that are free of organics and meet ODOT SS 00405.14—Trench Backfill, Class A. This general trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer or local jurisdictions. 4.5.6 Stabilization Material Stabilization rock should consist of pit- or quarry-run rock that is well-graded, angular, crushed rock consisting of 4- or 6-inch-minus material with less than 5 percent passing the US Standard No. 4 Sieve. The material should be free of organic matter and other deleterious material. ODOT SS 00330.16—Stone Embankment Material can be used as a general specification for this material with the stipulation of limiting the maximum size to 6 inches. 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS In most cases, other services beyond completion of a geotechnical engineering report are necessary or desirable to complete the project. Occasionally, conditions or circumstances arise that require the performance of additional work that was not anticipated when the geotechnical report was written. PBS offers a range of environmental, geological, geotechnical, and construction services to suit the varying needs of our Clients. PBS should be retained to review the plans and specifications for this project before they are finalized. Such a review allows us to verify that our recommendations and concerns have been adequately addressed in the design. Satisfactory earthwork performance depends 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. We recommend that PBS be retained to observe general excavation, stripping, fill placement, and footing and pavement subgrades. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface explorations. Recognition of changed conditions requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect whether subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. 6.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee, and their architects and engineers, for aiding in the design and construction of the proposed development and is not to be relied upon by other parties. It is not to be photographed, photocopied, or similarly reproduced, in total or in part, without express written consent of the Client and PBS. It is the addressee's responsibility to provide this report to the appropriate design professionals, building officials, and contractors to ensure correct implementation of the recommendations. The opinions, comments, and conclusions presented in this report are based upon information derived from our literature review, field explorations, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. It is possible that soil, rock, or groundwater conditions could vary between or beyond the points explored. If soil, rock, or groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that differ February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon from those described herein, the Client is responsible for ensuring that PBS is notified immediately so that we may reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Unanticipated fill, soil and rock conditions, and seasonal soil moisture and groundwater variations are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely taking soil samples or soil borings and test pits. Such variations may result in changes to our recommendations and may require additional funds for expenses to attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, we recommend a contingency fund to accommodate such potential extra costs. The scope of services for this subsurface exploration and geotechnical report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of work at the site, if conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at or adjacent to the site, or if the basic project scheme is significantly modified from that assumed, this report should be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations presented herein. Land use, site conditions (both on and off site), or other factors may change over time and could materially affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after three years from its issue, or in the event that the site conditions change. February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBS Environmental 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon 7.0 REFERENCES Beeson, M.H., Tolan, T.L., and Madin, I.P., 1989, Geologic map of the Lake Oswego quadrangle, Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington counties, Oregon: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Geological Map Series 59, scale 1:24,000 ODOT SS. (2014, updated 2015). Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction. Salem, Oregon. Oregon Department of Transportation. OregonHazvu. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Portland, OR OSSC (2014) Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). Based on IBC. (2012). International Building Code. Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc. Schlicker, H.G., Deacon, R.J., 1967, Engineering geology of the Tualatin Valley region, Oregon: Oregon Dept. Geology and Mineral Industries Bull. 60, 103 p. February 4,2016 Engineering+ Project No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental 13 0 W re m LI APPENDIX A Field Explorations Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon APPENDIX A— FIELD EXPLORATIONS A1.0 GENERAL PBS explored the subsurface conditions at the project site by advancing six borings to depths of up to 36.5 feet bgs. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Site Plan. The procedures and techniques used to drill the borings, collect samples, and other field techniques, are described in detail in the following paragraphs. Unless otherwise noted, all soil sampling and classification procedures followed local engineering practices that are in general accordance with relevant ASTM procedures. "General accordance" means that certain local and common drilling and descriptive practices and methodologies have been followed. A2.0 BORINGS A2.1 Drilling Borings were advanced with a truck-mounted CME-850 drill rig provided and operated by Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. of Hubbard, Oregon, using mud rotary and hollow-stem auger drilling techniques. The borings were observed by a PBS geotechnical staff member, who maintained a detailed log of the subsurface conditions and materials encountered during the course of the work. A2.2 Sampling Disturbed soil samples were taken in the borings at selected depth intervals. The samples were obtained using a standard 2-inch outside diameter(OD), split-spoon sampler following procedures prescribed for the standard penetration test (SPT). The sampler is driven 18 inches into the soil using a 140-pound hammer dropped 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches is defined as the standard penetration resistance (N-value). The N-value provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils such as sands and gravels, and the consistency of cohesive soils such as clays and plastic silts. The disturbed soil samples were examined by a member of the PBS geotechnical staff, and then sealed in plastic bags for further examination and physical testing in our laboratory. A2.3 Boring Logs The boring logs show the various types of materials that were encountered in the borings and the depths where the materials and/or characteristics of these materials changed, although the changes may be gradual. Where material types and descriptions changed between samples, the contacts were interpreted. The types of samples taken during drilling, along with their sample identification number, are shown to the right of the classification of materials. The N-values and natural water(moisture) contents are shown further to the right. A3.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Initially, soil samples were classified visually in the field. Consistency, color, relative moisture, degree of plasticity, and other distinguishing characteristics of the soil samples were noted. Afterward, the samples were reexamined in the PBS laboratory, various standard classification tests were conducted, and the field classifications were modified where necessary. The terminology used in the soil classifications and other modifiers are defined in Appendix A, Table A-1, Terminology Used to Describe Soil. February 4,2016 Project No.70976.000 A-1 �"" Table A-1 P'B S Terminology Used to Describe Soil 1of2 Soil Descriptions Soils exist in mixtures with varying proportions of components. The predominant soil, i.e., greater than 50 percent based upon total dry weight, is the primary soil type and is capitalized in our log descriptions, e.g., SAND, GRAVEL, SILT or CLAY. Lesser percentages of other constituents in the soil mixture are indicated by use of modifier words in general accordance with the Visual-Manual Procedure (ASTM D2488-06). "General Accordance" means that certain local and common descriptive practices have been followed. In accordance with ASTM D2488-06,group symbols(such as GP or CH) are applied on that portion of the soil passing the 3-inch (75mm) sieve based upon visual examination. The following describes the use of soil names and modifying terms used to describe fine-and coarse-grained soils. Fine-Grained Soils (More than 50%fines passing 0.075 mm,#200 sieve) The primary soil type, i.e. SILT or CLAY is designated through visual — manual procedures to evaluate soil toughness, dilatency, dry strength, and plasticity. The following describes the terminology used to describe fine-grained soils, and varies from ASTM 2488 terminology in the use of some common terms. PlastPrimary soil NAME, adjective and symbols Descriptityon IndPlaex(P) Description Index(PI) ORGANIC SILT CLAY SILT & CLAY ML& MHCL&CH OL&OH __ SILT Organic SILT Non-plastic 0-3 SILT Organic SILT Low plasticity _ 4- 10 SILT/Elastic Lean CLAY Organic clayey SILT Medium Plasticity 10—20 SILT Elastic SILT Lean/Fat CLAY Organic silty CLAY High Plasticity 20—40 Elastic SILT Fat CLAY Organic CLAY Very Plastic >40 Modifying terms describing secondary constituents,estimated to 5 percent increments,are applied as follows: Description %Composition With sand; with gravel (combined total greater than 15%but less than 15%to 30% 30%, modifier is whichever is greater) Sandy; or gravelly (combined total greater than 30%but less than 30%to 50% 50%, modifier is whichever is greater) Borderline Symbols, for example CH/MH, are used where soils are not distinctly in one category or where variable soil units contain more than one soil type. Dual Symbols,for example CL-ML, are used where two symbols are required in accordance with ASTM D2488. Soil Consistency. Consistency terms are applied to fine-grained, plastic soils (i.e., PI >7). Descriptive terms are based on direct measure or correlation to the Standard Penetration Test N-value as determined by ASTM D1586- 84, as follows. Note, SILT soils with low to non-plastic behavior(i.e. PI < 7)are classified using relative density. Consistency Unconfined Compressive Strength Term SPT N-value tsf kPa Very soft Less than 2 Less than 0.25 Less than 24 Soft 2-4 0.25 - 0.5 24-48 Medium stiff 5—8 0.5 - 1.0 48—96 Stiff 9— 15 1.0 - 2.0 96— 192 Very stiff 16-30 2.0 - 4.0 192-383 Hard Over 30 Over 4.0 Over 383 Table A-1 PB C Terminology Used to Describe Soil IBJ 2of2 Soil Descriptions Coarse -Grained Soils (less than 50% fines) Coarse-grained soil descriptions, i.e., SAND or GRAVEL, are based on that portion of materials passing a 3-inch (75mm) sieve. Coarse-grained soil group symbols are applied in accordance with ASTM D2488-06 based upon the degree of grading, or distribution of grain sizes of the soil. For example, well graded sand containing a wide range of grain sizes is designated SW; poorly graded gravel, GP, contains high percentages of only certain grain sizes. Terms applied to grain sizes follow. Material Particle Diameter Inches Millimeters Sand (S) 0.003 -0.190.075 -4.8 Gravel (G) 0.19 -3.0 4.8-75 Additional Constituents Cobble 3.0 - 12 75 -300 Boulder 12 - 120 300 -3050 The primary soil type is capitalized, and the amount of fines in the soil are described as indicated by the following examples. Other soil mixtures will provide similar descriptive names. Example: Coarse-Grained Soil Descriptions with Fines 5% to less than 15% fines 15% to less than 50% (Dual Symbols) fines GRAVEL with silt, GW-GM Silty GRAVEL: GM SAND with clay, SP-SC Silty SAND: SM Additional descriptive terminology applied to coarse-grained soils follow. Example: Coarse-Grained Soil Descriptions with Other Coarse-Grained Constituents Coarse-Grained Soil Containing Secondary Constituents With sand or with gravel > 15% sand or gravel With cobbles; with boulders Any amount of cobbles or boulders. Cobble and boulder deposits may include a description of the matrix soils, as defined above. Relative Density terms are applied to granular, non-plastic soils based on direct measure or correlation to the Standard Penetration Test N-value as determined by ASTM D1586-84. Relative Density Term SPT N-value Very loose 0 -4 Loose 5 - 10 Medium dense 11 - 30 Dense 31 - 50 Very dense > 50� PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON BORING B-1 Portland,Oregon 97239 PBS S Fax Phone:503.248.1939866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: APPROX.BORING B-1 LOCATION: V Engineering+ 70976.000 45.43495,-122.74847 Environmental cL W p A BLOW COUNT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION x z J O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH x a 0 F w a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w W d MOISTURE CONTENT (5 differing description are approximate only,inferred where p 1— rc/1 RQD% MCORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. CO 0 50 100 0.0 >�\TOPSOIL(2 INCHES) , 0.2 Medium stiff brown LEAN CLAY(CL);medium plasticity;moist _ 2.0 4.0 — Infiltration testing completed becomes stiff at 4.75 feet bgs �/ _ co ♦41.16.0 j • 6.5 Boring completed at 6.5 feet bgs;boring backfilled with bentonite chips to existing - ground surface. 8.0 — _ 10.0 — — 12.0 — — o - r- a 14.0 — — a F- a a d w - a r 16.0 — — a a' F- F m - w 18.0 — — — O 20.0 0 50 100 EK DRILLING METHOD:Hollow-Stem Auger BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches 2 DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 FIGURE Al LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 Page 1 of 1 0 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-2 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 PBSPhone:503.248.1939 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: APPROX.BORING B-2 LOCATION: +eFax 866.727.014045.43533,-122.74848 Engineering+ 70976.000 Environmental A BLOW COUNT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION x w O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH =o F- - to a PENETROMETER COMMENTS a_ HFEET ix OJ NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w n MOISTURE CONTENT differing description are approximate only,inferred where 0 �' ¢C rrrnRQD% pACORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. co 0 50 100 o.o j� •\TOPSOIL(2 INCHES) r 0.2 Medium stiff brown LEAN CLAY(CL);medium - plasticity;moist 2.0 / � 6 4.0 becomes stiff testingInfiltration completed at 4.95 feet bgs14 6.0 6.5 Boring completed at 6.5 feet bgs;boring backfilled with bentonite chips to existing - ground surface. _ 8.0 — — - 10.0 — — 12.0 — — F`.:`a ❑ z a 14.0 — — a ❑ c° d - w a 2 16.0 — — m a U' F- F _ O m 18.0 — — 0 8, 20.0 0 50 100 z � DRILLING METHOD:Hollow-Stem Auger BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches FIGURE m DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 Page 1 of 1 LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-3 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 P 13 S Phone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-3 LOCATION: Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: Engineering+ 70976.000 45.43540,-122.74786 Environmental wp A BLOW COUNT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION _x z J O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH o-0 F w a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET g JO NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of W WH d S MOISTURE CONTENT% 0 differing description are approemate only,inferred where p F Q RQD% CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. < 0 50 100 0.0 ,+,,•,\TOPSOIL(2 INCHES) ` 0.2 '/ Medium stiff brown LEAN CLAY(CL); medium plasticity;moist 2.0 � — !(7) 7 4.0 — CON I 450 psi for 12 inches;500 psi for 6 inches;600 psi for 6 inches 6.0 — ((-))1 ATT LL=40 PL=23 8 0 �/ becomes stiff — . A i-�•-H PI=17 Driller switched to drag bit at 7 feet 10.0 — 11 N a �% 12.0 — — t 0 a 14.0 — 0 d d o becomes medium stiff g [Lo s • 0 16.0 — rn E H T r FT, 18.0 —✓ — csi ti P. 0 9 j 20.0 0 0 50 100 DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches 2 DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 FIGURE A3 LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 Page 1 of 2 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-3 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 (continued) P B S Phone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-3 LOCATION: Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 45.43540,-122.74786 Engineering+ 70976.000 Environmental a p A BLOW COUNT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION x z iu O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH a o a r In a- PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of W W a- •MOISTURE CONTENT% C7 differing description are approbmate only,inferred where I— Q N fTTT1 RQD% p7ICORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. o) 0 50 100 • 20.0 % Very stiff brown gray orange LEAN CLAY (CL);low plasticity;moist20 22.0 J — — 24.0 — 26.0 / — 11(7) Al _ J _ 28.0 � — H 30.0 Jj — :a og 32.0Jj — F w o 0. 34.0 — ow0 a 20 110)m j 36.0 % — to — 36.5 Boring completed at 36.5 feet bgs;boring backfilled with bentonite chips to existing - F ground surface. 0 m 38.0 — — P. 0 9 40.0 0 0 50 100 z & DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches FIGURE A3 °m DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 Page2of2 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON BORING B-4 Portland,Oregon 97239 BsPhone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-4 LOCATION: Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: Engineering+ 70976.000 45.43504,-122.74802 Environmental a p A BLOW COUNT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION x z w $DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH = COMMENTS O d F w a PENETROMETER J EET NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w w a •MOISTURE CONTENT 0 differing description are approbmate only,inferred where p I– Q RQD% ®CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. CO 0 50 100 0.0 '\TOPSOIL(2 INCHES) ` 0.2 Very stiff brown LEAN CLAY(CL);medium plasticity;moist _ 2.0 = r Aa 4.0 �/ _ • 6.0 — _ �9 . becomes stiff 8.o 10.0 —✓� — 10 12.0 a � w a / Pc. 14.0 a becomes very stiff,brown gray orange 19 0 16.0 / _ v7 A• � U' 18.0 20.0 j 50 100 DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 FIGURE A4 LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 Page 1 of 2 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-4 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 (continued) PBC` Phone:503.248.1939 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: APPROX.BORING B-4 LOCATION: J Fax 866.727.014045.43504,-122.74802 Engineering+ 70976.000 Environmental A BLOW COUNT UMATERIAL= DESCRIPTION = O 4 DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND z w DEPTH o H w a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET w NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w CL al a •MOISTURE CONTENT% (7 differing description are approximate only,inferred where I" Q cn RQD% CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. en 0 50 100 20.0 Very stiff brown gray orange LEAN CLAY (CL);medium plasticity;moist21 22.0 — J/ �/ 24.0 — becomes medium stiff 111, 726.0 28.0 — 30.0 becomes very stiff 11th •6 • 32.0 � — r a a - o. 34.0 d ow becomes hard 112 38 a a 36.0 a3fi.5 Boring completed at 36.5 feet bgs;boring - backfilled with bentonite chips to existing - r ground surface. - 0 m 38.0 — — p. 0 9 40.0 0 50 100 E DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches FIGURE A4 m DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 Page 2 of 2 LOGGED BY:T.Rikli LOGGING COMPLETED:11/23/15 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON BORING B-5 Portland,Oregon 97239 PBSPhone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-5 LOCATION: 1•� Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: Engineering+ 70976.000 45.43471,-122.74854 Environmental CL A BLOW COUNT 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a wJ +DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND NDDEPTH Q PENETROMETER COMMENTSFE10 NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of W W �- •MOISTURE CONTENT C7 differing description are appro�dmate only,inferred where p I— Q rai) ITMROD% 771CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. CO 0 50 100 TOPSOIL(6 INCHES) • 0.5 Stiff brown CLAY(CL);medium plasticity;moist •♦ ♦ ♦ • 2.0 •; — ♦ •/ ♦ • 12 • A • ••/• (4 4.0 • — — • FILL ♦ • • • • becomes very stiff • 19 6.0 • •/ - co A ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ •♦ ♦ • • becomes hard 112 5Q/3'A 8.0 ; — a.5 ;;1, Very dense clayey GRAVEL(GC);medium Difficult drilling at 8.5 feet plasticity;coarse,angular to subangular gravel; - bgs • ' Caving between 8.5 and 14 moist ♦ 4 - feet bgs ♦' 10.0 .�: — m — —r— 519/t"A co ♦/' Nfr 12.0 • ♦,0 • ♦. • • •v • • o • a 14.0 # Stiff gray with red-brown mottles LEAN CLAY 14.0 Easier drilling at 14 feet bgs (CL);high plasticity;moist a ATT LL=48 15 PL=25 c H� PI=23 0 16.0 u, Jj m / • 18.0 20.0 z 0 50 100 E DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches °, DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 FIGURE A5 LOGGED BY:M.Swank LOGGING COMPLETED:11/24/15 Page 1 of 2 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-5 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 (continued) PBSPBC Phone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-5 LOCATION: Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 45.43471,-122.74854 Engineering+ 70976.000 Environmental A BLOW COUNT 0= MATERIAL DESCRIPTION = C7 o O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH O H 1 1-1-17,_,a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET g 9, NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w W Q S MOISTURE CONTENT% differingdescription area approximate only, ITi'n ° SCORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass O p pp inferred where Q ROD/a between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. o 0 50 100 20'0 Very stiff gray and brown with black specks • LEAN CLAY(CL);high plasticity;moistII 1g 22.0 – – 24.0 – 25.0 Hard gray and light brown SILT(ML);low plasticity;moist - 33 26.0 — — 11(7) IL 28.0 – – — 30.0 – – 34 F. A 31.5 Boring completed at 31.5 feet bgs.Boring 32.0 — backfilled with bentonite chips to existing — F5 _ ground surface. _ `a - m ¢ 0 w_ 34.0 – – — a 0 O O O a F- F 0 36.0 – – am m - c7 F- F _ m O 38.0 – – O 9 40.0 2 0 50 100 z 2 DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches FIGURE A5 Si DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 LOGGED BY:M.Swank LOGGING COMPLETED:11/24/15 Page 2 of 2 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON BORING B-6 Portland,Oregon 97239 P Bs Phone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-6 LOCATION: Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: Engineering+ 70976.000 45.43469,-122.74811 Environmental d p A BLOW COUNT DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION = z O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND L O p J a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET 9 NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of w w Il •MOISTURE CONTENT% C7 differing description are approximate only,inferred where I— ci) ®RQD% CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. to 0 50 100 0.0 '"'•:; TOPSOIL(6 INCHES) • 0.5 Medium stiff brown SILT(ML);low plasticity; • moist •• •♦ 2.0 ♦: I 7 4.0 • • FILL • • • • • becomes stiff '• 10 • N 6.0 • A • • • • • • • • 8.0 • _ ♦ M —10 — ♦ A ♦• • (4 • • Medium dense poorly graded GRAVEL(GP); 9.0 s ( coarse,angular to subangular gravel;moist - 10.0 •«( _ 10.5 V 12 Stiff brown LEAN CLAY(CL);medium plasticity;moist 12.0 f 350 psi for 24 inches o /Et. 14.0 u� becomes very stiff and gray with brown mottles - 8 I cg A • 0 16.0 a J - 0 j F m 18.0 20.0 0 50 100 2 DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches 2 DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 FIGURE A6 LOGGED BY:M.Swank LOGGING COMPLETED:11/24/15 Page 1 of 2 r f PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT BORING B-6 4412 SW Corbett Avenue TIGARD,OREGON Portland,Oregon 97239 (continued) PBSPhone:503.248.1939 APPROX.BORING B-6 LOCATION: J Fax 866.727.0140 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 45.43469,-122.74811 Engineering+ 70976.000 Environmental A BLOW COUNT 0 2 w O DYNAMIC CONE INSTALLATION AND DEPTH = MATERIAL DESCRIPTION � w a PENETROMETER COMMENTS FEET NOTE:Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of 0 w -Q ••MOISTURE CONTENT O differing description are appro>dmate only,inferred where H Q rA RQD% CORE REC% Surface Conditions:Grass between samples,and may indicate gradual transition. 0 50 100 20.02n0 Very stiff gray and brown LEAN CLAY(CL); • medium plasticity;moist19 • 22.0 — 24.0 — 25.0 Very stiff brown SILT(ML);low plasticity;moist _ t3 • rn J 26.0 — — 28.0 — — 30.0 – becomes with decomposed black gravel 25 N ♦ 31.5 -7Very stiff gray LEAN CLAY(CL);high plasticity; 32.0 l� — moist r_ 32.5 Very stiff brown SILT(ML);low plasticity;moist `a - w 0 & 34.0 – – a r - - c7 d w a O 29 ♦ 0a 36.0 — — rn — a36.5 Boring completed at 36.5 feet bgs. - Groundwater not observed.Boring backfilled - - with bentonite chips to existing ground surface. - E 38.0 — — — — S (7 9 40.0 0 50 100 0 DRILLING METHOD:Mud Rotary BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches A6 2 DRILLED BY:Western States Soil Conservation,Inc. HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT:85 Page 2 FIGURE Eof 2 LOGGED BY:M.Swank LOGGING COMPLETED:11/24/15 APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing • Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Hotel Development Tigard,Oregon APPENDIX B—LABORATORY TESTING B1.0 GENERAL Samples obtained during the field explorations were examined in the PBS laboratory. The physical characteristics of the samples were noted and the field classifications were modified where necessary. The testing procedures are presented in the following paragraphs. Unless noted otherwise, all test procedures are in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. "General accordance" means that certain local and common descriptive practices and methodologies have been followed. B2.0 CLASSIFICATION TESTS B2.1 Visual Classification The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System with certain other terminology, such as the relative density or consistency of the soil deposits, in general accordance with engineering practice. In determining the soil type (that is, gravel, sand, silt, or clay) the term that best described the major portion of the sample is used. Modifying terminology to further describe the samples is defined in Terminology Used to Describe Soil in Appendix A. B2.2 Moisture (Water) Contents Natural moisture content determinations were made on samples of the fine-grained soils (that is, clay, silts, and silty sands). The natural moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water to dry weight of soil, expressed as a percentage. The results of the moisture content determinations are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A. B2.3 Atterberg Limits Atterberg limits were determined on selected samples for the purpose of classifying soils into various groups for correlation. The results of the Atterberg limits tests, which included liquid and plastic limits, are plotted on the Atterberg Limits Test Results, Figure BI, and on the exploration logs in Appendix A. B3.0 CONSOLIDATION TEST Consolidation testing was conducted on one sample to obtain quantitative data for use in evaluating potential settlement resulting from loads imposed from proposed foundations. The test specimen was placed in a one-dimensional consolidation test apparatus (fixed ring). Loads were applied to the specimen and the resulting change in thickness of the soil sample was monitored with time. Upon completion of primary consolidation, the next load increment was applied. The specimen was kept moist until the first load increment was applied, at which point the specimen was inundated with water. The consolidation test curve is presented on Figure B2. The curve of the plots show the percent strain that occurred in the test specimens under various magnitudes of applied constant load. February 4,2016 Project No.70976.000 B-1 4412 SW Corbett Avenue ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS PBSPortland,Oregon 97239 Phone:503.248.1939 Fax:866.727.0140 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT PBS PROJECT NUMBER: Engineering.1. TIGARD,OREGON 70976.000 Environmental TEST METHOD:ASTM D4318 60 50 CH or OH "A"LINE x 40 Lu C30 H COCL or CL J a m 20 • 10 MH or OH CL-ML ML or OL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT a ui 0 z z a EXPLORATION SAMPLE SAMPLE NATURAL MOISTURE PERCENT PASSING LIQUID PLASTIC PLASTICITY KEY NUMBER NUMBER (FEETDEPT) CONTENT NO.40 SIEVE LIMIT LIMIT INDEX 0 (PERCENT) (PERCENT) • B-3 S-3 7.0 32 NA 40 23 17 m B-5 S-5 15.0 33 NA 48 25 23 m a c� I 0 8 m 0 Co w LU k FIGURE B1 Page 1 of 1 . ^ CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS _ 4412 SW Corbett Avenue �� pumo� ",�9 �- �� mn»'mm�»m��ym Fax:866.727.0140 PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT PBS PROJECT NU MBen: Engineering ' ^, TIGARD,OREGON /0e76.000 Environmental 0 2_-� - _-==�- -- 4------------------------------------�-- ------------'----�—'------�---- 8 ------�----- ---------------�-------�'-----------------------�'--�------- 8-----------�---------------------'------- --�-------------- ---'------------ z 10 ---------- -- ---- ----' co 12----�— -------- ---- --- ' --- --------�----------------------------- -- 14------'--�------- ---------- ------ -------�------ 16 ------------------------- --------'----------------------'--�---------- 18--------------------- ---------------'--------- ------------ 20 °- 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 PRESSURE,p(ton/ft2) SAMPLE INITIAL INITIAL FINAL xsv EXPLORATION SAMPLE DEPTH MOISTURE DRY DENSITY SATURATION NUMBER NUMBER (FEET) CONTENT (PCF) (PERCENT) 12 (PERCENT) • B-3 S-2 5.0 33.3 86.2 100.0 2 FIGURE B2 Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX B Maintenance and Operational Manuals May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental Stormwater Operations & Maintenance Plan Tigard Hampton Inn & Suites Date: December 2016 Prepared by: PBS Engineering and Environmental, Inc RESPONSIBILITY The owner is responsible for all on-site stormwater operation and maintenance. The City of Tigard (COT) is responsible for all Right-of-Way (ROW) stormwater operation and maintenance. DESCRIPTION The on-site runoff from the roof and hardscape will be collected via downspouts, or sheet flow into trench drain, and catch basins. The ROW runoff from the hardscapes will sheet flow into infiltration planters. Infiltration planters are vegetation-lined depressions used to detain, filter, and infiltrate stormwater. The infiltration planters are designed to be flow-through. INSPECTION / MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE Each part of the system shall be inspected within 48 hours after each major storm event. For this O&M Plan, a major storm event is defined as 1.0 inches of rain in 24 hours or more. All components of the storm system as described above must be inspected and maintained frequently or they will cease to function effectively. The facility owner shall keep a log, recording all inspection dates, observations, and maintenance activities. Receipts shall be saved when maintenance is performed and there is record of expense. INSPECTION/ MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES The following items shall be inspected and maintained as stated: Infiltration Planter and Flow-through Planter General Maintenance: • Remove dropped leaves, dead plants, and grass, and other plant clippings. Plant debris adds nutrient pollution as it breaks down and can clog facility piping and reduce infiltration. • Avoid using fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides in the facility. These products add to the pollution problems the facilities are designed to remedy. • Use mulch to inhibit weed growth, retain moisture, and add nutrients. Replenish when needed. Ensure that mulch does not inhibit water flow in the flow path. • Irrigate all new plantings as needed for the first 2 years. • Sediment Removal: Use rakes and shovels to dig out accumulated sediment. Avoid damage to existing vegetation. If sediment is deep, plants may need to be removed in order to excavate sediment. Caring for Wanted Vegetation: • Facility owners are responsible for maintaining healthy vegetation and must replace any plants that have died or been removed. • Maintain vegetation to the density approved on landscape plan. • Replant with vegetation approved for use in the original planting plan or from the recommended City plant list. • • Plant in late fall or early spring so plant roots can establish during the cool rainy seasons, before summer. • Amend, aerate, and/or till compacted soil before replanting by adding compost to increase nutrients and enhance soil texture. • If plants are not surviving, determine the reason for the plant die-off. Survivability may be improved by planting vegetation better suited for the site conditions or by irrigating more. You may need to test plating bed soils for pH, moisture, and other factors such as nutrient levels, soil structure, and organic matter content. Nuisance and Unwanted Vegetation: • Remove nuisance and invasive vegetation before it goes to seed in the spring. Do additional weeding in the fall. A list of nuisance plants can be found in City plant list. • Immediately remove vegetation that is clogging or impeding flow into the facility • Remove potentially large and deep-rooted trees or bushes when they might impede the flow path or compromise facility structures. • Provide erosion control on any dirt exposed by vegetation removal. Catch basin and Piped Storm System • Sediment shall be removed biannually (or when one-third full of sediment) • Debris shall be removed from inlets and outlets quarterly. • Maintain hooded outlet to prevent floatable materials from entering the storm drain system. • Quarterly inspection for clogging shall be performed. • Repair/seal cracks. Replace when repair is insufficient. Source Control measures prevent pollutants from mixing with stormwater. Typical non- structural control measures include raking and removing leaves, street sweeping, vacuum sweeping, and limited and controlled application of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. • Source control measures shall be inspected and maintained quarterly. • Signage shall be maintained. Spill Prevention measures shall be exercised when handling substances that can contaminate stormwater. It is important to exercise caution when handling substances that can contaminate stormwater. Activities that pose the chance of hazardous material spills shall not take place near collection facilities. • The proper authority and the property owner shall be contacted immediately if a spill is observed. • A spill kit shall be kept near spill-prone operations and refreshed annually. • Employees shall be trained on spill control measures. • Releases of pollutants shall be corrected within 12 hours. Insects and Rodents shall not be harbored in any part of the storm system. • Pest control measures shall be taken when insects/rodents are found to be present. Standing water and food sources shall be prevented. • If sprays are considered, a mosquito larvicide such as Bacillus thurendensis or Altoside formulations can be applied only if absolutely necessary and shall not be used where it will enter groundwater or come into contact with any standing water. Sprays shall be applied only by licensed individuals or contractors. • Holes in the ground located in and around the storm system shall be filled. • Outfalls draining into stormwater facilities shall be inspected and cleaned regularly to ensure no rodent activity, which can clog or decrease the efficiency of the storm system. Access shall be maintained for all facilities so operations and maintenance can be performed as regularly scheduled. STORMWATER FACILITY MONITORING LOG Flow Control -All facilities shall drain within 48 hours. Time/date, weather, and site conditions when ponding occurs shall be recorded. Pollution Prevention -All sites shall implement best management practices to prevent hazardous wastes, litter, or excessive oil and sediment from contaminating stormwater. Contact Public Works at 503-718-2591 or, for after-hours emergencies, 503-639-1554 for immediate assistance with responding to spills. Record time/date, weather, and site conditions if site activities are found to contaminate stormwater. Vectors (mosquitoes and rodents)- Stormwater facilities shall not harbor mosquito larvae or rats that pose a threat to public health or that undermine the facility structure. Monitor standing water for small wiggling sticks perpendicular to the water's surface. Note holes/burrows in and around facilities. Call Washington County Vector Control at 503-846-2904 for immediate assistance with eradicating vectors. Record time/date, weather, and site conditions when vector activity is observed. Maintenance: Record date, description, and contractor(if applicable) for all structural repairs, landscape maintenance, and facility cleanout activities. Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Date: Initial Work performed by: Work performed: Details: Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX C Site Maps May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental Hydrologic Soil Group—Washington County,Oregon (Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(A01) 0 C The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:20,000. Area of Interest(AOI) ®, CID Soils Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. D Soil Rating Polygons ® Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause A 0 Not rated or not available misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting Ej A/D Water Features soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Streams and Canals B Please relyon the bar scale on each mapsheet for map BID { Rails measurements. C Interstate Highways Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov CID 004,0 US Routes Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) D Major Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator U Not rated or not available Local Roads projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Soil Rating Lines Background Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more accurate 0.44400 A Aerial Photography calculations of distance or area are required. ''.'" A/D This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of 0.40.0 B the version date(s)listed below. „r,,,,: BID Soil Survey Area: Washington County,Oregon Survey Area Data: Version 13,Sep 18,2015 C Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 roso CID or larger. " D Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Aug 3,2014—Aug 23, • * Not rated or not available 2014 Soil Rating Points The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were a A compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting a A/D of map unit boundaries may be evident. ® B ®i B/D USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/13/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group—Washington County,Oregon Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group—Summary by Map Unit—Washington County,Oregon(OR067) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 37B Quatama loam,3 to 7 C 3.5 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 3.5 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation,are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups(A, B, C, and D)and three dual classes(A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate(low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group(A/D, B/D, or C/D),the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/13/2016 211 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 • Hydrologic Soil Group—Washington County,Oregon Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Tie-break Rule: Higher USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/13/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 .-.-•❖:❖.❖..,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.....,,......,❖.•-•-.:,,,:•••••••::-s:••:»::.::•:-:••-:.•:ees:•:�i ea:❖:❖:e�.❖:ee❖:ca:❖:•:•,:.:::;___....::;::::::::117:::;:'!,',7. ..... - - - - .� PBS a. r. �•� r ar aP-PE RUNG r t . $+ Emlmrmwntal SUB BASIN Al SW 89TH AVE.,.,._NUE INRLTRAnoN 1 r" PLANTER FOR r n.. ...111) � . " _�— SUB BASIN At(ST20) p/ 1 ' • I SUB BASIN B4 .b I FLOW-THROUGH ' t I I{ \ itill;l"r* ' FF=289.9 Prue BASIN ez(sn) HAMPTON INN 8,SUITES FF=290.9 I t II X !SUB BASIN B2 , JI ucH Q NTERsuRBnsIN B6(sT3J m 11 j A _i h PIPE RUN I : •-r + • +'+ I \\ J � � � � �Q I F,,,,,,L,,I ,,,,„,2 RARON _1 fSUB I ,. �� / / T3) I ;IPE RIUN 2 •� 0 0 i y II Y� 1 iii. 1111 m t PPE RU11-00 N] PLANTERFOR \ �,SUB BAS N B3(6TA) \ ' i PIPERUN6 ♦ P' , u3 W 0 _ - - 3'^. ice. • � I ea W b a.2 to L I r.' € ROCiF GAROCN 'ILI�I N Z 2 \2 iii tl7 ``I �\-PPERurvS hi II O1 tO y SUB BASIN B3 �I FF=277.0 b��p? E y COa SUB BASIN 81 _ re c. ----. --..... `...�—' • _ II i PIPE RUN9 • (' L ' _ ms— T I i ■ ® ap r0 rf• a• II O�' aI ® FLOW CONTROL MH ST38 E • a �' G I I'1 I IIII I= T�� l , INFILTRATION PPE RUN) ` � p gill PLANTER FOR - UB BASIN Bi(ST11) #s-s-s r ® -;-" B II , I El.. I PIPE RUN 6 ® b _ 6'CPNCRETE w R€Tawrvc �'�'. — r._ s. ` c_e � w L- •-.— wALL--- — SUB BASIN _ #� SUB BASIN PIPE RUN 1 r L s A3 A4 _ SW 70TH AVENUE ' -''--7 "' s.e z - ...-..... •— _ IPLANTEA FOR ,.Aev0.::1,0001 _ a re�..ns+E'E'cE t I (i we BAs N A (sTxs) l� VAS nRix�� Lx.Dl nR 1 J CI II P:AkI1C \ \ \\ Y ' ' 1 a II V� � �� BCALE.NONE A I; i 5f—+ INNFlLTRARON LANTEfl FOR 4'-- l �. SUB BASIN A3 \: (ST30) :11) , , wo.Ecr. m®,s. 1 oa PIPE RUN 10 EXI OR- Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX D Water Quality and Quantity Calculations May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 WATER QUALITY May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PB Environmental (41S) i> Aik (16S) i>A49 Sub basin B1 (private) Infiltration Planter ST11 Sub basin Al (public) Infiltration Planter ST20 POST POST 44S N 43' 6S i> 50 Sub basin A2 (public) Infiltration Planter ST23 Sub basin B2 (private) Flow-through Planter POST POST ST1 (es) i> 56 45S:- N 42' Sub basin A3 (public) Infiltration Planter ST30 Sub basin B3(private) Infiltration Planter ST4 POST POST (60S) N 61 ' 0 I> Sub basin B4 (private) Flow-through Planter POST ST3 Sub basin A4 (public) Infiltration Planter ST25 POST Subcat Reach on. Link Routing Diagram for 70976_STMQuality Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental, Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 70976_STMQuality Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (selected nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 23,481 98 parking lot (41S) 22,109 98 parking lot and sidewalk (45S) 39,445 98 roadway and sidewalk (15, 6S, 9S, 16S) 24,194 98 roof (44S, 45S, 60S) 109,229 98 TOTAL AREA 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Sub basin A4 (public) POST Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 830 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 9,927 98 roadway and sidewalk 9,927 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Sub basin A4 (public) POST Hydrograph 0.065 0.06 cfs —Runoff' 0.06: 0.055= Type IA 24-hr 0.05: 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22 0.045_... Runoff Area=9,927 sf Runoff Volume=830 cf w 0.04_ Runoff Depth>1.00" • 0.035: Tc=5.0min LL 0.03 CN=0/98 0.025—__ 0.02 • 1 , 0.015] 0.01 0.005- 0 m ._9. .6, .., .,.. .,.y.... .... .... .... .........��,,, .,,.E.,., .,,,(,.,,i..,. .... ,,,* 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD© 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Sub basin A2 (public) POST Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 629 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 7,525 98 roadway and sidewalk 7,525 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 6S: Sub basin A2 (public) POST Hydrograph -..._. ..---------- ..__,---, 0.048 0.046= 0.04 cfs 1 —Runoff 0044° 0.042i Type IA 24-hr 0 04- 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" 0.0387 , , 0 036 Runoff Area=7,525 sf 0.034i o.032 � Runoff Volume=629 cf 0 02s' Runoff;Depth> .00 0 026: Tc=5.0 min 3 0.024;7. LT 0.022; CN=0/98 0.02 0.018 0.0164- 0.0144 .016'0.014= 0.012 x ...- 0.008 0.006 0.004 �__ - 0.002 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Sub basin A3 (public) POST Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 692 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 8,275 98 roadway and sidewalk 8,275 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 9S: Sub basin A3 (public) POST 0.055- - Hydrograph 0.05 cfs —Runofff 0.05 0.045= _ Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22 0.04 Runoff Area=8,275 sf 0.035: Runoff Volume=692 cf 0.03- : L Runoff Depth>1.00 - Tc=5.0 min a 0.025_ CN=0/98 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005} 0,...1 2 3 48 9 1'0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment 16S: Sub basin Al (public) POST Runoff = 0.08 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,147 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 13,718 98 roadway and sidewalk 13,718 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 16S: Sub basin Al (public) POST Hydrograph 0.09 [- (0.08 cfs I _ _ Runoff 0.08 Type IA 24-hr 0.075 007_. .. 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=-1.22"_ 0.065= Runoff Area=13,718 sf 0.06 Runoff Volume=1,147 cf 0.055_ ... E 0.05= _ RunoffDepth>1.00" 0.045_ Tc=5.0 min CN-0198 a 0.04 , 0.035 0.03 0.025-i - 0.02= 0.015 0.01 __- E � -_ 0.005 _ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 41S: Sub basin B1 (private) POST Runoff = 0.14 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,963 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description * 23,481 98 parking lot 23,481 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 41S: Sub basin BI (private) POST Hydrograph 0 15-7.-- � � 10.14 cfs 1 Runoff 0.14 013 Type IA 24-hr 0.12- 50!)/0 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22". 011: Runoff Area 23,481 sf 0.1Runoff Volume=1,963-cf 009- Runoff Depth>1.00 0.O8 3 Tc=5.0'min s LL 007 ' _,. 0.0s 0.05? 0.041 � 0.03 1 0.02 ' 0.01:7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment 44S: Sub basin B2 (private) POST Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 387 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 4,628 98 roof 4,628 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 44S: Sub basin B2 (private) POST Hydrograph 0.03: . .. I 0.03 cfs� , —Runoff 0.028 0.026: Type IA 24-hr 0.024: r 50% 2yr NOAA Rai-nfafl=1-.22" 0.022= Runoff Area=4,628 sf 0.02= Runoff Volume=387 cf 0.018= Runoff Depth>1.0 "_ 0.016 Tc=5• 0 min 0.014 --- CN=0l98 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006- 0.004 0.002-4. - - ;- ; 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 45S: Sub basin B3 (private) POST Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 2,186 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description 22,109 98 parking lot and sidewalk 4,033 98 roof 26,142 98 Weighted Average 26,142 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: Sub basin B3 (private) POST Hydrograph 017 ;.. ._ ,-....;. 0.16= 0.16 cfs —Runoff o 15= _ Type._ IA 24-hr - 014 50% 2 r NOAA Rainfall=1.22 0.131 y- :_ 0.12_ ' Runoff Area=26,142 sf -- 0.11 Runoff Volume=2,186 cf „ 0.1 Runoff-Depth>1.00" " 009_ -- - - Tc=5.0`min LL 0 08 0.07- CN=0798-- 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.024 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) , I 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Subcatchment 60S: Sub basin B4 (private) POST Runoff = 0.09 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,299 cf, Depth> 1.00" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Area (sf) CN Description * 15,533 98 roof 15,533 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 60S: Sub basin B4 (private) POST Hydrograph 0.09 cfs L ' -Runoff II 0.095: 0.09: 0085- ,.- -__ Type IA 24- h r- 0.0650% 2yr NOAARainfall=1.22" 0.0752 Runoff Area=15,533 sf 0.07: ._ 0.065; Runoff olume=1,299 cf y 0.06 Runoff Depth>1.00 `0.055 Tc=5.0 min 0.05 .. u-0.0451 , CN=0/98 0.04 0.035= 0.03-� 7 i 0.025? 0 02' /„...........0.e..zi 0.015 ......-. ' 0.01 0.005: 0....1 E 1 2,...3....4....56,...7.,..8.,,.9..,10..11..12..1�3141j5,.1i61'7 1'....;.,.,�,,,.'.,..j.,,.;.... 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) • 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Pond 42P: Infiltration Planter ST4 Inflow Area = 26,142 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.16 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 2,186 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-lnd method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.68' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 4,053 sf Storage= 2,185 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 1,351 cf 7.00'W x 193.00'L x 1.00'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 405 cf 7.00W x 193.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 2,027 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 791 cf 7.00'W x 193.00'L x 2.00'H GRAVEL 2,702 cf Overall -67 cf Embedded = 2,635 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.42' 67 cf 8.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 191.0' 2,614 cf Total Available Storage Pond 42P: Infiltration Planter ST4 Hydrograph 017_ 0 16= 0.16 cfs ( Inflow 015_ _- 094_ Inflow Area--26,142 sf 0 13Peak flev=0 68' 0.12 0.113 Storage=2,185 cf 0.09 0 008- 0.073 006 = 0.05 - -- -- 0.043 0.03 0.02-7- 0 01 20.01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 43P: Flow-through Planter ST1 Inflow Area = 4,628 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.03 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 387 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= -0.78' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,260 sf Storage= 387 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 315 cf 7.00W x 90.00'L x 0.50'H FLOW THROUGH PLANTER #2 -1.50' 189 cf 7.00W x 90.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 945 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 278 cf 7.00'W x 90.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 945 cf Overall - 17 cf Embedded = 928 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 17 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 88.0' 800 cf Total Available Storage Pond 43P: Flow-through Planter ST1 Hydrograph 0.03-- � -� , + a- I I I -I 0.03 cfs I —Inflow 0.028_ . 0.026- - -WI oYYrea 4,62 sf- 0.024= , , Peak Elev=-0.78' o.oz2 0.02 ' Storage=387 cf 0.018? , 0.016, 0.014- T. 0.0122 0.01y - :_ 0.008 0.006- 0.004 3 __ + 0.002 0,...,,, ,,,. .,..� .....:....:....f..., 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920...2;.,,,; 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 1 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Pond 49P: Infiltration Planter ST20 Inflow Area = 13,718 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.08 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,147 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.78' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 2,232 sf Storage= 1,146 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 744 cf 4.00W x 186.00'L x 1.00'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 223 cf 4.00'W x 186.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 1,116 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 332 cf 4.00W x 186.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 1,116 cf Overall - 9 cf Embedded = 1,107 cf x 30.0% Voids #4 -2.42' 9 cf 8.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 27.0' 1,309 cf Total Available Storage Pond 49P: Infiltration Planter ST20 Hydrograph 0.09-- 0 085.'1 9=0.085: '- .I 0.08 cfs -Inflow 0.08= Inflow Area=1-3,718 sf 0065= Peak EIev=0.78' 0.06 Storage=1,146 cf 0.055 m 0.05 0.045_ LL 0.04 ' ' 0.035 ..- 0.03 0.025- 0 021 25 0.021 0.015- 0 005-5 15=0.005= 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Pond 50P: Infiltration Planter ST23 Inflow Area = 7,525 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 629 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.50' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,500 sf Storage= 629 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 500 cf 4.00W x 125.00'L x 1.00'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 150 cf 4.00'W x 125.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 750 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 224 cf 4.00'W x 125.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 750 cf Overall -2 cf Embedded = 748 cf x 30.0% Voids #4 -2.42' 2 cf 8.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 7.0' 877 cf Total Available Storage Pond 50P: Infiltration Planter ST23 Hydrograph 0.05- 0.048 i Inflow 0.046 0.04cfs , 0.044 0.042- Inflow Area=7,525 sf_ 0.04: 0.038: 0.036 Peak Elev=0.50 0034= 00324 Storage-=629 cf-- w 0.028= `-1.0 = __ 0.0265 c 0.024_. LL 0.022_-_ 0.018 0.016 0.014' • 0012_ 0.01 0.008.1 r _ 0.006- , 0.004 0.002- 0 .002=0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Pond 52P: Infiltration Planter ST25 Inflow Area = 9,927 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.06 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 830 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.52' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,920 sf Storage= 830 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 640 cf 4.00W x 160.00'L x 1.00'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 192 cf 4.00'W x 160.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 960 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 281 cf 4.00'W x 160.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 960 cf Overall -22 cf Embedded = 938 cf x 30.0% Voids #4 -2.42' 22 cf 8.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 63.0' 1,135 cf Total Available Storage Pond 52P: Infiltration Planter ST25 Hydrograph 0.065- I , 0.06_ (0.06 cfs —Inflow 0.055-; - ' Inflow,Area=9,927 sf 0.05. Peak EIev=0.52' 0.045`_ 0.04 i Storage-830 cf 2. 0.035- LT 0.03_ 0.025-? 0.02- 0.015 0.01: . 0.005_ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Pond 56P: Infiltration Planter ST30 Inflow Area = 8,275 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 692 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.48' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,680 sf Storage= 691 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 560 cf 4.00'W x 140.00'L x 1.00'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 168 cf 4.00'W x 140.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 840 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 252 cf 4.00'W x 140.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 840 cf Overall - 1 cf Embedded = 839 cf x 30.0% Voids #4 -2.42' 1 cf 8.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 4.0' 981 cf Total Available Storage Pond 56P: Infiltration Planter ST30 Hydrograph 0.055- , ... , .....,.. 0.05 cfs : —Inflow 0.05- 0.045- r Inflow Area=8,275 sf 0.04.. . Pea; Elev=0.48'_ 0.035. ; ; Storage=691 cf.. w 0.03- 3 ° 0.025 _... . 0.02 I 0.015 0.01 ' t I 0.005 .�,,..;.. ,�....;....;,...{...,j,...t..,.�....t....}....t....l.,,.�.,..�....:....:....�,...;...,,.,,.;..,.;.,.., 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Pond 57P: Infiltration Planter ST11 Inflow Area = 23,481 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.14 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,963 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.43' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area=4,921 sf Storage= 1,962 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 1,138 cf 6.50W x 250.00'L x 0.70'H INFILTRATION PLANTER #2 -1.50' 501 cf 6.50W x 257.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 2,506 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 715 cf 6.50'W x 250.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 2,438 cf Overall -55 cf Embedded = 2,383 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 55 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 280.0' 2,408 cf Total Available Storage Pond 57P: Infiltration Planter ST11 Hydrograph 0.15 0.14 cfs —Inflow 0.14 c 013: Inflow Area=23,481 sf 0.12- Peak Elev=O011= 43' 01= Storage=1;,962 cf y 0.09= 3 0.08- LL 0.07- 0.06, 0.05: 0.04 0.03 e 0.02_ 0.01 i W , 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuality Type IA 24-hr 50% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.22" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Summary for Pond 61P: Flow-through Planter ST3 Inflow Area = 15,533 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.00" for 50% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.09 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 1,299 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.83' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 2,436 sf Storage= 1,298 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 812 cf 7.00'W x 116.00'L x 1.00'H FLOW THROUGH PLANTER #2 -1.50' 244 cf 7.00'W x 116.00'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 1,218 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 359 cf 7.00'W x 116.00'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 1,218 cf Overall -22 cf Embedded = 1,196 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 22 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 114.0' 1,437 cf Total Available Storage Pond 61P: Flow-through Planter ST3 Hydrograph 0.1m ti 0.095 0.09 cfs -Inflow 0.085= Inflow Area=15�.53QQ- - - --- - - ti sf- 008:4_ 0.075: = Peak Elev=0.83' 007_ 0.065_ Storage=1,,298 cf H 0.06 0.055 33 0.05= E 0.045= 0.04= 0.035: 0.03 - . 0.025- _ _- 0.02 0.015_ 0.01= 0.005 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 WATER QUANTITY May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 p B Environmental . ( ) 48S Pre-developed <64S> DA62P Post-developed Planter and Flow Control MH Subcat Reach 'one Link Routing Diagram for 70976_STMQuantity Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental, Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 70976_STMQuantity Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 69,784 98 private- impervious (64S) 69,784 86 private- pervious (48S) 54,968 98 public-impervious (48S, 64S) 24,002 86 public- pervious (48S) 218,538 93 TOTAL AREA 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD© 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Runoff = 0.79 cfs @ 7.97 hrs, Volume= 12,160 cf, Depth> 1.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Area (sf) CN Description 24,002 86 public- pervious 15,483 98 public- impervious 69,784 86 private- pervious 109,269 88 Weighted Average 93,786 85.83% Pervious Area 15,483 14.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Hydrograph W 0.85= _Runoff 0.79 cfs 0.75 Type,IA 24-hr. 0.7 ' 2 YR Rainfall=2.44"0.6� = Runoff Area=109,269 sf Runoff'Volume=12,160 cf 0.5 3 0.45 RUrtoff Deptli 1.34" , � � Tc=50 min - 0.35: CN-86%98 0.3= 0.25. • 0.15i; 0.05: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Runoff = 1.41 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 20,099 cf, Depth> 2.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Area (sf) CN Description * 39,485 98 public- impervious * 69,784 98 private- impervious 109,269 98 Weighted Average 109,269 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Hydrograph 1.41 cfs —Runoff` Type IA 24-hr I 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Runoff Area=109 269 sf 1- Runoff Volume=20,099 cf w Runoff Depth>2.21" Tc=50 Min j \ CNOI98OI98 ,/,,,......„2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD© 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Inflow Area = 109,269 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.21" for 2 YR event Inflow = 1.41 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 20,099 cf Outflow = 0.79 cfs @ 8.24 hrs, Volume= 18,229 cf, Atten= 44%, Lag= 20.7 min Primary = 0.79 cfs @ 8.24 hrs, Volume= 18,229 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.08' @ 8.24 hrs Surf.Area= 12,871 sf Storage= 3,556 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 119.7 min calculated for 18,191 cf(91% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 53.6 min ( 726.9-673.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 4,290 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.00'H Planter #2 -1.50' 1,287 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 6,435 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 1,927 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 6,435 cf Overall - 13 cf Embedded = 6,423 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 13 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 65.0' 7,517 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary -4.67' 1.5"Vert. Orifice A C= 0.600 #2 Primary -1.64' 4.5"Vert. Orifice B C= 0.600 rimary OutFlow Max=0.79 cfs @ 8.24 hrs HW=0.08' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice A (Orifice Controls 0.13 cfs © 10.42 fps) 2=Orifice B (Orifice Controls 0.66 cfs @ 5.95 fps) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 2 YR Rainfall=2.44" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Hydrograph I {1.41 cfs —Inflow I —Primary Inflow Area=109,269 sf Peak Elev=O.08' Storage=3,556 cf _. 0.79 cfs 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD©10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Runoff = 1.38 cfs @ 7.95 hrs, Volume= 20,160 cf, Depth> 2.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 24,002 86 public- pervious 15,483 98 public- impervious 69,784 86 private- pervious 109,269 88 Weighted Average 93,786 85.83% Pervious Area 15,483 14.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Hydrograph I I I 1.38 cfs I —Runoff` I Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Runoff Area=109,269 sf 1- Runoff Volume=20,160 cf F Runoff Depth>2.,21" LL Tc=50 m i n CN=86/98 { 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Runoff = 2.03 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 29,240 cf, Depth> 3.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Area (sf) CN Description 39,485 98 public- impervious 69,784 98 private- impervious 109,269 98 Weighted Average 109,269 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Hydrograph 2.03 cfs —Runoff` 2 } ` Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Runoff Area=109,269 sf 7,7 Runoff Volume=29,240 cf Runoff Depth>3.21" LL 1 Te-=5:0 min CN=0198 o , 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Inflow Area = 109,269 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.21" for 10 YR event Inflow = 2.03 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 29,240 cf Outflow = 0.86 cfs © 8.42 hrs, Volume= 27,280 cf, Atten= 57%, Lag= 31.2 min Primary = 0.86 cfs @ 8.42 hrs, Volume= 27,280 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.43' @ 8.42 hrs Surf.Area= 12,871 sf Storage= 5,052 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 101.9 min calculated for 27,223 cf(93% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 52.7 min ( 715.8-663.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 4,290 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.00'H Planter #2 -1.50' 1,287 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 6,435 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 1,927 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 6,435 cf Overall - 13 cf Embedded = 6,423 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 13 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 65.0' 7,517 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary -4.67' 1.5"Vert. Orifice A C= 0.600 #2 Primary -1.64' 4.5"Vert. Orifice B C= 0.600 rimary OutFlow Max=0.86 cfs @ 8.42 hrs HW=0.43' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice A (Orifice Controls 0.13 cfs @ 10.80 fps) 2 Orifice B (Orifice Controls 0.73 cfs @ 6.60 fps) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 10 YR Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Hydrograph 12.03 cfs I —Inflow —Primary Inflow Area=109,269 sf Peak Elev=0.43' Storage=5,052 cf 0 1i - 0.86 cfs I I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Runoff = 1.65 cfs © 7.94 hrs, Volume= 23,872 cf, Depth> 2.62" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 24,002 86 public- pervious 15,483 98 public- impervious 69,784 86 private- pervious 109,269 88 Weighted Average 93,786 85.83% Pervious Area 15,483 14.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Hydrograph 1 65 cfs I —Runoff` j Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Runoff Area=109,269 sf Runoff Volume=23,872 cf '� RunoffDepth>2.62" Tc=50 min CN=86/98 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) , n 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Runoff = 2.30 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 33,320 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 39,485 98 public- impervious 69,784 98 private- impervious 109,269 98 Weighted Average 109,269 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Hydrograph 2.30 cfs —Runoff` Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall-73.90" Runoff Area=109,269 sf Runoff Volume=33,320 cf Runoff Depth>3.66" Tc=5.0 min 1 CN=O/9i8 . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 74 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 sin 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Inflow Area = 109,269 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.66" for 25 YR event Inflow = 2.30 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 33,320 cf Outflow = 0.90 cfs @ 8.49 hrs, Volume= 31,336 cf, Atten= 61%, Lag= 35.5 min Primary = 0.90 cfs @ 8.49 hrs, Volume= 31,336 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 0.60' @ 8.49 hrs Surf.Area= 12,871 sf Storage= 5,813 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 98.9 min calculated for 31,336 cf(94% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 54.7 min ( 714.7-660.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 4,290 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.00'H Planter #2 -1.50' 1,287 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 6,435 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 1,927 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 6,435 cf Overall - 13 cf Embedded = 6,423 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 13 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 65.0' 7,517 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary -4.67' 1.5" Vert. Orifice A C= 0.600 #2 Primary -1.64' 4.5"Vert. Orifice B C= 0.600 rimary OutFlow Max=0.90 cfs @ 8.49 hrs HW=0.60' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice A (Orifice Controls 0.13 cfs @ 10.99 fps) 2=Orifice B (Orifice Controls 0.76 cfs @ 6.90 fps) 70976 STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Hydrograph II 12.30 cfs I —Inflow —Primary Inflow Area-109,269 sf 2- Peak Elev=0.60' Storage=5,813 c'f LL 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 2,660 cf, Depth> 0.29" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Area (sf) CN Description * 24,002 86 public- pervious * 15,483 98 public- impervious * 69,784 86 private- pervious 109,269 88 Weighted Average 93,786 85.83% Pervious Area 15,483 14.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 48S: Pre-developed Hydrograph 0.135- ----, I-...... , ,- _ - ,... _ - -r I...-- 0.13- ' I I 1 .... I '_-. __ ..... _ _ -1 I I ......... 0.125 1 0.12 cfs 1 ' —Runoff` 012: 0.11Type IA 5 , 24-hr 0.105I 42% 2yr NOAA Rai-nall=102"- 0.095=- ; Runoff Area=109,269 sf 0 _ 0.08585- - Runoff Volume=2,660 cf - __, - � � -- 0.08-:- RunoffDe 50.29 w ' 0.075: .. pts..- 42- 0.07- Tc=50 m i n 30.065_ IT 0.06: ' , ' CN=86198 0.055= _.. 0.05 ` l. 0.045 0.04= i 0.035: r.. 0.03= ' ' ,_ ' 0.025 , 0.02= '..._ ....................9 0.015 0.01 0.005= 1 ; 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) . C 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Runoff = 0.53 cfs @ 7.92 hrs, Volume= 7,364 cf, Depth> 0.81" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Area (sf) CN Description 39,485 98 public- impervious 69,784 98 private- impervious 109,269 98 Weighted Average 109,269 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 64S: Post-developed Hydrograph 0.55- 0.53 cfs —Runoff` 0.5 Type 1A 24 hr- 0.45- 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" - Runciff Area=109,269 sf Runoff Volume=7,364 cf 0.35.= -- 1--- -- -- - w unoff Depth>0.81" 3 0.3- = _ Tc5.0' - - mrn LL 0.25- - _ CN=0198 i 0.2; 0.1 05,- 0 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Inflow Area = 109,269 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.81" for 42% 2yr NOAA event Inflow = 0.53 cfs @ 7.92 hrs, Volume= 7,364 cf Outflow = 0.10 cfs © 11.32 hrs, Volume= 6,731 cf, Atten= 81%, Lag= 204.0 min Primary = 0.10 cfs @ 11.32 hrs, Volume= 6,731 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs/2 Peak Elev= -1.64' @ 11.32 hrs Surf.Area=4,290 sf Storage= 1,764 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 193.3 min calculated for 6,731 cf(91% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 134.2 min ( 845.5-711.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 4,290 cf 65.50W x 65.50'L x 1.00'H Planter #2 -1.50' 1,287 cf 65.50W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GROWING MEDIIUM 6,435 cf Overall x 20.0%Voids #3 -3.00' 1,927 cf 65.50'W x 65.50'L x 1.50'H GRAVEL 6,435 cf Overall - 13 cf Embedded = 6,423 cf x 30.0%Voids #4 -2.25' 13 cf 6.0" Round PERF. PIPE Inside#3 L= 65.0' 7,517 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary -4.67' 1.5"Vert. Orifice A C= 0.600 #2 Primary -1.64' 4.5"Vert. Orifice B C= 0.600 rimary OutFlow Max=0.10 cfs @ 11.32 hrs HW=-1.64' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice A (Orifice Controls 0.10 cfs @ 8.30 fps) 2=Orifice B (Orifice Controls 0.00 cfs @ 0.20 fps) r 70976_STMQuantity Type IA 24-hr 42% 2yr NOAA Rainfall=1.02" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 5/23/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Pond 62P: Planter and Flow Control MH Hydrograph 0.55- -10.53 cfs I =- .. —Inflow I - —Primary 0.5- _ _ _ Inflow Area=109,269 sf 0.45- 4 Peak Elev=-1.6 ' 0.4; Storage=1,764 cf 0.35 iii - , 0.3- 3 _o LL 0.25— 0.2 0.15- _ • __, ;- 0.10,cfs ' 0.1� 0.05 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX E Conveyance Calculations May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBSEnvironmental Project: Tigard Hampton Inn &Suites PBS#: 70976.000 Date: 05/23/17 Conveyance Design Peak Flow Pipe Full Full %of Pipe Run From Q(25) Dia. Slope Manning Velocity Capacity Capacity Sub Basin (cfs) (in.) (ft./ft.) "n" V(fps) Q(cfs) 1 B2 0.10 6 0.0660 0.013 7.36 1.45 6.92% 2 B4 0.33 6 0.0880 0.013 8.50 1.67 19.77% 3 B3 0.55 8 0.0050 0.013 2.45 0.86 64.19% 4 B3 and B4 0.88 8 0.0140 0.013 4.11 1.43 61.38% 5 B2, B3 B4 0.98 8 0.0700 0.013 9.18 3:21 30.57%' 6 B1 0.54 6 0.0500 0.013 6:41 1.26 42.92% 7 B1, B2, B3 B4 1.52 10 0.0100 0.013 4.03 2.20 69..19% 8 Al 0.29 8 0.0080 0.013 3.10 1.08 26.76% 9 A2 0.16 8 0.1500 0.013 13.44 4.69 3.41% 10 A3 0.17 8 0.1300 0.013 12.52 4.37 3.89% 11 A4 0.19 8 0.1200 0.013 12.02 4.20 4.53% Conveyance 5/23/2017 (41s) (16s) Sub basin B1 (private) Sub basin Al (public) POST POST <44S> 6S Sub basin A2 (public) Sub basin B2 (private) POST POST 45S 9S Sub basin A3 (public) Sub basin B3 (private) POST POST ( ) 47S0 Sub basin B4 (private) Sub basin A4 (public) POST POST SubCat Reach on. Link Routing Diagram for 70976_STM Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental, Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Sub basin A4 (public) POST Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 2,794 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area ( fl CN sDescription 9,163 98 roadway and sidewalk 9,163 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Sub basin A4 (public) POST Hydrograph 0.21 0.2= _.., I 0.19 cfs L—Runoff 0.19 _ ._ Type IA24-h.r-_ 0.17 0.164 __ _ 3-25 YR Rainfall=3.90" 0.15 0.14-- _ __ Runoff area=9,a-fi3 sf 0.13 • .12w RunoffVokume=2,794 cf:.:::::. 0 1 Runoff Depth>3.66" • 0.09 _ I'c=5.0 min 0.08= 0.07= ! --; CN=0198 0.06= 0.05- 0.04 0.03 0.02 r < 0.01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) i , 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Sub basin A2 (public) POST Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 2,295 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description * 7,525 98 roadway and sidewalk 7,525 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 6S: Sub basin A2 (public) POST Hydrograph 0.17 I .- ' I 0.16 cfs 1 —Runoff 0.16: 0.15= Type IAr24 hr-- 0 14: _ 013=-- -25 I�R�Rainfall=3.90" 0.12_ Runoff Area=7,525 sf 0.11= : Runoff Volume=2,295 cf 3 0.09 Runoff Depthy3.66" 008_ ... 0 07_ . Tc=5.0 min....... 0.06: ... , CN=0/98 0.05 . ... . 0.04= 0.034 _ ,, 0.02; ,. ---- - -- ".„.„......... ......,,,,/ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Sub basin A3 (public) POST Runoff = 0.17 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 2,523 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 8,275 98 roadway and sidewalk 8,275 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 9S: Sub basin A3 (public) POST Hydrograph T r I" I 0.18 ,-- i 0.17 cfs;, —Runoff Type_IA.24,hr-. - - -- -- - . 0.15 __...�.. � ._-; , 0.14 25 YR;Rainfall '3.90" 0.13 Runoff Area=8,275 sf 0.12— 3 E 0.11_ Runoff Volume=2,523 cf 0.09 Runoff Depth>3.66" 0LT 0.08: Tc-5.0 ruin 007 0.06= - - CN 0/98 0.05= 0.044 0.03 001 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment 16S: Sub basin Al (public) POST Runoff = 0.29 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 4,183 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description * 13,718 98 roadway and sidewalk 13,718 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 16S: Sub basin Al (public) POST Hydrograph 0.32_.... , 0.3_...... I 0.29 cfs 1 —Runoff" 0 28- 0.26''..: Type IA,24-h r 0.24=_ ., __ 25 YRa RainfalI-3:90"__ 022 Runoff Area=13,718 sf 02m _ , , 0.18 Runoff Volume=4,183 cf 3 0.16: Runoff Depth>3.66"...... 0.12_ Yc =5•�ruin-- N=0198 00aW 0.06 ; 0.0a 0.02: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Y 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment 41S: Sub basin B1 (private) POST Runoff = 0.49 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 7,160 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description * 23,481 98 parking lot 23,481 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 41S: Sub basin B1 (private) POST Hydrograph 0.55— ...., --- f f , III II 0.49 cfs i —Runoff' 0.5:-'- 0 — 0.45- .... Type IA,24-hr- II 0.4- 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" 0.35- I _ Runoff Area=23,481 sf f, 0.3- Runoff Volume=7,160 cf Runoff Depthy3.66" . 0.25 Tc=5.0 m i n CN=0/98 0.15: , ,.... .v/j 1 0.05- I . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 44S: Sub basin B2 (private) POST Runoff = 0.10 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 1,411 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description 4,628 98 roof 4,628 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 44S: Sub basin B2 (private) POST Hydrograph 0105n ' 0 0.10 cfs —Runoff' 0.095 0.09: ;_ Type IA,24-hr 0 085= 0 08 25 YR'Rainfall-3.90" - _ _ _ - - - 0.0751 007 Runoff Area=4,628 sf 0.0654] ^ 006= Runoff Volume=+1,41' cf ;0005 Runoff Depth>3.66" 0.045= Tc=5.0 nein 0.04 0.035 CN=0/98 0.03 0.025 e 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 00. 1 2.,..3....45,...6..,.7....8,...9.,.10...1;1. 1,213...1,41'51(61'71'8.,,192021222,.,,. 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment 45S: Sub basin B3 (private) POST Runoff = 0.55 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 7,972 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description * 22,109 98 parking lot and sidewalk * 4,033 98 roof 26,142 98 Weighted Average 26,142 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: Sub basin B3 (private) POST Hydrograph 0.67 1117 T El 0.55 cfs —Runoff` 0.55 Type IA 24-hr 0.45- _._ - - �- 25 YRRainfal1=3.90" 0.4- Runoff Area=26,142 sf y 0.35- Runoff Volume=7,9 2 cf 0 0.3- Runoff-Dept->-3 6&" 0.25- Tc=5.G min...... 0.2- C N-0198 0.15 ........... 0.05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 70976_STM Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental Printed 2/20/2017 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 00668 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 47S: Sub basin B4 (private) POST Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 7.90 hrs, Volume= 4,737 cf, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 YR Rainfall=3.90" Area (sf) CN Description * 15,533 98 roof 15,533 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 47S: Sub basin B4 (private) POST Hydrograph 0.36 i 0.34: I 0.33 cfs I —Runoff` 032_ 03: Tx pe_Ik24-hr. _ 0.28= _... !_ ..... _ , 25 YR,Rainfall=3:90" 0.26 0.24 ........_ Runoff Area=15,533 sf 0 22 ......., u 02i Runoff Volume=4,737 cf 018 ...... __ Runoff Depth>3.66" o e LL 0.16= Tc=5.0.min 0.12; - , i\ CN0/98N0/98 0.08: 0.06 0.041 0.02 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Tigard Hampton Inn&Suites Drainage Report SW 69th Avenue,Tigard,Oregon 97223 APPENDIX F Stormwater Plan and Details May 2017 Engineering+ Project:No.70976.000 PBS Environmental a. PLAN SHEET LEGEND: PLAN SHEET ABBREVIATIONS: PBS ENGINEERING+ENVIRONMENTAL TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT -%- CONSTRUCHON FENCE BBREVIATION OFSFRPt OM OFWALL GENERAL NOTES CONSTRUCTION NOTES SHUTDOWN SEQUENCING NOTES DESIGN CONTOUR CB LATCH BASIN THESE NOTES ARE SUPPLEMENTAL TOTHE GLNEROL coxsmucnau NOTES PROVIDED DY THE PRESIDING AGENCY(s). I. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ONE SET OF TVW°STAMPED APPROVED PUNS ON I CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE AND VERIFY LOCATION,ELEVATION.AND SIZE P B S CO CLEANOUTI. CONSTRUCTION SITE AT ALL TIMES. OE EXIST.°WATER MAN W ...........AAAA-..-.1Bb...............-... EXISTING LONTGM COP CITU E IRCARO PROdfcTMOBllvgnox pDRIVEWAY RbI PIPE NCEITY13,11 MAIN IN POLYETHYNE ENCASEMENT SAWCUT UNE EXISTING GRADE I. DOCUMENTATION FROM THE PRESIDING JURISDICTION FRANCHISE UTILITIES ANO THE PROJECT 2 sCnEDGEOTYWDPaECGNSiRUCWR TIOx MEETixG.TLLEPHOxE 014Soa.eaO.SDDp�"smucnou To - CONSTRUCT TVWD ADDENDUM SAND DETAIL,INSTALL 1. EOCOMBINATION AIR AND SRRNWAER UNE FINISH TOPOGRAPHIC Y. VACUUMVALVESAT ALL INTERMEDIATE HIGH POINTS(PER WWI, EngimsTong+ s SHALLBE IN ACCORDANCE WITnqwwgIAMERICIx RIOTER WORKS DETAIL TEnvironmental lFG FINISH Assocur )STANDARDS RATER UNE Fu FLANGE z. . 314 uS" 6IE NCPFSE^ON UTILITIES Pawn TO ORDERING OF Valeavar.t5111 Shwa to SANITARY SEWER UTE L INVERT CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH EXCAVATION WORK, e. ALL WORK WILL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY WHO. INSPECTION CONNECTION T EXISTING MAIN.COORDINATE WGH TVWD FOR 3604590434.13 NJ MECHANICAL JOINT FITTING SHALL OF NEW MANUFACTUREA EMEAENT s. AND OF 5 PIPES BEDUCTILE IIALL BE OM.CENIJOINT DDLTILE' , � OW RIGHT OFVAY NECORD ANY OBSERVED CONFLICT BETWEEN EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION IRON CU5552ALL RIP RAP SO T PIPE MANHOLE ° NOTIFICATION TOTHEOWNER.OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AN 0 FITTINGS SHALL BE AND MADE IN THE USA, NHANICAL JOINT, NTuoLSSOTHERWISESPECeE 20 BACKFILL SHUTDOWNOF O EXISTING M.MAIN.HANDS INSPECTOR WILL PROVIDE NOTICE y0.O PROFFSP 6\.\\\\\\\�'I pREA WO % sSOPE CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND/OR DECOYSTHE OWNER.THE OWNERS :socslugxD THE ENGINEER OF RECORD SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLEFOR TO COVER FOR ALL WATER - 5 '"MTD ssco SANITARY SEWER CLFANOUP TED WITH COHFUCT3 THAT OCCUR DUCE CONSTRUCTION HAS BEGUNA UNT t SEMER MANHOLE 5 CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD FULLY LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING UTILITIES NOT PROPERLY LOCATED DG E TH RW SF "OF STORMWATER E RAD.o EITESTgMWATER CROSS s VALVE OPERATING NUT EXTENSIONS WWI BE REQUIRED. TUESOUGH TSTCRMWATER N HOLE T"E"L" PERCEIVED AMBIGUITY WITH THE DELINEATION OF THE PROJECT AREA.eV RIGH,OFMAY OR PROPER,LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY D.OwxER IMMEDIATELYOF Aur COxaICT3OR 0 eWELL AS SECTION 3.2 OF ANSEAVVVVA CE00.EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE SPECHED. EXISTING PIPE AND TRENCH.EFFORTS SHALL BE MADE TO NOT ALLOW STORMWATER TEE TRENCH STORMWATER rAPPLICABLE PERMITS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH WORK WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS 'EXPIRES,CONNECT TO EXISTING MAINS MIMI TAPPING SLEEVE ANO GATE VALVE INSTALL.PER 23 1 ,1,0 TC TOP OF CURB OR WITHIN THE PUBLIC RGHT.OF WAY. SECTION C AND STANDARD DETAIL TAPPING VALVE SHALL BE FLANGE BY MI TE AND PUMPS AT THE CONNECTON POINTS.IT SHALL BE AT HE WHO'S E I COVERED AREA TTP VP Of R TW OF ROOF PAVEMENT 0. VALVE AND SHALL MATCH HYDRANT LINE SIZE.FOR HYDRANT INSTALLATIONS IN iroN CONJUNCTION'MTH NEW MAI BOLL DISCRETION TO ALLOW CONNECTION TO THE WATER SYSTEM. CONNECT TO MAN WITH STANDARD MI h\\\\1010\\\\\1006\\\\\`f T-GILT AREA Pin TUAIA VALLEY WATER....CT nvE(s)MDucIuEER.RE"C RD�AiDTHS 000ET;20..11„EUCBY NJ BY FUNGE TEE FITTING AND FUNGE BY NJ GATE VALVE.DO NOT EXCAVATE 7. CAP OR PLUG SECTIONS OF EXISTING MAIN AT BOTH ENDS OE nr TOP OF WALL CONTRACTOR IS TO REVIEW LINES OF COMMUNICATOR SCHEDULE OF WORK AND COORDINATION OF NECESSARY BELOW SUB BASE GRADE BACKFILL OVEREXCAVATEO AREAS WITH CRUSHED ROCK PER ABANDONMENT.COORDINATE INSPECTION WITH TVWD.PIPE ANDD ® STORNWATER MANHOLE nTYPICAL INSPECTIONS2,2.B TO PROVIDE A FIRM THE REQUIREMENTS Of SECTION PROVIDE A FITTINGS SHALL SWABBED AND A VISUAL PRESSURE TEST VILL BE L UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE SQUARE.LEV,CONCRETE PIER BLOCK UNDERNEATH THE HyDRANT BLOCK SHALL DE CONDUCTED. • DITCH INLET W WATER UNE S. AFTER INSTALLATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES.AND PRIOR TO BEGINNING SITE WORK ACTIVITY.THE EIGHT INCHES THICK AND 12 INCHES ON EACH SIOE.PLACE HYDRANT CAREFULLY TO W/ MTH CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER OF RECORD AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR COMPLETION OF ANAVOD DAMAGE TO THE PIER JOINTING PROCEDURES SHALL CONFORM TO O. • BIOREPExnON OVERFLOW EROSION CONTROL INSPECTION. AND TO FLUSH MAIN.TVW°TO TAKE WATER WATER QUALITY SAMPLE N • DRAINAGE ARROW EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGENDRESTRAINED JOINT FOLLOWER GLANDS PER CHAPTER s AFTER HYDRANT IS IN PUCE W o FROM FABRIC ON BASE ROCK BEFORE PLACEMENT OF DRAIN I— E (FROM TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY) H THE D CONDUCTOR ON TIME AND MATERIALS r.CAP SEDIMENTATION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PELF RSIG SOFEDIMEN ATION OR DAMAGE PER WEEK. OTHER TILE Q III THRUST BLOCK TREE SCRIP AND TAKE NECESSARY STSIGNIFICANT STORM EPS EVEN, ROUTINELY AND AND CLEANLINESS OF STORMWATER STRUCTURES ;ANT HAS BEEN PUCED.THE DRAIN ROCK.CKETB A TVwO OI y LU 2 DECIDUOUS 0 MAINTAIN THEFUNCTIONNT ING, CITY OF TIGARD 06 Q In WATER VALVELE BLOCK * REMOVAL OF STRDLTDRESWAgTERAL OISPOSAIreACKFILLIxGNOT CONNECT DRAINAGE SYSTEM TO SET ALL HYDRANTS PLUMB AND NO.= GRADING PLAN PERMIT NOTES Z > 0 N F— . WATER VALVE LLYNIEEAWS ME 1. IN THE EVENT OF An INADVERTE,OISCOVEIV OF POSSIBLE CULTURAL MATERIALS,INCLUDING HUMAN REMAINS.ALL WORK 'ARAL.'" Z Z O r TIAL HYDRANT AS. 1 THIS GRADING PERMIT IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS FINAL APPROVAL OF WATER METER AREA ss ADDITIONAL CULTURAL MATERIALS Z Q W ADD Z ■ aLOxaFE wATw xETEN ENwONPERED.THE AREA WILL BE SECURED AND PROTEcreD. iiclFcuraBiicx:AmmeauuaiRFr oiaernclF`Icr he CURE SETTpaDAADEs APPROVALOF THE ENnREC NST ucrlw.oEl-ELOPMENT Z = OF ,J VALVE LE ro PROCEED OUTSIDE of THIS BUFFERED % o R HYDRANTS SO THAT THE SAFE,FUNGE 0 A MINIMUM OF DiREE INCHES PENDING CITY 1. MAXIMUM OF SIX INCHES ABOVE FINISHED GRADE OR SIDEWALK LEVEL. Ar FIRE HYDRANT ICE RHPOJ IF POSSIBLE HUMAN REMAirvTOO 0 EN000AIARED".TTHE OORREGON"STATE POLCE"COM005SIiON CONTRACTORS FXPEN0P LBE DISCONNECTED AND RELOCATED AT THE PUN BET. Q40 J ® CHECK VALVE MANHOLE 106 ON INDIA"SERVICES(CIS),SHPo.AND APPROPRIATE TRIBES WILL ALSO BE NOTIFIED. 2DEBRIS NANY ADRXTOEIC ROAD IS PROM/T . THE CITY MAY ORDER STOPPAGEPa W QL/TRLWSLW NEN • OREGON STAT B ACTION AT ANY TIMEN W Z SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT ■ TOP OF THE DRAIN ROCK TO SEPARATE THE ROCK FROM EARTH COVER. LAID ON • SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE GAS VALVE APPROPRIATE SSSS. AS DESIGNATED BY CIS DEUNI6 GRIFFIN Sao- -ABTA JOHN FOULLY 5D2a0B00t5 OR MAri oIEDERICH 50Y90005TT 2CONTROL IS REOUIRED AT.L TIMES.THE CI,MAY ORDER GE STOPPAGE ~c� STIREET LUMINAIRE WY TO MOVE F cry IST IspBEE To.ALL SANITARY MINER 1.1.$WalliN 10 rEer LATER/U.0E0R 3 FEET VERTICAL,OF a 6.RIICH FOR p of WORK TO EFFECT CORRECTIVE ACTION.AT ANY TIME. _ a �' TO ASSESS THE DISCOVERY QNsuLTATION WITH TIE SHPOIws CccuRRED ANOO PROFESS OVALM AEOOG TICK 0 t- RETAININGWALL BNI OF SEPARATION BELOW THE WATER NNCALL 911,0 NOT SPEAK WITH THE MEDIA E XIMATEIV WOEGREES0 AT IEnsT to re TABLE TO THE SOILS SIGN M.PRONAIY CORNER MONUMENT• WORK WILL NOT RESUME IN THE Q B THEn.IN ANY WAY,DO CAVATED ARTA OF DISCOVERY UNDL ALL PARTIES INVOLVED AGREE UPON A COURSE OF ACTION. , P51(POUNDS,P...°.''....ARE"CH)OHALL PERCENT OF ♦FV IF HUMAN REAINSAREENCOUTERED.DO NOTDETURBTIo"S SHOULD BE AND i ALL MAINS VITHpSTOnC PRESSURE UP. 10o CONSTRUCTED SHALL EX BRwGRTTRIASACCEPSN°T TO EXCEED V CM MARRO% NGIT-a-EAT UNE - BE TESTED AT 150 PSI FOR I HOUR WITH A MAXIMUM LOSS OF 5 PSI.WATER MAINS MATH MAXMM Nsm ASOBTAINED AYMEASURE.EACH LIFT EAASTHO TL BE PM coAAACACTED TO IOTON TEST. THAN 103 PSI SHALL BE PRESSURE ALE BICYCLE RA00 ROMANY — — APPROPRATE TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS TO DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE COURSE OF ACTION LLCOusuLT WITH SHPOAND THE STATIC PRESSURE TOIL,HWRVrnHAMPXIMUM LOSS OFSPSI,TESTED THANES 5 THE BOWOARr. sTHUCNRALF LLS SHALL COMPLY WITH APPENDIX C�APTERs3� ® MODIFIED CURB INLET P1100511 LME "'__-" - """" """""" ORCHAEOLOGIOAL 0000HATIOus MAY BE REQUNED,THIS IS HANDLED ou00000 By CASE BASIS BOISE PROFESSIONOL t2.uPoNSgn000000RY COMaET ON OF TEST NG,THE SEW MIO xS 000 CONNECT ONS TO UNIFORM BUILDING CODE CONSTRUCTION ON EXISTING SLOPES + GREATER THAN s I SHALL BE ACHIEVED ay BENCHING INTO THE EHSTING © TRANSFORMER CNTERIBE —___—_—__ ARCHAEOLOGIST AND PROJECT MANAGER IN CONSULTATION WITH BHP°AND APPROPRIATE TRIBES. DISINFECTION.FLUSHING VELOCITIES SHALL BE AT LEAST 2.5 FEET PER SECOND. UNDERDRAIN MUST BE movom.THE UNDERDRAIN.IF REQUIRED.WILL DISINFECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TH ANNA STANDARD THE STATE ENE DE ING STRUCTURE OR A PART OF A STRUCTURE IS TO IN PLACE.MAKE CLEAN Y��IR�A CROSS SECTION T - 2 WHERE WITHA SAW 05010 OTHER APPROVED CUTTING DEVICE TOONES EST55 TO OR AS DIRECTED. SMCOTH.VERTIGLCUTBAAAArryAAAA,AADISINFECTION SHALL BE U.O.DISINFECTING MIXTURE SHALL BE A CHLORINEWATER EQUIVALENT TO EXXON GTF 12500,ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE STARTINGO BENCH.THEN PLACING A SIX INCH LAYER OF.1,,-3.N.DRAIN ROCK, TV WEI E. B REQUIRED O PERFORM REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES AND OBSTRUCTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TOEREE MGA(MIEEIGRAMB PER IITEF). Alum,COVERING THE DRAIN AocA WITH THE Ao.OVEN FILTER THE DISINFECTION MIMURE WILL BE PREPARED BY IwECTINGpCALCIUMSooIUM FABRIC.SUCCESSIVE BENCHES WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH VERTICAL IM PO. E ^a IrvPOCHLORRE AND WATER SOLUTION INTO THE PIPELINE AT A MEASURED RATE... FILL BEPWEEN TWO TO FLUE FEET AND BELOMPA0TED I"LOVERS 5,TO UNLESS OTHERWISE FRESH(POTABLE)RATER IS ALLOWED TO FLOW THROUGH THE PIPELINE SQ THAT THE o ----------- - ALL DISPOSAL MATERIAL BECOMES THE PROPERIY OF THE CONTRACTOR AT THE PLACE OF ORIGIN,DIRECTED BY THE OWNER IN WRITING TO THE CONTRACTOR DISPOSE OF MATERIAL AT OWN EXPENSE TREATED(CHLORINATED)LUTOMATED) _ ALLWATER SMALL BE RETAINED IN THE PIPEL/NE LONG ENOUGH TO DESTROY NOT EXCEED II AT FINISH GRADE NO ROCK OR SIMILAR 00518 EDHE --'-,,,, PROMPTLY AND DIAMETER SHALL BE quoRIO THE IAL ____,a_.__.__„A_ 5 NECESSARY,COMPLETE REP EPAIRs OF REPTHE LACEMENTS OR MADEED NIA.RIALS MAY BE NO COST TO THE OWNER.REQUIRED IF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD DETERMINES ITLEA, AFEEA TA. STRUCTURAL FILL_ U LINE UNTIL THE WATER DIROUGHOUT THE PIPELINE IS EQUAL CHEMLILLY AND6 THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER FOR STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE NOTIFIED STORM ROO U E — e____M _ ° USE APPROVED NATIVE BACKFILL MATERLAL EXCAVATED FROM WITHIN LIMITS OF THE PROJECT.WHICH IS FREE FROM 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE,BY THECONTRACTOR,OE BALTERroEQGIMLLY TORE PERMANENT x0000 OF SUPPLY. FDRANUNDERDRAIO STARTING BENCHWORK TOVERIF0 Y RRA LEE DETERMINES A.FVE MATERIAL IS NOT SUITABLE.IMPORTED BACAND OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIAL.AND NEi NO FROZEN GROUND.IF THE NEERR OFRRec0REacoi sa1TO DETERMINE THE NEED 000 EXISTING CONDITIONS. 7 SINFECTION WATER TO FLOW INTO A WATERWAY WITHOUT ADEQUATE DILUTION OR BE USED. 00000105000 GRu58100 LEVEL t ENGINEERS R000505ECOMME0DATION 0500005RIERE WILL BE ANOTHER 24-HOUR RETENTION PERIOD PRIOR 70 . oTECHNroAL 0 BACTERIOLOGI TESTING BACTERIOLICAL TESTS WILL BE CLEARING CONSISTS OF PRE.RVING TREES AND OTHER VEGETATION DESIGNATED TO REMAIN IN PLACE;CUTTING IF SPRINGS OR GROUND WATER ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING L REMOVING VEGETATION,SUCH AS WEEDS.GRASSES,CROPS AND BRUSH REMOVING OTHER VEGETATIVE DEBRIS. "D .OPERATION ofVALVES IN THE TITUS%R E AREA IS PRonWITEpEN BY,VwD. , E CONTRACTOR HIM,NOTIFY THE SOILS AND CIVIL U s IN A MANNER THAT WILL ALLOW THE ENGINEERS TIME TO REVIEW THE '. GRUBBING CONSISTS OE.BRUSHING OE STEMS REMAINING ABOVE THE GROUND SURFACE AFTER THE CLEARING WORK TREE STUMPS ROOTS AND OTHER VEGETATION FOUND BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE.PARTIALLY BURIED NATURAL OBJECTS. AALL NEW N0100050U000(EFF0001THEDALTE OIHAIRENcgsEMExT'ERTWYND re SNcATIONAND AND PAREAPIANTOPROPERLYMITIGATETHEWATER p B. ER AND DEBRIS ACCUMULAT OFROM CLEARING AND PE SHALL-RE FLEX.OR APPROVED EQUAL PER IOWA I- a THE CONTRACTOR SHAW HAvE THE SO,S ENWNEER TAKE COMPACTION ¢ ° GRUBBING OPERAnoNS BEcoMETHE coNTRALTORSRoosgNDOTHERVEGETgTION TogDEPTH OF AT LEAST DSFT BELOW ADOENDV IR IT AND iEFFFECTIS on EEw"Ina151. B INFILL MINIMUM OF THREE TESTS WILL BE REQUIRED FOR EACH 2 FEET N WITHIN EXCAVATION LIMITS,REMOVE TREE Z 5 EXCAVATION SUBGRPDE OR SLOPED SGRFACFs0 . 10CLF,M UP ALL AREAS OF WORK PERFORMED UNDER CLEARING ANEI GRUBBING OPERATIONS,INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF (0 OYCvVPgai°ionil000MN:COMPLY ORS Tsr s„THPOUGX test, UNDESIRABLE0 .4 LH,.AND ALL OTHER MATERIAL WHICH ME UNSANITARY,UNSAFE OR UNSIGHTLY,TO THE SAnsFACTTON OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. E. a. SECTIONS ESTABLISHED,UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED IN WRITING BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD.ALT CLEARING AND GRUBBING OPERATIONS AND EARTHWORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE LINES, AND CROSS 0 04 PROJECT CLOSEOUT I- € I. THE CONTRACTORS SURVEYOR IS• ON(S).SURVEY°INNFOOIR"IB"N0I SHALINCLUDE CONDITIONS.. 5050RRYYSEWEDAND Z B. APPROVAL INFRASTRUCTUREiEc.MANHOLES.CATCHBASI"s.VALVES,METERS,RIMS,INVERT ELEVATIONS.PIPE SIZES, CAIN 4 .002 2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY,.ENGINEER OF RECORD IMMEDIATELY OF NSTRUCTION T IS NOT IN GENERAL 5 CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVEDTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE ENG NEER OF aSTRUCTION PoEccUMENTS. pyR ORD WITH ONE(t PAPERCOW AND OF REQLESTEQ ONE DIGITAL '''''''' TRMTtt _ COPY OF THE AS-BUILT SURVEY. IZ °. REQUEST ADDITIONAL ASBUILT SURVEY PG TE MAY AIt DOcuMENTATICN,IF IT IS DEEMED THE INmALSURVEY IS INMEQUg1E. eJ xxo xD. W m 2 T CO.1 OF a. 29 1 ---7,.............s+ EMETramiartd wn A96 v aetwu ww 2 260 PBS ENGINEERING+ENVIRONMENTAL SANITARY PROFILE NOTE • BEE SHEETS C0.1 AND 00.zFOR PROJEOT NOTES AND MASTER LEGEND. • z • i2 NAND.ID MINA,MOE TO EDGE VERT sarvR>R,sRxyEnEGO OTHER UTILITIES KR,BEP4n4„ory BETWEEN • • • 9eaaax4?S • • 3. SEE SxEETB G.onxo c5.e con ON.SITE UTLInEB. iM LEP' • ° IExPw 1118 o SUED- • o 0 RV • - W • C1) MI to w I- asz UjUj -3+20 -3+00 -2+80 -2+60 -2+60 -2+20 -2+00 -,+80 -1+ -, 0 -1+20 -»00 -0+B0 -0+e0 te Z Q y W 2 SW CLINTON STREET 60 J HORIZ SCALE=20 ZO m p T. VERT SCALE=5 H m Z= Ey Ja a .0U = n y ::: 0 • a C., P • 303 __ • 305 2 J Y4 ° -J v v CI ..- I w L 0 .._...� ___ __,_._____-_.. __+—300 0 O —046 Z 1 I. , —._ — 0 U y I 0 • I +290 re 0 4+80 5+00 5+20 5+40 5+60 5+80 8+00 + 6660 a+60 6+eO R00 7+20 7+40 7+50 i- 6 SW CLINTONSTREETCO HORIZ SCALE=20 Z '44O VERT SCALE=5 U 0 LL 1— d Thlt[NEED G4om.In mei 'Z u,I*InInh Infrastructure meewm'.,,05 ' ¢ of a Survey Monument LoGetion Shown on a eacu 602 oat No OesiNn Modification >. ;6 Nor DHeld 66nChang P In ne Perm'Ne2 Ec6 60926 2 GE uld Dame infrastruclure Do Be PIau4 zwEo. ♦Dl " m. INW 2616 ATTENTION w 1.66, .a 6,Foe.RD. J 4+6,.0. 17�,� qem bre ufi..x..,.G.,:r.r. „m,004e..o,Me a n.�.°i T.Cerge,. W C6.2 OF Q. 29 lY e"CONCRETE !� �. 5 2+1 29 +$ }Ft ( Ii„,...,- s-i ..,- .I...., I TAMINGS 1 m(L) 1 5 ALL + I gm MI -- 6.00(L) 6.00' - w --.te us- ,-i _ :w Envirommmt�l za ' au w s n m«, J0.00 r— —__ .a 6 +_ + X-'- ,+'JO IY t• �26(L) STA:H697z { ,g 1 wDOpaW.w' STA:0+67.64 + >"' STA: '' {f\��'5 3 16.32 00'(R) - �• j ^NL°'^ 6. () .N(R) +� \ 00(R) fiEG N CURB AND GUTTER t Q i BEP STANDARD CI.B Ex PD NR - \ s .s„ 13.08(R) `i 3+5 i ��p,EO PfbFF o re R.,.sc \ \ ,..:ti \ \ \ Y,::., 1 oAuwx i ' Q I ` C \ } t at a t('',,,r 7N LEAVE I CJ hh 1 IExPtREs. 12/31/16 I Cn SCALE:1•=20' ) 295 1 I 95 �, 266 • 290-- --r� __ _$__ _ _._-- -..___ ____ I PM STA r 3+0600 t IWC• ( � _—___ __ •• __ _. _.—_290 = W D 285 .......... ...... ..-......... Pw_¢73.40 • tS °6 Z J .......... ............. ........ g ...�._. • ._...... _...... .._ . ............... ............... ..._._.. ..............PMSKA;N�.�-.... __..... ......... ......... 1........ 1 __....... 265 Z W O Sci ' + .,, :ARS{jr Q d 260— — `-- -----{ PRWO�SURFACE,..._ .___ — ---- -_-_ __ OC lg y, - Z 1- Q F. A�<a�06Ea x • a 'w 260 O ,r x c z6s • • • _ � Fa=_zTo O. I- 1 Q 275 .......... _ ...... ) ...::.'- ... .._. .... .A �> ... H • • S' 3S'W WWWi YnB1WWW .. C y 4z Lax ° DY I ',:,''''..2' ! etati —+>w 270 — — 270 • zfis ............. ...... .__.... ............ F �. ...... ..,_ __ _..._..isr-1r PAC za6n3 ...... -..._. z65 ~ —-1" --7c�::- -4,, 260 _ _-- 3.001F S1 6[61 ^ ' -_` 3 1Ofi91116 CAPPED, ' ! --- '. • • 1 I• GXOY • I I I ii 50+00 0120 0+40 0+60 0+60 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+• • • • • '40 2+80 2+80 3+00 3+20 3+40 3+60 3+80 4+00 4+20 4+40 4+60 4+80 5+00 5+20 5+40 5+60 5+80 6+0055 CZ SW 70TH AVENUE 0 HORIZ SCALE=20 y VERT SCALE=5 G Z 280 0 040 PBS ENGINEERING+ENVIRONMENTAL 1= • • • SANITARY PROFILE NOTE g = • z75 — —_ _ —_ _ • --z 5 ,� 6EE6NEET6�.,AND Go.2FOR PROJECT NDTE6AND h,ABTERLEGEND 6ANTAR.66w6RAND0TNERUTUTEs2 MAINTAIN'S'MINIMUM EDGE TO EDGE I VERTICAL 66RAR..TDN6E,wEEN en 6 .. �.;,, 3. 665 68E08 Z 370 - -'— / ,. a�hE — 270 w0 D . — r-,_ G ....— IY • • W •5 T_ ._ _265* v 8 lh - ( I— _ d FN,PC 6 NTt�c0esgn Compo (7)nTaM - 0 a n,.6e"eyMan enu.aeonShonon:.nn,E 60 ! fio z .. Sahara.or Partition Plat No Devon Moddlaallon . > g 6wbnIf It WouM Came 20U*o - To1, I978 002 a PROJECT 6 • • 255 s - 6+DD 6+'2D 6+D 6+'6D 6+fiD 6D D D 6D fiD 6• ♦DD 6 20 6+40 6+6D NAV.] ATTENTION °' �.„. ,zW.,,n,,,.R,,,... SW 70TH AVENUE „'� eXE e M N„30022*r004, J t2.T HORIZ SCALE=20 ....,;=47,==7,;:'=,=,,c,,,,,,,,,, VERT SCALE=5 1E2 C6.3 of n. 29 sIDEWHua DRAMHOE. PB T NOTCH.4•". \''' . :-.,"' --.7'7..."., ' -''',-" i, — ..7'1‘...,,,,,,,,,, a R RI ;_ _e s ------ �... EngineeringvIpo, e + A e 1r� y¢� Environmental &' E` .. .___`. '- » _.__ . -� 4PERF.nP[ v - e. Cl.' 6waeo�avoa4e D ..-iii.. a c� .��[i_iw�_ _ • 1 --- L=fiJ' -= YWM'mm CURB INLET PER CWS OVERFLOW E ;' SLOOi If"ID w e_ DETAIL 403/086,U1P. }2.J' SW)DTI AVE. 60.0' 3.0' ,,,,:,,;:t., �. CHECK DAM PER CWS AAAA.-.. � _...- .. __AAAA.-. ... -- _- 0,PLAN VIEW oREaoN 24'LEA''' IExFIREs. 'come ...... ........s 9s....... ........ �.-............. ......._.R,. ... .......... AAAA .......... .. ..rz .......... CURB INLET PER C. SW SIDEWALK DETAIL 40}C88 TYPR22.3' / 911 H� ,t. 8 E PIPE DRAINAGE OTC- r, 4 10.5'�2.0' TANDARD CURB CO b SL=60K RI S 22 L 114.5' SIDE U( 4 MS ROPOSEO ASPHALT(A CUENTIXI STJ 7 z re Wt .._fV_, Z QWr. weER .RF QTR 'NR ., EIGH01 r2/— PLANVIEW .t:.I ! Pliu**1 �1rT -7 1.. ......1-11-9 ,g ME'''' a CL ILI 0 NON-WOGEOTEXTILETY I I 0.5'TYP. -}•CLEAN CRUSHED ROCK Q 0 y IE 286.68 'rr�_ _ • G Q,, 15•CLEAN CRUSHED ROCK r. C'y )1,-,,\.,),.', -4 rl (1-1,0 3/f) SIDEWALK I r� r- DRAINAGE NOTCH PROPOSED VARIES.PER PIAN 10.5' STANDARD CURB 6"PERFORATED NOTESSEE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE PLAN FED PROPOSED LANDSCAPING. SIDEWALK DETAIL 40 PER CNS Cl E=6• PIPE 2.HANOBOOKEDIUM PER CLEAN WATER SERVICES LIDA E=4•.ttP. DETAIL 40]/[66 2 PROPOSED ASPHALT NATIVE SOIL AVEM 1 PROLATE EQUIPMENT STET.CAND FOOT VEHICLE IN FROM ALL VEHICLE MFIC, MIN MA% MIO (SW 6919RU AVE) AN INFILTRATIONI AREAS PRIOR VO,WRING CURBIE 29,1 54 EMII-111111121 1.5. CUT SECTION A-A' .. _7'1'7' MOLES RETAINING WALLIiI Y'y la I LANDSCAPE PUN FOR R J EESRUCN1e•GRONG PROPOSED LANDSCAPING TTyp MEDIUM 2. GFOYANG MEDIUM PER CLEAN WAVER a -'-tll-,LPLANTER SHALL BE FLAT BOTTOM IN V I aRMOH,SINIINCH. YAHEECSE PLACEDGEOTE%T6E TYP ' ACCORDING TO PRO.E<T PLANS PW 0.5'TYP. ° y � -3•CLEAN CAUSHED ROCK DETAIL 406.PROWDE r MIN. z 0 IE 269.12 moi: • ROTEOTON FROM ALL a VIAND TRAFFIC.DDFE EQUIPMENTTRAFFIC 10•CLEAN CRUSHED ROCK STAGING,AND FOOT TRAFFIC N CHECK OAM PER CWS 1— , 1 JJ :I i (1 1/2• 3/41 PROPOSED DURING AND AFARTER DETAIL 406/[86.TYP. PRIOR 11.WRINC ANO AG1ER SEE PWI NEW O `4 / I CONSTRUCTION w L u y _,y.__, CO B•PERFORATED MIN iy z _T _, O NATIVE SOIL '( 1I ; J_Y=I SECTION A-A' t `': 1 .1="-1'),Is FriIFre.- C4 i :,? j 1 IFF FI I S- 0 ' I 1'-11 ,I :-..,- LG,. 3_.t i' f• g z NFILTRATION PLANTER(ST-20) ' cALE.uDNE SECTION B-B' }^ MO.cT. 709x0.002 Q a vRAwx.. PVR INFILTRATION PLANTER(ST-25) cN MAY 201)0 NDNE J 17 C8.3 OF d 29 T; 6 : I CHECK DAN PER CNB P B S DETAIL 405/C5.11,TM. .,2150'.1•45- b Y A. DRAINAGE 1.4—PER PUN VIEW-1 0 -g .....( [ZIgjIlMllilgi iI PRDTOSEDSTANDARD CURB Environmental U( — I a OVERFLOW PER CWS I I0.6 E-e- OETAIL 402/CeB LD I PROPOSED ASPHALT ffrM CHECK DAN S {-.y5'''-7:-1,4,,r, 1 pNONO N PER CWS DETAIL 408/Cfle L5' 0.1.44 PAVEMENT VamwVr. 70.0C MA% MIN. (SW CUNroN s.1 �)I m. j 5 �j-iYI v5.204004441 I `,rii tri=1 -Y`'� `�_ PROm �I F_y 1 -L 91 T s E,� 1 i > I_ T11 ��11�17 'Y9 RETAINING WALL -iTi t• 5 N s: `-' 17 1 lIV: F I { BEE STRUCTURAL t I� t -1 ,. ~"TJ' Ll(i i TB-GROWING ( Lr •T 3V �,M .3 ,!-' a' SECTION B-8' g1 �i Qs tt°. �!4 4 4a -r QEAN CRUSHED ROC% lE%P 1201418 N i _ ' (3/C-1/7 1.i r CURB HNLET PER CNS IE 2 T0 ' ' .J DETAL 403/CB 8.TM. - �I -/ 15'CLEAN CRUSHED ROCK .. f.•` 1 9DEWAL%DRA NAGE 1_I I - + W HOTCH.C TYP. n I ( -i - `��: ,A( 1— r HY t Y PERFORATED 1 t II PIPE ® 8332.2 `r■■ BOIL ,1t R200.0 il re 4 J A 1 , PROVIDE Y MIN.FREEBOARD. MO O.C. 4. PRONDE PROTECTION FROI ALL VEHICLE TRAFFIC.EQUIPMENT STATING,AND FOOT Z = ( TRAFFIC IN CONSTRUCTION. INFlLTI2ARON AREAS PRIOR ro,WANG AND AFTER : 'C O F co 2 _ — , M re LU �. SECTION A-A h 5 1 1 d 0 � 1 ; E co I— . 25 Q Ie 0 R2 2 ii RB INLET PER CWS DETAIL 403/CB6,TM i \\L r Pr . . e i ane CUT 1 m ( ROW LINE.TM. nk a i D.s �� I ¼::is b ASPHALT � _ ® 2� U V s I I 4 CH CK DAM M0.IN. AN% }I M I H1 J I V V HEIGHT 368'' ee 0 PLAN VIEW j11, U RETAINING WALL F `f,;� �� 4IY SFE STRUCTURAL 4..,...%; .......-,,T, 1 ,T 1 - S r Ort, 18 MEEDIUM . I: z O CHECK DAN PER CWSI I_ _1 F— I CETAIL 406/CB.TM. CEOTE%TILE,TYP NI-g1,71�9� L�j�'- IQ^$R fly e 5 0 PER PUN NEW 0.5.r''''• rr_w�w - CLLAX RI USH'ROCK M 1,� I U 1. re D 4 - Z 06 .. IE 25823Nin , MN K l>� 15'CLEAN CRUSHED HOCK a BII�� t- $ x TYA .�1 �� [ B.PERFORATED 7.33.1.c„ r��l}! . (1-1/2'-3/47 to m _II t PIPE ..� : I e.1' Z € its 11r i �4_ HND NOTES.uNDsenPE PAN Fae morosFD I L� ' r} 7. -' t r _Ly iyrt e 2 PROVVDRONDNG IW.gNMRERC WATER SERVICES uDA II 7 i r II r=rF' y `'.{A�r 3. PUNTER SHALL BE MT BOTTOM IN ALL DIRECTORS NATIVE SQL I 4. TAC WHIN N 1 INCH CHECK DAMS SHALL BE PUC' Y 0 g H MM T CORDING TO PROJECT PUNS PER DETAIL 405. B-PERF.RPE LL PROVIDE 2'MIN.FREEBOARD. € 4. PROVIDE PROI'TION FROM ALL VEHICLE TRAFFIC, SL.'.Ot I B I` EQUIPMENT STAGING.AND FOOT TRAFFIC M SECTION B-B' neniD�AFiER Cor INFILTRATOR As PRIOR TO,CURING ,, I Z a 11 CVERROW ., a SECTION A-A' �� p ,`5,;�" 1- .R°:ec+ FOP>a Om 6. d °� MR OINFILTRATION PLANTER(ST-23) Z °NEEP. TOL uF.NONE Op PLAN VIEW EL NnvmHr ° ieu"NFILTRATION PLANTER(ST-30) J DMF (22 C8.4 of a. . N