HomeMy WebLinkAboutPAR2019-00004 - FIR Letters / Memos - 10/11/2011 S
gZDOZ — I (D -cX_)D 10
WWW MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FIRE MARSHAL
Mason County Bldg. III,
426 West Cedar Street, Shelton, WA 98584
www.co.mason.waus Shelton(360)427-9670 Belfair(360)275-4467 Elma(360)482-5269
January 28. 2019
Fire Marshal Notes:
Permit:PAR2019-00004
Name: Lake Cushman Maintenance Company ore
Phone:
Building Construction:n/a Copy
Building Class:Roadway
Square Footage:n/a
Hydrants:No
During the pre-application meeting the following was discussed:
Road Upgrade. All existing roadway surfaces that are subject to upgrade under a filed permit must conform to the
Mason County Title 14.17 "Standards for Fire Apparatus Access Roads". The proposal presented at the pre-
application meeting addressed 12'not the required 20' as listed in 14.17.060.
Questions were posed about the current road surface not meeting the code and the ramifications of. Currently access
to a residence/building/occupancy must meet the current and adopted access standards as listed in Title 14.17. If the
road access does not meet Title 14.17:
"14.17.150 ...additional fire protection or mitigation as specified in 901.4.4 of the 2012 IFC. The Fire Marshal
may also approve access roads which do not meet these requirements if the road provides reasonable access
under the individual facts of the case."
The mitigation option for this type of situation is an installed approved NFPA 13d fire sprinkler system. Obviously,
this option proves challenges to the home owner.
All parties involved in the meeting have an interest in providing a solution to this longtime problem. I described the
use of adopted ordinance and industry standards as it relates to fire access and well as the problematic long-term
issues involved with road access,sprinkler system,emergency access,and insurance as it may relate.
Possible solutions were presented,however none of the following was approved. It is my intent to have a solution
provided by the design team and interested parties (Lake Cushman Company, Lake Cushman Maintenance
Company,and City of Tacoma)that will address reasonable alternatives to fire access, on in some cases emergency
access. A possible solution discussed at the time of the meeting with all the participants was:
• Each parcel affected by the roadway/road access would be "tagged" in Mason County Records
that the installation of a sprinkler system is required on all new construction. In addition,a notice
to title would also be completed.
• A letter from all interested regulatory/invested parties agreeing to these conditions would be
provided at the time of review. Letters would be required from Lake Cushman Maintenance
Company,Lake Cushman Company,and City of Tacoma.
-% NA
• Property owners would be notified of the proposal. Current property owners with structures
would be made aware that any future residential units would require a fire sprinkler permit.
• Provide a drive surface of not less than 12'that conforms to Mason County Title 14.
• Provide vehicle tum-outs reasonably spaced and approved by the Fire Marshal. 14.17.080.
• Make the existing W.Mackinaw Road"west side"a loop road,not a single access.
• Provide Knox Boxes for FD access on all gates(this may already be in place).
Discussion was brought to my attention that the LCMC Board may have to seek possible remedy from the home-
owners depending on the cost of the overall project,and the project will have to"make sense"to them. The solution
to this is to come to an approved recognized alternative to the issue. Knowing that the decision that is made for this
project may become a standard for any future projects.
I am committed to objectively reviewing the access for the sole reason of fire and emergency access. All decisions
will be made using standard adopted code, prescriptive design, or exceptions listed in Mason County Title 14.
Reasonable alternatives which fit these categories will be evaluated. Cost of the overall project will not be
considered as an alternative for fire access and future development.
Once interested parties have decided which options is more viable, it is suggested that a continuation of the pre-
application meeting occurs prior to permit submittal to ensure that all foreseen issues have been addressed.
If there are any further questions that may come up,please feel free to contact my office.
Plan approval does not relieve the designer/contractor from complying with all applicable codes and
requirements as adopted by Mason County and the State of Washington, not does it abrogate the
requirements of the requirem is of other au orities having jurisdiction.
Reviewed by: Jero y H'
S89'1028E 326.76-_�� \\ \ -/
A \ \ \ \
\ \--
1-col g
\\82v\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ —` _� // \/� fN w .
pp\\8� Z .
\L0�4D \\LQT 4C\\ SLOT 4�\\ N\� =—_ __ ------�960 - --_ \!/ J I f J l I 1 /�\ 3= w
-� --- ---940 - / Ill I I 1 1 / (LTERNATIVE 1a -- --z _-�g3 / / / / I / ^g w
cli
LOT 3B 1 +00, \ \ TA:17+39 \ \
�_. \ \ \ \\ �\ �\ �\ \- --_' _ ROCK VISIBLE -- --- _920_910 --� / / / / / I I I I J Z 3
y \ \ _ -- -
-1 0-� �` �� \ \ \ \�\�\� \\'\\�_-LOT S f- Of
ON SURFACE -`--- -_°00--_-\
N \ /� \ \ ALTERNATIVE 1 / --- - o --- —\:z
o 117 \\ \ STA:19+3 8 \ �� -- - -- -g z / / l Ill Z
OPTION C 0 \ \\� �\ \\\� /��� --\ \\ \�� - _ 80 _ -�- / / / ( cM�i 2m
in co S
`3 \ \ _ 10T 6A-- -LOT�B _ / 'LOT 7
a / N 770- o \ \ \ \ / -\
�," \� \ \ \ -� /, \ ALTERNATIVE 1 —o / // / Q
00
W r 1�4+00 -L w \ \\ \ \\ \ \_ --� 2 + 0 + p— 9\—i + --- —$50—�\ \\_ --/—� //�/ /�// / / �w Z Q
w \\ �•Sx b 760 0 \\ — \ \\ �— ---_-- /~ -- —'-25+00 �� /' // /� W 0
00
in z
\�\ 00
BH6 �• \\/ t i� �••� \`� OPTION B /� _— -- `---- T \`— —__—/—_—/` /.• Z
' \ '• '-770--/ Z ----_ -...MACKINAW RD =-_ - _ •-i ��%,
00
----INITIAL BEGIN OF _----- _ - �
O / / // ABANDONMENT AREA Q J
O Q
\\ N 0'00'40"W 37. 8' / / / // cc Q
\ // �/ / / LAKE CUSHMAN
EL: 742 FT. \� 1� / APPROXIMATE Q
APPROX. EASTERN \ \ , / /
PROPERTY BOUNDARY \ / / BUILDING LOCATION (TYP.) NOTES Z
I /
\� / 1 Q
// z 1. INFORMATION SHOWN IS PER AVAILABLE MASON COUNTY GIS, SITE VISITS U Z
KEYED NOTES ® ON 6/21/2018 & 7/19/2018, AND INTERPRETED FROM GOOGLE EARTH. Q IY
2. TOPOGRAPHY INFORMATION IS PER WADNR LIDAR AND CONTOUR INTERVAL Lu
7. LEAVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY. CONTINUE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO THE NORTHEAST. SCALE: 1"= 100 FEET IS 10 FOOT.
8. CONNECT TO EXISTING DRIVEWAY. WOULD NEED TO RELOCATE SHED AT STATION 20+15. 3. PROPERTY LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY FOR Q
ALSO MAY NEED TO SHIFT ROAD WEST, INTO EXISTING CUT BANK TO MAINTAIN BUILDING ALL LOTS ADJACENT TO LAKE CUSHMAN IS APPROXIMATELY REPRESENTED
SETBACKS ON LOT 5. BY THE CONTOUR LINE AT ELEVAT10N 742 FT. � WH
100 0 40 60 80 100 onww Br. HAL
9. LEAVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY. MAINTAIN DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THE EAST/SOUTHEAST. SCALE TRUE FOR 11X17 4. BUILDING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. BUILDING OUTLINES REPRESENT CHECKM BY: WH
STRUCTURES OR TRAILERS. As NOTO
CONTINUE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO THE NORTH. onh:n�zs/zoia
5. PROPOSED ROAD LOCATION IS APPROXIMATE AND LOCATED WITH A
OPTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 LEGEND CONSUMER GRADE GPS.
B. OPTION B WOULD REQUIRE THE NEED FOR A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO REVIEW FOR 6. ALTERNATIVE 1 WAS FIELD MARKED WITH ORANGE AND WHITE FLAGGING.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THE STRUCTURES ON LOT 5 FROM CUT SLOPE. (OPTION B NOT FFEXISTINGOUND CONTOUR (10 FT) ----350-- - — 7. EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL BORE HOLES (BH#) AT LOCATION SHOWN ON O
FLAGGED IN FIELD) EXISTING ROAD AND DRIVEWAY -------•----- PLAN.
C. REPAIR EX. MACKINAW ROAD STA: 108+00 TO 109+00 (SHEET PA3.1) PER GEOTECH PROPOSED ROAD ALIGNMENT (ALTERNATIVE 1) - - 8. THE MAJORITY OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE FULL BENCH
a RECOMMENDATIONS. CONSTRUCT NEW ROAD ALIGNMENT AND GRADE EXTENDING FROM ELEVATION 742 FT —
________ CONSTRUCTION I.E. FULL ROAD PRISM EXCAVATED INTO NATIVE ���� v��"E"
WEST MACKINAW ROAD (STA 115+00) TO ROAD SUBGRADE) WITH END-HAUL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL MOVED TO A 6804
ALTERNATIVE 1 (�-� STA 117+41 W. MACKINAW OPTION C. - 16+60 ROAD PROPOSED OPTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 STABLE LOCATION.
ALTERNATIVE 1). (OPTION C NOT FLAGGED IN FIELD.) s"FFT
g 9. 12% MAXIMUM PROPOSED GRADE. PA3.2
N W
W ¢
U�
¢ t-
0 U
O W
N�
a a
GENERAL NOTES
1. NO PROPOSED BUILDINGS, SEVERAL EXISTING BUILDINGS MAY NEED TO BE RELOCATED. SETBACKS FOR RELOCATED
STRUCTURES TO FOLLOW MASON COUNTY CODE FOR RR5 ZONING. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON-SITE _ _
2. DRIVEWAYS FOR EACH LOT SERVE AS PARKING SITES. NO ADDITIONAL PARKING SHOULD BE NECESSARY. ��� N
-E;� Z
3. EXISTING BUILDINGS LABELED WITH LETTERS A THROUGH Y WITH APPROXIMATE SQUARE FOOTAGE TABULATED, THIS SHEET. 3w w N
4. STEEP SLOPES EXIST ON SITE THAT MAY EXCEED 100%. BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE* LOT #
5. NO ON-SITE SEWAGE TANKS OR DRAINFIELDS ARE KNOWN TO EXIST ON-SITE. A 263 LOT 1A Z3
6. NO EXISTING STORMWATER DRAINAGE FEATURES ARE KNOWN TO EXIST. 3
B 435 LOT 1 B H
7. THERE IS NO KNOWN DRINKING WATER SUPPLY THAT EXISTS ON OR ADJACENT TO THE SITE. NONE ARE PROPOSED. C 1174 LOT 1C Z�
8. NO FIRE HYDRANTS EXIST ON-SITE. D 72 LOT 2A ?j =
9. NO WETLANDS ARE KNOWN TO EXIST ON-SITE. E 874 LOT 2B Q
Q LOT 2C Z
10. EXISTING W. MACKINAW ROAD TO SERVE AS ACCESS. 12% MAX PROPOSED GRADE ON PROPOSED ALIGNMENT. F 1057 � �
11. EXISTING STORMWATER SHEET FLOWS TOWARDS LAKE CUSHMAN. PROPOSED STORMWATER RUNOFF WILL SHEET FLOW G 493 LOT 2D Q
WHERE FEASIBLE, OTHERWISE DITCH AND EITHER DISPERSE OR PIPE TO LAKE CUSHMAN WHICH HAS A LARGE WATER BODY H 306 LOT 2D 0 >-
EXEMPTION. 75 LOT 3D Q Z
12. LOCATION OF SEASONAL STREAMS DETERMINED FROM WA-DNR FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION MAPPING TOOL. J 874 LOT 3D =O
13. SITE DISTURBANCE: 14-6 ACRES FOR ROADWAY CLEARING, CONSTRUCTION, AND TREE REMOVAL. � 764 LOT 3B U
14. EARTHWORK FOR FULL BENCH ROAD CONSTRUCTION EXPECTED TO EXCEED 10,000 CUBIC YARDS. Z
M 348 LOT 4D N
15. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: ±APPROX. 55,000 SF (1.26 AC). IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WILL BE ADDED TO CONSTRUCT 0 LOT 4C
Q
--� A 12' WIDE GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD. THEREFORE STORMWATER MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS #1-9 WILL BE REQUIRED. N O 76 760 LOT 4B
16. EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: ±APPROX. 116,000 SF (2.66 AC). EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREAS INCLUDE THE P 116 LOT 5
EXISTING ROADS, DRIVEWAYS, STRUCTURES, ETC. Q 140 LOT 5
EASEMENT NOTES R 1 S 3 7 LOT 5
7 LOT 5
BASED ON PRELIMINARY SURVEY RESEARCH, THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS MAY EXIST ON SITE: T 677 LOT 6A
U 960 LOT 6B
• CITY OF TACOMA HAS RESERVED RIGHT OF ENTRY ON THE IL-LT. WIDE LATERAL STRIP ADJACENT TO THE 742 FT. V 57 LOT 7 LLJ
ELEVATION. THERE CAN BE NO FILLS OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES PLACED WITHIN THIS STRIP WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN W 57 LOT 7
PERMISSION FROM TACOMA CITY LIGHT. X 175 LOT 7 0
• 20 FT. PRIVATE EASEMENT ON CENTERLINE OF WEST MACKINAW ROAD FOR ACCESS AND UTILITIES. Y 246 LOT 8C Z
• PRIVATE EASEMENTS EXIST ON SOME DRIVEWAYS.
*SQUARE FOOTAGE DERIVED FROM AERIAL PHOTOS BY
DELINEATING THE OUTLINE OF VISIBLE STRUCTURES
DESIGNED BY! BDF1
DRANN er N.
CHECKED By
HDH
CAL AS NOTED
DATE:11/26/2018
Q,P
O
REN40N5
s
JOB NUMBER
6804
SHEET
PA2.0
w�
S
A— r l/ _— \\\\\\ f i /'—'\ \ \ /� I I I I I / _ I I I I\ ,1 \ o W
- 'DRIVEWAY CONNECTS TO \ \ \ �.• �\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I/�\ \ I 1 \ \ 1 /
�t
// \\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\ / p// 9 CUSHMAN RIDGEI ROAD X\ \\ \ \ ( I I ) %
/ f / / / / \ 1 I 1 �� 'S z
/ / / / / / / f \ 1 I iOZ
c
-.—Wass- W
- —__�\ J/ /� ��/// \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \-- --� / 1 / l ) / / / / / / I / / / / / / / I I )•1 I I I I I I I I I I / �=�oo =w
Ln
�L0ui—
//
o\ \ \ b, \ co \ \ SEASONAL STREAM O
\ \ moo \\ �n---910 \goo \ \�
///�-� // // w\ \\\\ \\\` 00
Lr) \ rn.— \�\ \\ o__�� /���'/-� /j/// // / �-J/ / / / / I / /�� 1 \ 1 I \ \ \\\\\\ Z
\ \ \ cD i/ / i/ / / / / / / / \ 1
ri SEASONAL STREAM -// / :o \ \ \`� \ `� ��\ !� --_890 \���� "'` ���/, �/°° / / //,/// / / // ) I I ! / /I\�\\ \ \ III I I I� lA
a \ \ / _ _—� V) \ \ o ~ —880 N--- / /' // �l Z
Lul_ \ \ \� 8j — 11
o I / /LOT 110
—COT 8A �L T 8�\ z OT 8C� N LOT 9A 0- ----LOT 96
00
cn \ 10 ALTERNATIVE00 S --\\ \ \\ \\ \, -` ------' _ - o -i i// // / ' III( I I ( 1 \ V O
\ - /� ��,_\ \ 11 ALTERNATIVE 1�-- ---- / / /// / / �% ! I I ( III \ 1 Z
/O \ ' ` ••` \ I / / / / // O
- V 12 ALTERNATIVE 1 OPTION DJ
/ I / / / I / S ! /
35+00 _1- /� A: + Z
DWY\ — \!C _��— �' ------ �� \ /// // / ) ! I II 1\ II`il ; I\\ // N
�/
••/ -W. MACKINAW RD ''�•� \---'--`-s1o \\\\ — / / / / / // ) 1 \ \\\ \ I / a
APPROXIMATE
O/� �� - \�� �� �••� UILDING LOCATION (TYP.) cn
ir
00
EL: 742 FT.
APPROX. EASTERN
I PROPERTY BOUNDARY \\\ END OF W. MACKINAW RD
\_-_-
LAKE CUSHMAN >
— NOTES OPTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 Z
_ F-
1. INFORMATION SHOWN IS PER AVAILABLE MASON COUNTY GIS, SITE VISITS D. OPTION D TO CONNECT TO CUSHMAN RIDGE ROAD
KEYED NOTES # ON 6/21/2018 & 7/19/2018, AND INTERPRETED FROM GOOGLE EARTH. FROM EXISTING DRIVEWAY. CONSTRUCT 620 LF OF Q m
O ROAD TO AVOID CONSTRUCTION OF ALTERNATIVE 1 W
10. ±15 FT FILL OVER SEASONAL STREAM. CULVERT TO BE INSTALLED. BUILDING X 2. TOPOGRAPHY INFORMATION IS PER WADNR LIDAR AND CONTOUR INTERVAL
IS 10 FOOT. FROM STATION 25+00 TO APPROXIMATELY 32+50. f—
IN STREAM CHANNEL WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF (OPTION D NOT FLAGGED IN FIELD) J
FILL SLOPE. 3. PROPERTY LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY FOR Q
11. CROSS EXISTING DRIVEWAY. ALL LOTS ADJACENT TO LAKE CUSHMAN IS APPROXIMATELY REPRESENTED
BY THE CONTOUR LINE AT ELEVATION 742 FT. DE91M BY: WH
12. END OF CONSTRUCTION FOR NEW ROAD. CONSTRUCT TURNAROUND AT DRANK BY. NAL
APPROXIMATE STATION 36+00.
4. BUILDING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. BUILDING OUTLINES REPRESENT CHECKMBY: EDH
STRUCTURES OR TRAILERS. 11/26/ AS NOTED
DATE: 2018
LEGEND 5. PROPOSED
CONSUMER OAD ADEL CATION IS APPROXIMATE AND LOCATED WITH A
FFEXISTINGUND CONTOUR (10 FT) 350---- 6. ALTERNATIVE 1 WAS FIELD MARKED WITH ORANGE AND WHITE FLAGGING.D AND DRIVEWAY --------.---- 7. EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL BORE HOLES (BH#) AT LOCATION SHOWN ON O
LPROPOSEDOAD ALIGNMENT (ALTERNATIVE 1) _ _ PLAN.
42 FT _________ 8. THE MAJORITY OF THE NEW CONSTRUC110N SHALL BE FULL BENCHSCALE: 1"= 100 FEETCONSTRUCTION (I.E. FULL ROAD PRISM EXCAVATED INTO NATIVE JOB NUMBER
PTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 SUBGRADE) WITH END—HAUL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL MOVED TO A 6804
STABLE LOCATION. 100 0 40 60 80 100 SHEET
9. 12% MAXIMUM PROPOSED GRADE. SCALE TRUE FOR 11X17 PA3.3
W Q
CJ 7
T T 0
y C
Q U
MAN
two A Eo
MA KINAVi Ru !jg
e liVo
=N
• , re 2. 0
Q
PRE-APPLICATION PLANS N=
ir;e. =s
3W HE
?W
bgs�''� zo
- �� J)I)I(� (/, ���\\ \�-'��( l-'��\\\\\C //! 1 ( \ \> ) GREEN DIAMOND `/ -�,� zir ��
pOf
OT= �Jf Cb4 �\\\\\\. \L�� �l I \ rr —_ \ ����c �1 /l(/ '� �I
A ;= LOT \\\�� \\ N�ll
11 r\\\\\\\ / �� A LET= C� ,_ Lb� \\\\LO�����.��\�= ' ( /JI>�\ \\����—, \m Z
\ _ Ofi-3 —
II�(\�\�\\�:� L07 30 Y \ ^��` _ � lll - \ \\` I-� )J�) �jlll/r`\ a Q
('\\�R�\IQI)Y OF ZAQOMA_ — �= _ — ��= \� `s—�_ = /ll r��\ lbf� aT LOTS •,` Z
\\,�\ < < ,;/ , - — r C �p \\�L�bI _ OT=-LOT _i/ll�1 j�( \ A : B a� _ - B / I/� / \�
4 \ �-n.— -6 A
J \\
J
EL: 742 FT. �\ LAKE CUSHMAN o
N APPROX. EASTERN N
PROPERTY BOUNDARY Q
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S. SITE MAP
z
LAKE CUSHMAN 1" = 400'
SITE LOCATION/ SCALE TRUE FOR 11X17 W
US 101 W_
W. MACKINAW RD4�`- - WA 119
NF 2340 HOODSPORT W
APPLICANT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SHEET INDEX
U
LAKE CUSHMAN MAINTENANCE COMPANY EAST 1/2 OF S06 T23N R4W W.M. PA1.0 COVER SHEET
3740 N. LAKE CUSHMAN ROAD EAST 1/2 OF S31 T22N R4W W.M. PA2.0 NOTES
HOOD HOODSPORT, WA 98548 PA3.1 N. MACKINAW RD ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
PA3.2 W. MACKINAW RD ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
US 101 CANAL OWNER EXISTING LAND USE PA3.3 W. MACKINAW RD ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
ZONED: RR5 - RURAL RESIDENTIAL
BDH
LAKE CUSHMAN COMPANY 5 ACRES DESIGNED Br. NAL
24113 56TH AVE W, CRAM!BY, NAL
MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 98043 �PROJECT PURPOSE scE AS NOTED
CONTACT DESIGN NEW ACCESS ROAD TO ALL LOTS DATE:11/26/2018
AKS ENGINEERING & FORESTRY, LLC. SITE AREA `-`
NF 23 CONTACT: BRYCE HANSON
9600 NE 126TH AVENUE, SUITE 2520 59.16 AC (2,576,880 SF)
VANCOUVER, WA 98682 O
GOVEY RD. WA 106 PH: 360-882-0419 DATUM
FAX: 360-882-0426 NAVD 88 REVISIONS
US 101 E-MAIL: BRYCEH®AKS-ENG.COM
JOB NUMBER
W. SKOKOMISH VALLEY RD.
6804
SHEET
PA1 .0
IN
• \\ �����\ � ' \�� \\ - -- _=940—;\950;_ - - \. j j J�1 J I N/ % / l / '- �'� \\ �� \�
\ \ \
` \ \ \ — — —
\ — -- -------- —g30\= HARD ROCK J (I 11(/ / / / / i / _ \�\ \ \ '\ \ Q
\ \ \ — — oo \ \ \
\ �\ — -- _ — oz
VISIBLE ON SURFACE, �\ ) II 1111 / �/ / / N\ \� \\\� \\�
�\ ;� -- �•,,`— _—NN
— - \�-- � —�g�� \ _ - ,�V, ////)/( ( l / / / J \ \ \ \ \\ \ �� N
-Ll'— _APPROXIMATE —� 0� \�— o.\ \` /�`\\\I I / / ( / I� \ "N-ag Z
\ -'\—\ \`` o 'BUILDING LOCATION (TYP.) �8 j -890 N; -900 / /// - I SEASONAL STREAM\ �� a=�
C14 00 \ S "cam rn_ —\ 00, /II. \ \\
\ ` \ \ o cn LOT 1C oo SOT 2A \SLOT 2B — o — — '�-' �pT. 2�/ r LOT 3D
- -L 2C-
00
LOT 30 J SOT 1 /—TOT 16— — —860 OPTION A_ --_ `—"—__`W /// / / / \ \ ALTERNATIVE 1 \ O
\ \ \ \\ L N �_-850---- _}-__ z ALTERNATIVE 1__ oo 6 STA:12+28 � \� Z
NN
\\ �\�—_—i830 CITY OF TACOMA = — Hwy __\ �i'� _ I- 4 STA:8+13.\,—_� I / �J \—� �•. c�
o \ NN
� \ --- \—N040319 E 20.00 Q 0� C — ---- a, ALTERNATIVE 1 O +:�� _ SOLAR �� a Q
ao l— — --� \� `\ r `•'�' N �a� / _ — .����—.�J7L \ N 5 STA:10+38 1 12+0 �, �, 1`00\\PNft—" W Z
\o \\ I J �S89'10 28 E 274.15 �— — — _ 0
/ ALTERNATIVE 1 p0= Do
lLij
colI I J l_ �\ —_3 :4+1 — 14/ 1k _ — _,�0+0p •_ _ \..1 q :, 00-- N V Q
Lu
\ �I / / / / / ® � — _ /6k r/� i�a�p1}pp.. - 108+Oi) --- p ••,� _F � \ oo/ LOT 3C
� pp — % is z-�= — 109+00— � 0 K /810- ALTERNATIVE 1_ , %p ' Z
STA:0+00 - cn
O
ALTERNATIVE 1 •-�...� . +F�'-- •� 00 ��
• o STA'0+62 \•
\ \ 9 2 �\ \�
o� \ �� r �2k �•�.� AW , / INITIAL ROAD
\\ \�•\\ �__ oo /�� /BH2 ---103+p0 - �• • MACK�N`'� � // REPAIR AREA \\ ��i ��—�\ \\ (�
\ 0 \ •�0�0 �x�f / �— —W--!�� �� i \_ - �� \ �\ to
\�00 � 101+00' 102�+%�x '—ice '_— ---- —�/// // \I i��0 \\\ \— Q J
LAKE CUSHMAN / �� APPROXIMATE O Q
EL: 742 BUILDING LOCATION (TYP.) CC Z
APPROX. EASTERN l - Q
PROPERTY BOUNDARY ��� / W
NOTES ? �-
\� EXISTING TURNAROUND Y Q
\ \ J 1. INFORMATION SHOWN IS PER AVAILABLE MASON COUNTY GIS, SITE VISITS LEGEND
\ \� & PARKING AREA U Z
ON 6/21/2018 & 7/19/2018, AND INTERPRETED FROM GOOGLE EARTH. Q CC
2. TOPOGRAPHY INFORMATION IS PER WADNR LIDAR AND CONTOUR INTERVAL LV
//. /� / 77EXISTTINGOUND CONTOUR (10 FT) --350----- F--
\ \ IS 10 FOOT. _I
I \\\\ \\ // � 3. PROPERTY LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY FOR EXISTING ROAD AND DRIVEWAY ------------- Q
ALL LOTS ADJACENT TO LAKE CUSHMAN IS APPROXIMATELY REPRESENTED PROPOSED ROAD ALIGNMENT (ALTERNATIVE 1) -BY THE CONTOUR LINE AT ELEVATION 742 FT. ELEVATION 742 FT _ _____ BEMM Br: WH
MA M Br. NAL
KEYED NOTES # 4. BUILDING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. BUILDING OUTLINES REPRESENT PROPOSED OPTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 —l-----------— CHE�BY. BDN
1. �-� OF EX. MACKINAW RD AND ALTERNATIVE 1. INITIAL REFERENCE LOCATION FOR STRUCTURES OR TRAILERS. oA>E:n 2s/2m8As No1fn
W. MACKINAW RD & ALTERNATIVE 1. 5. PROPOSED ROAD LOCATION IS APPROXIMATE AND LOCATED WITH A
2. BEGIN CONSTRUCTION OF PROPOSED ROAD. CONSUMER GRADE GPS.
3. CROSS EXISTING DRIVEWAY. 6. ALTERNATIVE 1 WAS FIELD MARKED WITH ORANGE AND WHITE FLAGGING. z
4. CONNECT TO EXISTING DRIVEWAY. ROADWAY TO BE WIDENED TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM OF 7. EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL BORE HOLES (BH#) AT LOCATION SHOWN ON OPTION TO ALTERNATIVE 1 Q
12 FT DRIVING WIDTH AND TO ALLOW FOR POTENTIAL PARKING FOR LOTS 2A, 2B, PLAN. REASNS
A. UTILIZE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AT STATION 4+12 FOR SCALE: 1"=100 FEET
AND 2C. 8. THE MAJORITY OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE FULL BENCH ALTERNATE CENTERLINE LOCATION. THIS OPTION WOULD
5. LEAVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY. MAINTAIN DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THE NORTHEAST. CONSTRUCTION (I.E. FULL ROAD PRISM EXCAVATED INTO NATIVE REQUIRE THE RELOCATION OF TRAILER/STRUCTURE ON Joe NUMBER
CONTINUE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO THE NORTHWEST. SUBGRADE) WITH END-HAUL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL MOVED TO A LOT 1C. THIS OPTION WOULD ELIMINATE FULL BENCH 6804
6. CONNECT TO EXISTING DRIVEWAY. SHORT ROCK WALL ALONG WEST EDGE OF STABLE LOCATION. CONSTRUCTION FROM STA: 5+00 TO 8+00. (OPTION A 100 0 40 60 80 100 SHEET
DRIVEWAY. 9. 12% MAXIMUM PROPOSED GRADE. NOT FLAGGED IN FIELD) SCALE TRUE FOR 11X17 PA3.1