HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEP2000-00015 Grade 15,000 cy Corrections to Utility Instalation - SEP Determinations - 2/1/2000 I
oN_STgTF MASON COUNTY
BPS C �� DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
M O
S NUPlanning Division
0 N Y P O Box 578, Shelton, WA 98584
of
1864 (360)427-9670
MITIGATED
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-350)
SEP2000-00015
Description of Proposal:
To grade 15,000 cubic yards on a 16 acre site. The proposed grading project is to correct and improve stormwater,
utility installation, paving and pond excavation.
Proponent: ROBERT DRESSEL
Site Address (If Assigned): 431 NE LOG YARD RD BELFAIR
Directions to Site: The site is located at the end of Log Yard Road.
Parcel Number: 123211001070
Legal Description: TR 7 OF N1/2 NE
Lead Agency: Mason County
The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverser impact
on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c).
This decision was made after review of a completed Environmental Checklist and other information on file with
the Lead Agency. This information is available to the public upon request. MITIGATED MEASURES ARE
ATTACHED.
Please contact y Ne ee at ext. 26-5 with any questions.
This DNS is issue nder 197-1 1 0(2) the Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date
below. Comment u e u t d b 116/00.
66nWQrejof Responsible Official Date
SKOKOMISH TRIBE (2) HCCC
DOE FPD #ZCf�__J
WDF&W MCPW
DNR APPLICANT
MITIGATED
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-350)
SEP2000-00015
CONDITIONS OF THIS DETERMINATION
1) Residential developers and individuals shall be required to control erosion during construction. Removal of
vegetation should be minimized and any areas disturbed should be restored to prevent erosion and other
environmental impacts.X
2) Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic environment as a result of this project.
X
3) Emergency vehicle apparatus access roads shall conform with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and
Mason County Title 16. If the access road cannot conform, special conditions will be placed on any building
permit issued on property that is served by a non-conforming access road. Contact the Mason County Fire
Marshal for details.
4) All future development of the proposed site will be subject to the conditions that are listed. However, this does
not exempt future proposals from further review through the SEPA process.
A
MASON COUNTY
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORkOUNTY ROAD ENGINEER
Shelton,Washington 98584
DATE: January 14, 2000
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS
TO: Randy Neff, DCD - Planner
FROM: Alan A. Tahja, P/W- Co. Hydr. Engr. DCD WO#000002
SUBJ: Stormwater Report Review NAME: Robert Dressel
GRD99-0028
Randy,
The Stormwater Site Plan developed for the proposed North Mason Fiber Company in Belfair
has been received and reviewed by Public Works and found to comply with current standards and
good engineering practice for this time and place.
The Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC)plan on sheet 15 of the plan sheets should
be required to be followed. Included in the TESC is a requirement (#14 under Drainage Notes)
that a performance Covenant or surety shall be required. At this time Public Works is relying on
the grading permit requirements and penalties to stand for the financial liability element of a
Large Parcel Permanent Water Quality Control Plan required in Ecology's Technical Manual.
The proposed stormwater plan and grading plan appear acceptable as submitted.
An Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Covenant is required under the County's surface water
management ordinance to be created to cover the proposed stormwater control features.
Attached please find a copy of the form Mason County is employing to satisfy this requirement.
Please forward a copy of the O&M Covenant to the owner or their engineer for completion,
recording, and delivery to Public Works for future monitoring and administration.
Please feel free to contact me at County extension 461 if you have any questions regarding this
department's review or these comments.
Sincerely,
JL
Alan A. Tahja
Encl: O&M Covenant form
File: H:\WP\STRMWTR\REVIEWS\Dressel-idc.doc
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1 . Name of proposed project, if applicable :
North Mason Fiber Company
2 . Name of applicant :
Mr. Robert Dressel
3 . Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
P.O. Box 275 N.L. Olson and associates, Inc.
Belfair, WA 98528 2453 Bethel Avenue
(360) 275-0228 Port Orchard, WA 98366
(360) 876-2284
Norman L. Olson, P.E.
4 . Date checklist prepared:
December 1, 1999
S . Agency requesting checklist :
Mason County Department of Community Development
6 . Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if
applicable) :
The project is anticipated to be begin construction during the
2000 construction season.
7 . Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or
further activity related to or connected with this proposal?
If yes, explain.
None known.
8 . List any environmental information you know about that has
been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this
proposal .
None known.
1
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
9 . Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property
covered by your proposal? If yes, explain .
No.
10 . List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed
for your proposal , if known.
Grading Permit, Storm Drainage approval, SEPA approval, Fire
Control System approval .
11 . Give brief, complete description of your proposal , including
the proposed use and the size of the project and site . There
are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal . You do not need to
repeat those answers on this page . (Lead agencies may modify
this form to include additional specific information on
project description) .
The Applicant proposes to construct an additional 7 . 69 acres
of new pavement area, along with two stormwater retention
ponds, one fire control storage pond and two biofiltration
swales . Of the total 25 . 56 acre site, the improvement work
will take place on only 16 . 68 acres, within the north and
southeast portions of the property, or Basins A and B. The
site is divided into three separate areas . No improvements are
anticipated to the southwest portion of the property or
Basin C.
Basin A, located in the north portion of the property consists
of 8 .71 acres and is presently cleared with approximately 2 .71
acres of pavement. The proposed improvements to the north area
include 2 .77 areas of new pavement area, a retention pond and
biofiltration Swale, a fire control storage pond and pipe
system, 0 . 64 acres of existing third growth forest and/or
brush and 0 .43 areas of grass in fair condition.
2
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Basin B, located in the southeast portion of the property
consists of 7 . 97 acres and is currently cleared with
approximately 0 .22 acres of pavement area with buildings and
graveled surface. The proposed improvements to the southeast
area include 4 . 38 acres of additional new pavement, a storm
retention pond and biofiltration swale . There are 0 . 53 acres
of existing third growth forest and/or brush and 0 . 25 areas of
grass in fair condition.
Basin C, located in the southwest portion of the property
consists of 8 . 88 acres, is developed and will remain in its
current condition. This area consists of approximately 7 . 55
acres of pavement and 1 .33 acres of third growth forest
and/or brush.
12 . Location of the proposal . Give sufficient information for a
person to understand the precise location of your proposed
project, including a street address, if any, and section,
township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over
a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the
site (s) . Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity
map, and topographic map, if reasonably available . While you
should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with
any permit applications related to this checklist .
The total 25 . 56 acre site is located east of State Highway 3
with access from Log Yard Road, and west of Old Belfair
Highway, in a portion the west 1700 feet of the North Half of
the Northeast Quarter of Section 21, Township 23 North, Range
1 East, Willamette Meridian in Mason County, Washington.
3
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B . ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1 . EARTH
a . General description of the site (circle one) : Flat,
Rolling, hilly, steep slopes , mountainous, other .
The site is divided into three areas . The southwest 8 . 88 acres
slopes with an average declivity of 1 . 5% and the southeast
7 . 97 acres slopes 0 . 32 acres slopes with an average declivity
of 1 . 0o, and the north 8 . 71 acres slopes with an average
declivity of 5 . 0o.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate
percent slope) ?
The steepest slope on the site appears to be approximately
66 percent. This steep occurs at the southeast property
boundary with the majority of the southeast basin at a 1 . 50
slope. Said steep slope covers about 1000 sq. ft .
C . What general types of soils are found on the site (for
example, clay, sand, gravel, peat , much) ? If you know the
classification of agricultural soils specify them and note any
prime farmland.
Soils on the site are classified as Everett loamy sand. (Ed)
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable
soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe .
No.
4
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
e . Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of
any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill .
The majority of the site is has been cleared or is paved, with
some pasture grass, brush and some trees around the perimeter.
Approximately 850 of the 16 . 68 acre improvement area will be
graded for pavement, utility installation (relocation) and
retention or fire control storage pond construction. Grading
with no importation or exportation is anticipated.
Approximately 15, 000 cubic yards of excavation will occur on
site .
f . Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction
or use? If so, describe .
Yes . Erosion could occur during construction but Erosion
Control measures will be implemented during that time .
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after project construction (for example,
asphalt or buildings) ?
Approximately 71 percent of the 25 . 56 acre site will be
covered with impervious surfaces associated with buildings and
asphalt. Currently the site is 41 percent impervious with
existing buildings and asphalt pavement.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other
impacts to the earth, if any:
All requirements of Mason County Department of Public Works
for Temporary Erosion / Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan will
be applied to the maximum extent possible during and after
construction, to preserve the quality of stormwater leaving
the site. To minimize the impacts due to land disturbing
activities on the site, construction will begin in the spring.
Soil exposure will be kept to a minimum until all
erosion/sedimentation measures are in place. The
erosion/sedimentation control system will continue to be
maintained and repaired until the site is stabilized to assure
continued performance of the intended function on the site.
5
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2 . AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the
proposal (i .e . , dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood
smoke) during construction and when the project is completed?
If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if
known.
Dust and diesel exhaust will be produced on site during
construction. Auto and equipment utilized by the owner/tenants
emissions after the completion of the project.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that
may affect your proposal?
No.
C . Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts to air, if any:
Construction vehicles will conform to all applicable
Washington State Emission Control requirements. All emissions
will comply with the requirements put forth in the Puget Sound
Air Quality Authority.
Any burning during construction will be conducted with a
burning permit with Fire Department coordination.
3 . WATER
a. Surface :
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate
vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal
streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands) ? If yes, describe
type and provide names . If appropriate, state what stream or
river it flows into.
None known.
6
V
4
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to
(within 200 feet) the described ' waters? If yes, please
describe and attach available plans .
No.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would
be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and
indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material .
It is anticipated that no fill material will be removed from
the site.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or
diversions? Give general description, purpose and approximate
quantities, if known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If
so, note locations on the site plan.
No.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste
materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of
waste and anticipated volume of discharge .
No. The proposal involves the use of a storm infiltration
system.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be
discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose
and approximate quantities, if known.
Yes. A storm infiltration system has been designed for the
100-year, 24-hour storm event. The project generates 6 .12
ac-ft of total runoff volume.
7
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the
ground from septic tanks or other sources , if any (for
example : Domestic sewage ; industrial, containing the following
chemicals . . . , agricultural ; etc . ) Describe the general size
of the system, the number of such systems, the number of
houses to be served (if applicable) , or the number of animals
or humans the system (s) are expected to serve .
None . The applicant currently utilizes a SaniCan for the
office and will continue to do so.
C . Water Runoff (including storm water) :
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and
method of collection and disposal, if ariy (including
quantities, if known) . Where will this water flow? Will this
water flow into other waters? If so, describe .
The stormwater runoff generated from the site improvements
will be collected and conveyed through a system of
biofiltration swales for treatment prior to discharging into
the retention pond and infiltrating as described above .
Please refer to the Final Storm Drainage analysis dated
November 29, 1999 .
2) Could waste .material enter ground or surface waters? If
so, general describe .
Waste material associated with impervious surface runoff will
enter the ground through the infiltration system proposed, but
the Biofiltration swale will be responsible for providing the
required water quality.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface ground and
runoff water impacts, if any.
Water quality / quantity mitigation efforts will be reviewed
and approved by Mason County.
8
V
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
4 . PLANTS
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site :
X Deciduous tree: Alder, maple, aspen, other
X Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X Shrubs
X Grass
X Pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants : cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk
cabbage, other
water plants : water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or
altered?
The majority of the vegetation on the site will altered or
removed. Approximately 29% of the site will be grass or
native, 71 % will be pavement and buildings.
C . List threatened or endangered species known to be on or
near the site .
No threatened or endangered species are known or suspect to
occur on the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other
measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if
any:
No landscaping plan will be submitted in conjunction with the
proposal.
9
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
5 . ANIMALS
a . circle any birds and animals which have observed on or
near the site or are known to be on or near the site :
birds : hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other.
mammals : deer, bear, elk, beaver, other .
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on
or near the site .
None known. -
C . Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
None
6 . ENERGY and NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood
stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project 's
energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc .
Electricity is utilized for all energy needs . Natural gas via
portable tanks my be practical in the future.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar
energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe .
No.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in
the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to
reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Building construction to comply with Washington State Energy
Conservation Codes.
10
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
7 . ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a . Are there any environmental health hazards, including
exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion,
spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of
this proposal? If so, describe .
Minimal risk of spills and fire during construction.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be
required.
None other than the normal Police and Fire Department.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any:
None.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect
your project (for example : traffic, equipment, operations,
other) ?
Noise from Log Yard Road, State Highway 3 and the surrounding
properties are minimal and will not impact the proposal .
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or
associated with the project on a short term or long term basis
(for example : traffic, construction, operation, other) ?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site .
Short term noise will be generated by construction equipment
during standard business hours . Additional noise from the
proposed business during the day and evening hours.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if
any:
None.
11
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
8 . LAND and SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent
properties?
The site is currently developed commercial . Surrounding
properties are undeveloped commercial .
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe :
Not known.
C . Describe any structures on the site .
Office building and other outbuildings.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, ,what?
No.
e . What is the current zoning classification of the site. a(,
The current zoning classification for the site is
Commercial.
f . What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the
site?
Mason County Comprehensive Plan designates the site as h#
Commercial.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master
program designation of the site?
N/A.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an
"environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify.
No.
i . Approximately how many people would reside or work in the
completed project?
Approximately 6 people will work at the completed project and
none will reside.
12
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
j . Approximately how many people would the completed project
displace?
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,
if any:
None.
1 . Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible
with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
The proposal will comply with all applicable Mason County Land
Use Regulations.
9 . HOUSING
a . Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low income housing.
None.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low income housing.
None.
c . Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if
any:
None.
10 . AESTHETICS
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure (s) ,
not including antennas; what is the principal exterior
building material (s) proposed?
N/A.
13
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or
obstructed?
None.
C . Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,
if any:
None.
11 . LIGHT and GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposed produce?
What time of day would it mainly occur? -
None.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety
hazard or interfere with views?
No.
C . What existing off-site sources of light or glare may
affect your proposal?
None .
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare
impacts, if any:
None.
12 . RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities
are in the immediate vicinity?
N/A.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing
recreational uses? If so, describe .
No.
14
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
C . Proposed measure to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided
by the project or applicant, if any:
None.
3 . HISTORIC and CULTURAL PRESERVATION
a . Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed
for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to
be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe .
No.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,
archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be
on or next to the site .
None.
C . Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
None.
14 . TRANSPORTATION
a . Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and
describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show
on site plans, if any:
Site access will be provided from State Highway 3 and Log Yard
Road.
b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not,
what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
No.
C . How many parking spaces would the completed project have?
How many would the project eliminate?
N/A.
15
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or
improvements to existing roads or streets, not including
driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public
or private) .
No.
e . Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity
of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally
describe .
The project will utilize railway for transportation of
materials to be stored on site. The object is to use rail and
the site for a material transfer area.
f . How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the
completed project? If known, indicate when peak volume would
occur.
Approximately 224 vehicular trips per day is anticipated.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation
impacts, if any:
None .
15 . PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public
services (for example : fire protection, police protection,
health care, schools, other) ? If so, generally describe .
No.
b. Proposed measures- to reduce or control direct impacts on
public services, if any.
None.
16
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
16 . UTILITIES
a . Circle utilities currently available at the site :
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone,
sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Cable TV
17 . SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of
knowledge . I understand that the lead agency is relying on
them to make its decision.
gnat Si - e
7 l C_�
o an L.- Ol on, P .E .
Date Submitt d
17
ESA LISTED SALMONIDS CHECKLIST
Applicant Information Project Information
Name Name
Phone Location
Description
This worksheet was designed to help project proponents and
government agencies identify when a project needs further
analysis regarding adverse effects on ESA (Endangered.--Species
Act) listed salmonids . Salmonids are salmon, trout and chars ,
e.g. bull trout . For our purposes , "ESA listed salmonids" is
defined as fish species listed as endangered, threatened or
being considered for listing .
If ESA listed species are present or ever were present in the watershed where your project
will be located, your project has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply
with the ESA. The questions in this section will help determine if the ESA listings will
impact your project.
The Fish Program Manager at the appropriate Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
regional office can provide information for the following two questions
1 . Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the watershed
in whi�,ch your project will be located?
Yes No
Please describe .
4'6oD (f.4NAL
2 . Has there ever been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in
this watershed? Yes No Uncertain
Please describe .
If you answered "yes" to either of the above questions, you
should complete the remainder of this checklist.
September 1999 1
PROJECT SPECIFICS: The Questions in this section are specific to •
the project and vicinity.
1 . Name of watershed: V�R I 14 /I SLp
2 . Name of nearest waterbody: 1601) C, piAl
3 . What is the distance from this project to the nearest body of
water?
Often a buffer between the project and a stream can reduce the chance of a
negative impact to fish.
4 . What is the current land use between the project and the
potentially affected water body (parking lots, farmland, etc) ?
OVA IK /RESIDIFN7/AL
5 . Is the project above a:
• natural permanent barrier (waterfall) Yes No ?
• natural temporary barrier (beaver pond) Yes No z
• man-made barrier (culvert, dam) Yes No 7
• other (explain) :
6 . If yes, are there any resident salmonid populations above the
blockage? Yes No Don' t know,
7 . What percent of the project will be impervious surface
(including pavement & roof area) ? 70 1 f1
September 1999 2
FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if
this project could interfere with migration of adult and
juvenile fish.
Both increases and decreases in water flows can affect fish migration.
1 . Does the project require the withdrawal of :
i . Surface water? Yes No_k
Amount
Name of surface water body
ii . Ground water? Yes_ No
Amount
From where
Depth of well
2 . Will any water be rerouted? Yes No Lam'
If yes , will this require a channel change?
3 . Will there be retention or detention ponds? Yesje:::�'No
If yes, will this be an infiltration pond or a surface
discharge to either a municipal storm water system or a
surface water body? /Vo
If to a surface water discharge, please give the name of the
waterbody.. N6A/E /il/ �L y'lz R-r�Z /,V7-0
4 . Will this project require the building of new roads?
Yes No L—' Increased road mileage may affect the timing of water
reaching a stream and may impact fish habitat.
5 . Are culverts proposed as part of this project? Yes No��'
6 . Will topography changes affect the duration/direction of
runoff flows? Yeses No If yes , describe the changes .
PAC141)-y Ib bf CD417-P LtC V P
7 . Will the project involve any reduction of the floodway or
floodplain by filling or other partial blockage of flows?
Yes No
If yes , how will the loss of flood storage be mitigated by
your project?
September 1999 3
S
WATER QUALITY: The following questions will help determine if
this project could adversely impact water quality. Such impacts
can cause problems for listed species.
Water duality can be made worae by runoff from impervious surfaces, altering water
temperature, discharging contaminants, etc.
1 . Do you know of any problems with water quality in any of the
streams within this watershed? Yes No
If yes , describe.
2 . Will your project either reduce or increase shade along or
over a waterbody? Yes No 1-�
Removal of shading vegetation or the building of structures such as docks or
floats often result in a change in shade.
3 . Will the project increase nutrient loading or have the
potential to increase nutrient loading or contaminants
(fertilizers , other waste discharges, or runoff) to the
waterbody? Yes No '--
4 . Will turbidity be increased because of construction of the
project or during operation of the project? Yes Now
In-water or near water work will often increase turbidity.
5 . Will your project require long term maintenance, i . e . bridge
cleaning, highway salting, chemical sprays for vegetation
management, clearing of parking lots?
Yes No I-- If yes, please describe .
September 1999 4
VEGETATION: The following questions are designed to determine ,
if the project will affect riparian vegetation, thereby,
adversely impacting salmon.
1 . Will the project involve the removal of any vegetation from
the stream banks? Yes No
If yes, please describe the existing conditions , and the
amount and type of vegetation to be removed.
2 . If any vegetation is removed, do you plan to re-plant?
Yes No P" If yes , what types of plants will you use?
September 1999 5
FINAL STORM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
FOR:
NORTH MASON FIBER COMPANY
CLIENT:
NORTH MASON FIBER COMPANY
P.O. BOX 275
BELFAIR, WA 98528
(360) 275-0228
ATTN: MR. ROBERT DRESSEL
PREPARED BY:
N.L. OLSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC .
2453 BETHEL AVE. SE
PORT ORCHARD, WA 98366
(206) 876-2284
L50 99
WAS
�OtvAL / W/gy
December 10, 1999
e {
NORTH MASON FIBER COMPANY
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I . INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 1
II . UPSTREAM ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 2
III . DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 2
IV. DESIGN CALCULATIONS:
A. PARAMETERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 5
B. BASIN A STORM WATER FAC;LITY DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 9
1 . DEVELOPED CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 9
2 . DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 10
3 . RETENTION/INFILTRATION POND DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . PG. 10
4 . BIOFILTRATION SWALE DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 11
5 . EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . PG. 12
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 13
1 . DEVELOPED CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 13
2 . DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 14
3 . RETENTION/INFILTRATION POND DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . PG. 15
4 . BIOFILTRATION SWALE DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. 16
5 . EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . PG. 17
6 . OVERFLOW INFILTRATION TRENCH DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . PG. 17
i
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - VICINITY MAP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-1
FIGURE 2 - SCS SOILS MAPPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-2
FIGURE 3 - HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP (TR-55) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-3
FIGURE 4 - RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-4
FIGURE 5 - "n" AND "k" VALUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-5
FIGURE 6 - 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-6
FIGURE 7 - 100-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-7
FIGURE 8 - DEVELOPED CONDITIONS MAP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-8
FIGURE 9 - D.O.E . INFILTRATION RATE TABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . PG. A-9
ii
I. INTRODUCTION•
The North Mason Fiber Company is located near Belfair,
Washington, in Mason County, west of and ajacent to Log Yard
Road between State Highway 3 to the east and Old Belfair
highway to the west . The 25 . 56 acre site is situate in the
Northeast Quarter of Section 21, Township 23 North, Range 1
West, Willamette Meridian in Mason County, Washington (See
Figure 1 in Appendix A) .
The subject property is currently developed commercial with
pavement, an office and a few outbuildings . The site is
typicaly cleared but surounded with typical Puget Sound
third growth timber stands of Douglas and Hemlock Fir,
Cedar, Pine, Alder, and Maple . The under story consists of
Rhododendrons, Ferns, Salal, and Blackberry.
The USDA Soil Conservation Service classifies the site as
primarily Everett soils (Hydrologic Group Ed) -with slopes
0 to 15 percent . Given the Everett soils the Curve Numbers
will be assumed @ 'A' soil type, unless otherwise noted.
The proposed improvements for this project include paving
and grading along with construction of two
retention/infiltration ponds and biofiltration swales for
storm drainage quantity and quantity mitigation, and a fire
control storage pond and pipe system.
The runoff is divided into three separate systems as
depicted on the Developed Conditions Map, Figure 8 in
Appendix A, and- as described as follows :
Drainage Basin A, consisting of 8 . 71 acres and is located in
the north portion of the property. Retention Pond A will
receive 6 . 55 acres of runoff, 5 . 48 acres from pavement and
0 . 64 acres from third growth forest and/or brush and 0 .43
acres from grass in fair condition. Of the 5 .48 acres of
pavement, 2 . 71 acres is existing and 2 . 77 acres is proposed.
1
I . INTRODUCTION CONT'D.
Drainage Basin B, consisting of 7 . 97 acres and is located in
southeast portion of the property. Retention Pond B will
receive 5 . 38 acres of runoff, 4 . 60 acres from pavement and
0 . 53 acres from third growth forest and/or brush and 0 . 25
acres from grass in fair condition. Of the 4 . 60 acres of
pavement, 0 . 22 acres is existing and 4 . 38 acres is proposed.
Of the 5 . 38 acres, 4 . 91 acres contributes runoff to the
biofiltration swale, 4 . 38 acres from pavement and 0 . 53 acres
from second growth forest and/or brush. Runoff from the
remaining 2 . 59 acres of the 7 . 97 acre site, will sheet flow
offsite.
Drainage Basin C, consisting of 8 . 88 acres and is located in
southwest portion of the property. The existing retention
pond receives existing runoff from approximately 7 . 55 acres
of pavement area and 1 . 33 acres from second growth forest
and/or brush. This basin is developed and is not included as
part of the improvement area or within this storm drainage
analysis .
II. UPSTREAM ANALYSIS:
An upstream analysis for site concludes that the property is
generally self contained, therefore no significant off-site
runoff contribution is associated with the project site .
III . DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS:
A downstream investigation of the site reveals that runoff
to the north boundary continues down a sloped region prior
to crossing under the railroad spur entering a swale which
continues to the north to Union River and then south to Hood
Canal . All runoff to the southeastly boundary continues down
a sloped region along the railroad spur which continues to
the south to Union River and Hood Canal . All runoff to the
southwest is self contained within the existing pond area,
with overflow to the south where runoff continues to flow
along the railroad spur and overland to the Union River and
south to Hood Canal .
2
III. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS CONT'D:
The intent of the applicant is to reduce the maximum amount
of runoff as possible from leaving the site . The two
proposed retention/infiltration ponds are designed with
emergency overflow spillways . Retention pond B is also
designed with an underground infiltration overflow trench
system.
3
z
0
H
H
a
U
a
U
z
H
W
A
y
H
IV. DESIGN CALCULATIONS
A. PARAMETERS•
1 . The Water Quality / Water Quantity mitigation for the
project site will be designed to meet the criteria set
forth by the Washington Department of Ecology' s (DOE)
Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin,
except where modified herein as noted, and is as
follows :
* Water quantity mitigation for increased storm
water runoff shall be performed by the use of
storm water retention (infiltration) facility
designed to meet the discharge requirements for
100 percent of the developed 100-year, 24-hour
peak release rate design storm event .
* Water quality mitigation for the site shall be
performed by utilizing a biofiltration Swale
designed for the 6-month, 24-hour peak release
rate design storm event .
* Runoff shall be computed using the SCS-based
hydrograph method, Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph
(SBUH) , given a Type lA rainfall distribution.
See Figure 4 and 5 in Appendix A for Runoff Curve
numbers (CN) and "n" and "K" values used in Time
calculations, respectively and Figures 6 and 7
for the 2-year and 100-year, 24-hour Precipitation
and figure 6 for the 100-year Isopluvials
respectively.
* Design infiltration rates and sizing criteria
shall meet the recommendations of the D.O. E .
stormwater manual, Section III-3 (See Figure 13 in
Appendix A) .
* Technical requirements will be as per the Mason
County Department of Public Work - Stormwater
Division in conjunction with the Stormwater
Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin and
using WATERWORKS SOFTWARE FOR HYDROLOGY (Version
4 . 11c) by Engenious Systems, Inc and OPEN CHANNEL
FLOW MODULE, (Version 3 . 41) by Haestad Methods,
Inc.
5
IV. DESIGN CALCULATIONS
PARAMERTERS CONT'D. :
2 . Travel time (T-) for the SBUH Method will be determined
as follows :
T = 0 .42 (ns * L) °'Q / L (P_) 3.s * (sc) o.a
(initial sheet flow @ 300 ' maximum distance)
+ SUM L / (V * 60)
where :
P, = 2-Year Rainfall Precipitation, IN.
L = Flow Length, FT.
V = Velocity, FPS = k (s_) '�21
ns = Manning' s sheet flow roughness coefficient
(See Figure 8 in Appendix A)
k = Time of Concentration Velocity Factor
so = Slope, FT / FT
3 . Rainfall Precipitation for the project is as follows :
PZ = 3 . 65 Inches @ 2-Year, 24-Hour Precipitation
P6 = 2 . 34 Inches @ the 6-month, 24-Hour
Precipitation (640 of 2-year Precipitation)
Pioo = 7. 00 Inches @ 100-year, 24-Hour
Precipitation
(See Figures 6 and 7 in Appendix A)
6
IV. DESIGN CALCULATIONS
PARAMERTERS CONT'D. :
4 . Emergency overflow spillway weirs (3 : 1 slopes) shall be
designed to pass the developed 100-year storm event
using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrogra�h (SBUH) and the
following formula, L = [Q100 / (3 . 21 * H- ) ] - 2 . 4H
where :
L = Length of spillway opening, Feet (FT. )
(6 ' minimum)
H = Weir Head, Feet (FT. )
Q100 = Developed 100-year flow, Cubic feet/Second
(C. F.S . )
5 . All Biofiltration Swales will be sized using the
Manning' s Equation for Open Channel Flow,
Q = (1 .49/n) *A*R0.667*SO,5 where :
Q = Design Flow Rate, Cubic Feet/Second (C. F. S . )
n = Mannings Roughness Coefficient
_n = 0 . 20 @ Water Quality
n = 0 . 035 @ Water Quantity
A = Cross-sectional Area, Square Feet (S . F. )
R = Hydraulic Radius, Feet (FT. ) = A / wetted
perimeter (P)
S = Slope (FT. / FT. )
7
IV. DESIGN CALCULATIONS
PARAMERTERS CONT'D. :
6 . Design infiltration rate will be determined according
to Section III-3 of the DOE Manual and is as follows :
Q = fd * i * AS
where : Q = Flow rate at which runoff is infiltrated
fd = Design infiltration rate of soil
i = Hydraulic gradient
As = Surface area of infiltration
additionally: fd = f/2 Factor of safety of 2 . 0
where : F = DOE infiltration rate
i = (h + L) /L
where : H = height of water colume over infiltration
media
L = Distance from infiltration media to water
table or relative impervious layer.
therefore : . Q =f/2 * (h+L) /L * AS
7 . Curve Numbers for the project are as follows :
Given the Everett soils, the following Curve Numbers
(CN) will be utilized:
Second Growth Forest and/or Brush = 55
Grass in Fair Condition = 77
Pavement and Roofs = 98
(See Figure 4 in Appendix A)
8
B. BASIN A STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
1. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS :
At the developed condition, the runoff area for the
retention/infiltration system consists of 6 . 55 acres
and consists of the following:
BASIN A DATA
Future Land Use : Commercial
Basin Size : 6 . 55 Acres
Soil Type : Everett (Ed)
ON-SITE CONDITION FUTURE
Land Use Commercial
Pervious Area 1 . 07 acres (1)
CN Pervious Area 63 . 84 (2)
Impervious Area 5 .48 acres
CN Impervious Area 98 (3)
(1) 0 . 64 acres Third Growth Forest and/or Brush @ CN = 55
0 . 43 acres Grass in Fair Condition CN = 77
(2) 0 . 64 * 55 + 0 .43 * 77 / 1 . 07 = CN = 63 . 84
(3) 5 .48 acres Pavement and Roofs CN = 98
(See Figure 4 in Appendix A)
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
PERVIOUS TIME:
L1 = 77 ' , So= 334 . 0 - 331 . 0/77 = 3 . 900-. , ns= 0 . 40 , Pz= 3 . 65
LZ = 130 ' , So= 331 . 0 - 330 . 0/130 = 077%, ns= 0 . 40, PZ= 3 . 65
L3 = 97 ' , So= 330 . 0 - 326 . 0/97 = 4 . 120-. , ks= 11
L9 = 97 ' , So= 326 . 0 - 325 . 0/97 = 1 . 03%, ks= 27
L5 = 303 ' , So= 325 . 0 - 320 . 0/303 = 1 . 6501, ks= 27
IMPERVIOUS TIME:
L1 = 175 ' , So= 333 . 0 - 330 . 0/175 = 1 . 71%, ns= 0 . 011, PZ= 3 . 65
LZ = 95 ' , So= 330 . 0 - 325 . 9/95 = 4 . 320-. , k5= 11
L3 = 90 ' , So= 325 . 9 - 325 . 0/90 = 1 . 00%, k5= 27
LQ = 303 ' , So= 325 . 0 - 320 . 0/303 = 1 . 6506, k5= 27
(See Figure 5 in Appendix A)
9
B. BASIN A STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN•
2 . DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE:
Determination of the design infiltration rate according to
Section III-3 of the D.O.E. manual as follows :
Q = f/2 * (h+L) /L * As
where : f = 2 . 41 in. /hr. for loamy sand
(See Figure 9 in Appendix A)
h = variable depth of water
L = 10 ' assumed per DOE Section III-3
example problem where no signs of ground
water is encountered.
AS = varying areas
therefore:
Q = (2 . 789E-5) * (h+L) /L * A;
3 . RETENTION/INFILTRATION POND DESIGN:
The proposed retention/infiltration pond for Basin A
has been modeled within Waterworks . The model, Storage
List ID: pondA has the following geomerty:
STAGE (FT) AREA (SF)
314 . 0 16011 .42
316 . 0 19558 . 08
318 . 0 23475 .45
320 . 0 27344 . 40
(See Waterworks Data for Stage Storage Table)
10
B. BASIN A STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN•
3 . RETENTION/INFILTRATION POND DESIGN CONT'D:
The Stage Discharge List ID : disA for the retention
system was designed to provide needed storage volume
while allowing for the infiltration flow rate at above
mentioned design infiltration rate .
Therefore, the Stage Discharge Table has the following
geomerty:
STAGE (FT) As AREA (SF) (h+10) /10 0 (CFS)
314 . 0 16011 .42 1 . 0 0 .45
316 . 0 19558 . 08 1 . 2 0 . 65
318 . 0 23475 .45 1 . 4 0 . 92
320 . 0 27344 .40 1 . 6 1 . 22
(See WaterWorks Data for Stage Discharge Table)
Based upon the Stage Storage and Stagew Discharge
Structures identified, the Level Pool Summary for the
Developed 100-year, 24-hour storm event provides a Peak
Stage of 318, 13 FT with a volume of 81, 998 . 5 CF.
4 . BIOFILTRATION SWALE DESIGN:
The Biofiltration Swales were sized to provide water
quality treatment at the 6-month storm event .
Additionally, the 100-year peak runoff rate was routed
through the Swales to ensure that flow velocity would
not exceed a scouring velocity of 3 F. P.S .
Due to the high flows associated with the developed
site, two biofiltration swales channels were utilized.
The following parameters were used to size each of the
biofiltration swale :
11
B. BASIN A STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN•
4 . BIOFILTRATION SWALE DESIGN CONT'D:
Max. 6-month Flow 1 . 31 CFS (2 . 62 CFS total)
Max. 100-yr Flow 4 . 21 CFS (8 . 41 CFS total)
Side Slopes 3H: 1V
Swale Length 200 Feet
Longitudinal Slope 1 . 00 Percent
Maximum Flow Depth 4 Inches
Residence Time for Quality 4 Minutes Minimum
Velocity for Capacity 3 FPS
6-month Manning ' s "n" 0 . 200
100-yr Manning' s "n" 0 . 035
Sizing Results (See Appendix B) : •-
Swale Bottom Width 11 . 00 Feet
6-month Flow Depth 0 . 33 Feet (4 . 00 Inches)
6-month Flow Velocity 0 . 33 Feet per Second
6-month Flow Residence Time 200/0 . 33 = 606 Seconds
or 10 . 1 Minutes
100-year Flow Depth 0 . 23 Feet (2 . 76 Inches)
100-year Flow Velocity 1 . 54 Feet Per Second
(See Waterworks Data for Water Quality/Quantity Worksheet)
5 . EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY DESIGN:
The emergency overflow spillway length was sized using
the following data:
L = [Qioo / (3 . 21 * H3/z) ) ] - 2 . 4H
therefore :
Q = 8 . 41 CFS = 100-year Peak Emergency Overflow
H = 0 . 5
L = [8 .41/ (3 . 21 * (0 . 5) 3/I1 ) ] - 2 .4 (0 . 5)
L = 6 . 21 Feet ( Use 6 . 25 Feet)
12
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN•
1 . DEVELOPED CONDITIONS :
At the developed condition, the runoff area for
theretention/infiltration system consists of 5 . 38 acres
and consists of the following :
BASIN B DATA
Future Land Use : Commercial
Basin Size : 5 . 38 acres
Soil Type : Everett (Ed)
ON-SITE CONDITION FUTURE
Land Use Commercial
Pervious Area 0 . 78 acres (1)
CN Pervious Area 62 . 05 (2)
Impervious Area 4 . 60 acres
CN Impervious Area 98 (3)
(1) 0 . 53 acres Third Growth Forest and/or Brush @ CN = 55
0 . 25 acres Grass in Fair Condition CN = 77
(2) 0 . 53 * 55 + 0 .25 * 77 / 0 . 78 = CN = 62 . 05
(3) 4 . 60 acres Pavement and Roofs CN = 98
(See Figure 4 in Appendix A)
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
PERVIOUS TIME:
L1 = 225 ' , So= 326 . 5 - 323 . 5/225 = 1 . 33%, ns= 0 . 40, P2= 3 . 65
L2 = 300 , So= 323 . 5 - 320 . 5/300 = 1 . 00%, ks= 27
L3 = 36 ' , So= 314 . 5 - 313 . 78/36 = 2 . 00%, kc= 21
Lq = 150 ' , So= 318 . 25 - 316 . 75/150 = 1 . 00%, kc= 17
L5 = 95 ' , So= 316 . 0 - 315 . 25/75 = 1 . 000-.
So= 315 . 25 - 314 . 5/20 = 3 . 75%
So= 1 . 0096*75 + 3 . 75%*20/95 = 1 . 580-. , ks= 21
13
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
1 . DEVELOPED CONDITIONS CONT'D:
IMPERVIOUS TIME:
L, = 300 ' , So= 325 . 7 - 325 . 0/45 = 1 . 56% +
S,,= 325 . 0 - 322 . 45/255 = 1 . 001, _
So= 1 . 08% n5= 0 . 40 , P,= 3 . 65
L, = 145 ' , So= 322 .45 - 321 . 00/145= 1 . 00%, k;= 27
L; = 3361 , So= 317 .5 - 314 . 5/300 = 1 . 00% +
So= 314 . 5 - 313 . 78/36 = 2 . 00% = S�= 1 . 11%, k5= 21
(See Figure 5 in Appendix A)
2 . DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE:
Determination of the design infiltration rate according
to Section III-3 of the D.O. E. manual as follows :
Q = f/2 * (h+L) /L * AS
where : f = 2 .41 in. /hr. for loamy sand
(See Figure 9 in Appendix A)
h = variable depth of water
L = 10 ' assumed per DOE Section III-3
example problem where no signs of ground
water is encountered.
AS = varying areas
therefore:
Q = (2 . 789E-5) * (h+L) /L * As
14
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
3 . RETENTION/INFILTRATION POND DESIGN:
The proposed retention/infiltration pond for Basin B
has been modeled within Waterworks . The model, Storage
List ID: pondB has the following geomerty:
STAGE (FT) AREA (SF)
314 . 0 10886 . 04
316 . 0 13872 . 91
318 . 0 17164 . 04
320 . 0 20494 . 38
(See Waterworks Data for Stage Storage Table)
The Stage Discharge List ID: disB for the retention
system was designed to provide needed storage volume
while allowing for the infiltration flow rate at above
mentioned design infiltration rate.
Therefore, the Stage Discharge Table has the following
geomerty:
STAGE (FT) As AREA (SF) (h+10) /10 CFS
314 . 0 10886 . 04 1 . 0 0 .30
316 . 0 13872 . 91 1 . 2 0 .46
318 . 0 17164 . 04 1 .4 0 . 67
320 . 0 20494 . 38 1 . 6 0 . 91
(See WaterWorks Data for Stage Discharge Table)
Based upon the Stage Storage and Stage Discharge
Structures identified, the Level Pool Summary for the
j Developed 100-year, 24-hour storm event provides a Peak
Stage of 318, 77 FT with a volume of 70, 222 CF.
t
15
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
6 . OVERFLOW INFILTRATION TRENCH DESIGN CONT'D:
The available volume for the trench listed above is
dependent upon the percent void At each stage
identified. The rock within the trench is assumed at 30
percent void. The cross-sectional area of the 4 foot
diameter pipe at a given stage is determined as
follows :
STAGE (FT) d D A/D2 AREA*2 (SF)
313 . 0 1/4 0 . 1535 4 . 92
314 . 0 1/2 0 . 3927 12 . 56 --
315 . 0 3/4 0 . 6318 20 . 22
316 . 0 Full 0 . 7854 25 . 00
Based upon the cross-sectional area of the trench (300
void) less the cross-sectional area of the pipe (1000
void) for a given stage, the CF/FT volume is as
follows :
STAGE X-SECTIONAL AREA o VOID VOLUME
FT SF (CF/FT)
312 . 0 13 x 1 13 . 00@0 . 30 3 . 90
313 . 0 13 x 2 4 . 92@1 . 00 11 . 24
21 . 08@0 . 30
314 . 0 13 x 3 12 . 56@1 . 00 20 .49
26 . 44@0 . 30
315 . 0 13 x 4 20 . 22@1 . 00 29 . 75
31 . 78@0 . 30
316 . 0 13 x 5 25 . 00@1 . 00 37 . 00
40 . 00@0 . 30
317 . 0 13 x 6 25 . 00@1 . 00 40 . 90
53 . 00@0 . 30
18
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
6 . OVERFLOW INFILTRATION TRENCH DESIGN CONT'D:
Therefore, the Stage Storage Table associated with a
200 FT. long trench with the cross-sectional properties
listed above is as follows :
STAGE (FT) VOLUME (CF)
311 . 0 200 x 0 . 00 0 . 0
312 . 0 200 X 3 . 90 780 . 0
313 . 0 200 X 11 . 24 2248 . 0
314 . 0 200 x 20 .49 4098 . 0
315 . 0 200 x 29 . 75 5950 .-0
316 . 0 200 X 37 . 00 7400 . 0
317 . 0 200 X 40 . 90 8180 . 0
The Stage Discharge table for the retention system will
be designed to provide needed storage volume while
allowing for infiltration at the following rates :
Q = f/2 * (h+L) /L * AS
where: f = 2 .41 in. /hr. = 5 . 58E-5 for loamy sand
(See Figure 9 in Appendix A)
h = variable depth of water
L = 10 ' assumed per DOE Section III-3
example problem where no signs of ground
water is encountered.
AS = 2600 SF. ( based on a 13 ' x 200 '
trench bottom)
therefore:
Q = (2 . 789E-5) * (h+L) /L * 2600
Q = 0 . 073 * (h+L) /L
19
C. BASIN B STORM WATER FACILITY DESIGN:
6 . OVERFLOW INFILTRATION TRENCH DESIGN CONT'D:
The Stage Discharge Table is as follows :
STAGE (H+L) /L 0 (CFS)
311 . 0 1 . 0 0 . 07
312 . 0 1 . 1 0 . 08
313 . 0 1 . 2 0 . 09
314 . 0 1 . 3 0 . 09
315 . 0 1 .4 0 . 10
316 . 0 1 . 5 0 . 11
317 . 0 1 . 6 0 . 12
(See Waterworks Data in Appendix A)
Based upon the Stage Storage and Stage Discharge
Structures identified, the developed 100-year, 24-
hour Storm Event provides a Peak Volume of 8180 . 0
CF of additional storage volume.
20
APPENDIX A - FIGURES
0
o �
OLD 8Ej p
OLD BELFAIR HWY.
z o
o Ro
RpII,R
O~
O
MASON CO.
KTTSAP CO. BREMERTON
w '. •• Y� �:yii• t • •• =`.inp �,�' `�r,.,� ,'�:T�: .,�+•: :n\!�.�jYq+!+;Ft• ��: i.!�� .��
���• { ♦ r�• t•�t/~.a ia+�i�a••:_ ,{? j 1!t`1 �Y~.:. ,a..,,�•..�i.fi/w� �`"�.`�4,viy."r��.a �..V- _
7A? 11 a /!-a •.h'�''�� VLE •' ��•�„��r.a.• � .'"`w' ,,s,• '� .iA ' �Q7i� f`r i.•. .
�� ice' �' '�'�r: -''•7Z`"•�jijYy�e ..i.• '•7t��� _t ..r w���'lr�a �•- 1yi�'+� ����'�": a
�• •Y!�i r it ar��•::j�� ti ti 1,�I:•ry�1�� ��. �yl `r � x^�i],+e�b�. t. •2
yI'!-�.ar�{J��•w f ••�s���ytill , r� {'. ~'..�`!1.�� ••�+� 1� �Izr ,SY• >a.
...a. • ��•: •'f`�v^ •4�5. YL:.:ss F
-.t"; •.;,-� L �- A v •,. •. S i •.`,. i•` :! �7w:• ` •t'^ may.
..� •��ya a ti .f ••.a.r ..,I• .�` r•� •'�;�.�J!ti`�:..�.•.J�S.r�•4- w•y•w%fit _ a '•� 'ZG'u"•
•r ♦:e�9�.;-,,.,�'�}-�� t'.+� ':. � yi{j.' - ?`w y�•'�s�t••�� ����irb�� lY a s • }s• k4���Q�./,ra•L��r"":t'.?:iiZ�.,.•,a 1tt v � 's'{�:•'�r��„L.`:},y.�► ,�[!•�'t. :}'•"�rll�� °� �?!�'.`_�j'+�,�, �- 4'iC i�+r�
w M ltiM //: i�dss.`�,,��; �•, `zj�,iy!/►'•�..� 7•w/iG~1 1''«:�1�•�it a;. ��. �;Ti`��_
it=•'..Iii►r.'C4tl...,a1�i4»-•}.1+�..�
VZq: N• - �^•,`74 M••+ Wv'f.y.'•C':"Y,•.k` .1•�e :�i �lir
40,
-s
T 'a s .� •� l•a '. 1� Yw�� '{�A►` �i•t�;)�?,-� at♦ - • a���1}f=�� � ' s
.�l��yyyy tt ram'"••r. Li} �r� • �'F° :ra'ra. :'€�3R�� 1 +
f.M J-•r.:t►f2•. dNy�:? .i.,� s; .l � :d: •yS,r �. rt•• r..,"r- . '��„
4dY y��sp�,f 4 ,10 1►'�;. •50m. ,• PU
•y�� ! c.,, •/�..}.t 3!y � .y t .Z",� �•.1A�i. .}�t.-....."�a�(�hi�i4��g'•yY''��;t t �yRA��2,•i�a;�!•��
.%lG:.:.r+a t 7i'. - °'ti' t`?w !'•i'1'"' `.'� s T <r if y�F'► '``'!1+:'i.��!'•i►.a 7t� t ryw a`- 'ji. 'v-t�/
;�t��yyf• i T� ♦ a
'VwJ } {�: �f'•.. �...► G
TjY.�•I r! aiti. �' :.� :Ii1 r' a:�Rt a�-Y.f a.} . bi'...'. h'�. ( 1 `�1 �s� alL ! 1M-F''•t� ?s
L�r F ` 1 ,t 3� ♦ v iyi" yw �Saw'� RNA-`ti
- =as.{ . * � .ti: rsv ,lx�'�¢.�.. .?, •tY.i'•. .r'i{t•�,xV2
arc >yik",�{�• •+' a�23"'�,a!r ..T• ♦ `+:. /•. t?'� '!l "i1.�
\ ZM ! "i�r� ' ,;. �:� �5 ; _ , .�•.•.• .6^ RO
r rr#� 1i►� *� `azt. � s
•�•af,, 3e i � fir. •' Ns� 1 �iip
tZ.t
JL
•��'3; �„K "g.`••ic. v�•.,� �'n'�tA + • •�`����.�`..�4.��,.• �`t����t�!.y�t•�.�•���4t r'�=;i-^=t�;��'�`��.�.��t?.
;�.••)�i•o-r,. !�-„� - l A'1 I -f• �' ` S y1'i�~. r t4i��o-•� 11I a►` R- fl s�~r ,��s a T►•i��I•
S . .,� c,� c_R { �'�{+�+� ..';-fir..• y r ^•r 1:•i.',�•;"'1►!~�r'ari;'i t
y'� f- •s.•• .+r. �'` �Sy '•„ ' :..Y S 'S �'_ij. .J• s,./} f9?~%+' `!^rW;..`• ii'�. •►.�1�.V'S`}.' ;.�Yt�►
}i,j.�'�'t "',�.� ?F J•"`U'°`��t '� .� st ,w .�y :34+,5:,�,?kr ,r- ���.-• �:, �� �� II
��:� •�e.� e.�•. tit= �{�- i•;��j/ �: �'•��t�.`•*v�`.��!' ��tiy.��•.�{1r� A, .•;� -tl
"tL- s-,r.,j' n.. Y ;t tifi �'!�.� e: a t .•� '!S� �i1iT'�Y`�`vY�y� "*•�•
.�,•.�;� r�•wy�. t'• ' q,r�'A: 'T.�;t:-i i iY ♦ i •c.. w•,. e4'�'1a+���t�K���!�'��'`�iMiP�j�`:�«i"��� '� �Y
#- t rAI vi m , •• '"�SS:•y<<t�'r�•r� ',tl Y r.-:-. ma's ?. Y/y� � �►�r�i .{,_j t.�a.��:•'i'•� i7 M,~i •*
• Sr ri o r •4:r �. v • i. f - .T• �'i. .-Ng -.
r. �..-,�:ntS+.*fwA•. r�• •}i;.�.fL.
iP r�� •f+r , �l.r�'2 .!a't^ ) s� �`+} - ', v �.��� IiI 1� .7..:b: �'..ati i �►--t
rTa_�-. ya.�1'� t<' s.r a..-t t�✓�a �i i" may.. 't i' I,1• a.�j�r� a s►i�'�'• �:w+r •• i'f• '
1'iy ,:"'... pia! , ♦ ;. i ,�:•. r F•7� �� ,la"", �`=Nti� �..���•
��';'.• s.ti. .7: �`* -• ict„� tiy. .►�•if« i��4.s,�-s:ti t �,t. Y: ?r�l:.. '4 �vf r'♦. + �• ��
t t�s •�.
., t�") lJti;,'• f.�,.}7i'.'. ..Yjt�`b4Y^lr-v.:` "s .-.3
ah��a�c
1
N
(71 r
o uzz❑ ❑ ° A ❑ uummma ❑ A ¢ m ❑ auuzzzzzuzzAzz zu ❑ mcuumA ° ❑ m ❑ z ❑ ❑ muuu ❑ mz ❑ mzA L
20 4
z 9 Ix
T
Q �
CQ
A C
z -
5
0
H
W
O
a a
w �
x 8
a QQ E' E
E' 'E
b ay ° a 3 3 u u ? y u ` > C 0 ° g ° S o A S_' o
Gv U �J A C� a ' > e u L Q b o 0 0 ° u u > o „ m 4 9 o f o' o E t r c ° u °c o 0 0?G OC oG iZ 0. n n w rn Vn Vn En (n rn Ln Ln v) n in v) vd) Vn v) Vn rn Vn
U
° e ❑ A A ❑ A ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑
umuummmmummu0umA ❑ umuzzummm ¢ mumuuuuzzumzzzummu ❑ zmzpm � maza GN
i
z E � b
i
T H
Q �
0 C
H n
Lo
uuu
v u E E u >
u u u • a a O s
u � iuuuua� a� a� a� � a� � � aa � zzzz
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN
Table III-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers
(Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural,
suburban and urban
land use for T lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration.
LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP
F B C D
Cultivated land(1) : winter condition 86 91 94 95
Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92
Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89
Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86
Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94
Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
landscaping. 1.
Good condition: grass cover on z75% of the 68 80 86 90
area
Fair condition: grass cover on 50-7S% of 77 85 90 92
the area
Gravel roads & parking lots: 76 85 89 91
Dirt roads & parking lots: 72 82 87 89
Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 98 98
Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 1100 100 100 100
Single family residential(2) :
Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) Separate curve number
1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected for
1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious
2.0 DU/GA 25 portions of the site
2.5 DU/GA 30 or basin
3.0 DU/GA 34
3.5 DU/GA 38
4.0 DU/GA 42
4.5 DU/GA 46
5.0 DU/GA 48
5.5 DU/GA 50
6.0 DU/GA 52
6.5 DU/GA 54
7.0 DU/GA 56
PUD's, condos, apartments, %impervious
commercial businesses & must be
industrial areas computed
(1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer
to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972.
(2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system.
(3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good
condition for these curve numbers.
III-1-12 FEBRUARY, 1992
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN
Table III-1.4 "n" AND "k" Values Used in Time Calculations for Hydrographs
"n'" Sheet Flow Equation Manning's Values (for the initial 300 ft. of travel) na
Smooth surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel, or bare hand packed
soil)
0.011
Fallow fields or loose soil surface (no residue) 0.05
Cultivated soil with residue cover (s_< 0.20 ft/ft) 0.06
Cultivated soil with residue cover (s> 0.20 ft/ft) 0.17
Short prairie grass and lawns 0.15
Dense grasses 0.24
Bermuda grass 0.41
Range (natural) 0. 13
Woods or forest with light underbrush 0.40
Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80
*Manning values for sheet flow only, from Overton and Meadows 1976 (See TR-55, 1986)
"k" Values Used in Travel Time/Time of Concentration Calculations
Shallow Concentrated Flow (After the initial 300 ft. of sheet flow, R = 0.1) kg
1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n = 0. 10) 3
2. Brushy ground with some trees (n = 0.060) 5
3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n = 0.040) 8
4. High grass (n = 0.035) 9
5. Short grass, pasture and lawns (n = 0.030) 11
6. Nearly bare ground (n = 0.25) 13
7. Paved and gravel areas (n = 0.012) 27
Channel Flow (intermittent) (At the beginning of visible channels R = 0.2) kc
1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter (n = 0.10) 5
2. Forested drainage course/ravine with defined channel bed (n = 0.050) 10
3. Rock-lined waterway (n = 0.035) 15
4. Grassed waterway (n = 0.030) 17
5. Earth-lined waterway (n = 0.025) 20
6. CMP pipe (n = 0.024) 21
7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42
8. Other waterways and pipe 0.508/n
Channel Flow (Continuous stream, R = 0.4) k�
9. Meandering stream with some pools (n = 0.040) 20
10. Rock-lined stream (n = 0.035) 23
11. Grass-lined stream (n = 0.030) 27
12. Other streams, man-made channels and pipe 0.807/n**
III-1-16 FEBRUARY, 1992
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN
124 123 122 121
49 i
_ 25 25 a w w ww w XIMIs 39 25 2e to
BE w 2f
OLGA I .25
C
� n
; I)�\
\ FRIDAY HARBOR PORT STA LEY (\
_40 `. MT 30 ya n
I ;E 1 Rr
I y/c u20
10
35 302510 I0� 1. �? 3 Allst .
48,
f R
` /� E R E T T ?
40 f6 rs'.
- f I 1 15 21 25 c
429
50 '
ss 2b s15c
s v 30 5 's
45I _ / S AT
���j
,k • vU C
40� a J '
35' 55 20
s —
3 \ /5 40 35 COMA — 2
47 3 3 10
E AS RDE N
r 3o m
2s 2s 35 f 13
40
'CENT
w
O 55. \ 10 YAKI
7•
k 20
45' s 40
35 \ ADA
46, 3 2 E (� 'f ss S0
WASHINGTON '0 3 25 e K
10 0 10 20 30 40 PPL EN E
----� MILES 20 a 15 2
Figure 25 '
25'--` NOAA ATLAS 2, Volume IX
ISOPLUVIALS F 2-YR 24-HR PRECIPITATI N IN Prepared by U.S.Department of C morce
TENTHS OF A INCH National Oceanic and Atmospheric ministration
National Weather Service,Office of Hydrology
Prepared for U.S.Department of A riculture,
Sol[Conservation Service,Engineer g Division
124 123 122 121
• III-1-44 FEBRUARY, 1992
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN
124 123 122 121
49 _
I 4 45 _ 80 r s
EL
T
� 0 ,
�t c 45 la'" A, cJs 40
o. � � GA � � \
1 ( 4
- \ 55 �
\ F IEL MAR C' •FORT SlArj-'
� Q+
7S 8085 \ 35 30/f \ ` r 70 5 0
t f
I / � 5 10 1 6 0
75 I
1 2 I
,OAS 3 3 55
4 8 i5 10) -OAS
Aift�
75 3 _ 251 °
8U f L�,
85. 1 5 45 ' ° 0 ;
90�
100, E w s s 100. s so
,
90.. i 1 40
AT 5 a e
4 s 1
841 (40
0� 2
60 S s
4 7 55, 5 ' :. 0 6 4 3
! � 65 3 \
ABE E N 5
�i0
i — 5 2
_ a s
70 4 r 1 R L 7° w 'S
/( 75 -
2
I 60 7S 22 ••YAK
6d 55
} 45 to pro
s
55+• lam' ° � —�,f �s
s s 10
65 7d, T p 0
65 60 55 10 ' AD M -30 �25.
46 w 1 I C�
WASHINGTON 4° i ° �° 40 ' — tCKLI
O F'• ' `GP.'Cp E N E
10 0 10 20 30 40 � •80 ,
'—� MILES 40 to
iFigure 30 I NOAA ATLAS 2,Volume IX
ISOPLUVIALS F 100-YR 24-HR PRECIPIT !TION 45 5055 60 65 Prepared by U.S.Department of C merce
ional+ IN TENTHS OF N INCH q National Weatheeanic rsery a office of ministration
I Y gY
Prepared for U.S.Department of Apiculture,
� Soil Conservation Service,Engineer g Division
124 123 122 12i
' III-1-46 FEBRUARY, 1992
R c-A .
�-asan
o _
a M+Opl1 1.1E1p11 /
Y
a MM]CRI /
w .
E� s
a ftli"
a oafs rat
FNE OM R10�
RkW ROW
PO"O
ti
RErE"r oR Po"o JN
rORBAY CELL
crfmjm a1a MommlloR
(m oEuan
1p a w I I'm
sm arrz
a+sA
RETErAgN PO"O i
SECO"O CELL _ •7
W MS■-17
A1AR
aIr EL EOOE Or►awww - 7 rfK■.a,.
TO RE-
1 STA 0-OOI R EOOE 6
S'fJ1r6 -71fA MK1Ol1
Ina Inr+CK) •WAM A -71.A
-
E.O.AEO mom
- IEEE auas)
MCC Of.c rwo[n tr
`Y.
• /KENK OMTE
m ouftr si.woo
a
Scale: 1"=IW .
�i C�• SA
V�LOP�
r avo rr,ct-& t�/1
EW EDGE OF
PAVEMENT
N
—EDGE OF PAVEMENT I
N
n o
f, 25.
.. o-v ,
1%N
'N J N � zz•
p RETENTION m
POND 'B'
SECOND CELL
84'
1e'
- 1
72'
I -
RETENTION POND 'B'
FOREBAY CELL
104 M
107'
\ is
\ '•ASS
\ N-12 Ct _
N SWALE
\ I
MH /1 TYPE II\
48 m \
W/ STD. GRATE
\
\E=319.0 \
LF
24' A05 N-12 \ �' •
uw I') TYPr 11 4R"m. r t1i� • ■ C ' \ \
��nenn" w w w v
�3
w to
tT y
r-tD O
H
Infiltration Cation Exchange Effective N y
H Texture Rate Capacity Water Capacity Hydrologic I y�
Class Hydrologic (milliequivalents/ (inches per Soil Group U
(inchmfhr.) 100 grams) inch)
Coarse Sands or Cobbles 20.00 <5.0 --- A to
0 O
r
Sand 8.27 <5.0 0.35 A ~'
° z
N Loamy Sand 2.41 5.0 0.31 A 0 y
N
N Sandy Loam 1.02 >5.0 0.25 B �
w rr C:
Loam 0.52 >5.0 0.19 B F- y
m t'
Silt Loam 0.27 >5.0 0.17 C n ny
r O
Sandy Clay Loam 0.17 >5.0 0.14 C w �U
to y
m
Clay Loam 0.09 >5.0 0.14 D M
r•
Silty Clay Loam 0.06 >5.0 0.11 D Q
G�
Sandy Clay 0.05 >5.0 0.09 D �3
Silty Clay 0.04 >5.0 0.09 D 0 O
r• C:
Clay 0.02 >5.0 0.08 D ~ Uz
y
Source(except for cation exchange capacity): Rawls, Brakensiek,and Saxton, 1982(16) k
r* to
� G N
n z
Cation exchange capacity values arc estimated from Buckman and Brady, 1969,(23) (D
�C
N l
H
A
ul
m
P4
O
3
P4
W
E4
z
H
co
�i
W
12/1/99 11 : 6 : 2 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc. page 1
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions Basin A
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: ADEV-100 NAME: Basin A Dev. 100-year, 24-hr
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6 .55 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 7 .00 inches AREA. . : 1 . 07 Acres 5 .48 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 63 . 84 98 .00
TC. . . . . 51 .59 min 5 . 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - - Sheet L: 77 . 00 ns : 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 .0390
TcReach - Sheet L: 130 .00 ns :0 .4000 p2yr: 3 .65 s : 0 . 0077
TcReach - Shallow L: 97 .00 ks:11 . 00 s :0 .0412
TcReach - Shallow L: 97 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s :0 . 0103
TcReach - Shallow L: 303 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0165
impTcReach - Sheet L: 175 .00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0171
impTcReach - Shallow L: 95 .00 ks :11 . 00 s : 0 . 0432
impTcReach - Shallow L: 90 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Shallow L: 303 .00 ks:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0165
PEAK RATE: 8 .41 cfs VOL: 3 .35 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: ADEV-6m NAME: Basin A Dev. 6-month, 24-hr
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6 .55 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 .34 inches AREA. . : 1 . 07 Acres 5 .48 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 63 .84 98 .00
TC. . . . . 51 .59 min 5 . 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - Sheet L: 77 . 00 ns: 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0390
TcReach - Sheet L: 130 . 00 ns :0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 .0077
TcReach - Shallow L: 97 . 00 ks:11 . 00 s : 0 . 0412
TcReach - Shallow L: 97 . 00 ks:27 . 00 s :0 .0103
TcReach - Shallow L: 303 . 00 ks:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0165
impTcReach - Sheet L: 175 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0171
impTcReach - Shallow L: 95 . 00 ks : 11 . 00 s : 0 . 0432
impTcReach - Shallow L: 90 .00 ks :27 . 00 s :0 . 0100
impTcReach - Shallow L: 303 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0165
PEAK RATE: 2 . 62 cfs VOL: 0 . 98 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
12/1/99 11 :6 :2 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc. page 2
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions Basin A
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf\AcFt Acres
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
1 8 .408 480 146086 cf 6 .55
2 2 . 623 480 42831 cf 6 . 55
3 0 . 940 1350 130437 cf 6 .55
4 0 .517 790 42831 cf 6 .55
6 6 . 845 480 120839 cf 5 .38
7 2 . 147 480 35750 cf 5 .38
8 0 . 762 1360 103345 cf 5 .38
9 0 .376 800 35750 cf 5 .38
12/1/99 11 : 6 :2 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc. page 3
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions Basin A
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. pondA
Description: Basin A Retention Pond
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
314.00 0.0000 0.0000 315.60 28456 0.6533 317.20 61390 1.4093 318.80 98931 2.2711
314.10 1778 0.0408 315.70 30234 0.6941 317.30 63541 1.4587 318.90 101472 2.3295
314.20 3557 0.0817 315.80 32013 0.7349 317.40 65693 1.5081 319.00 104013 2.3878
314.30 5335 0.1225 315.90 33791 0.7757 317.50 67845 1.5575 319.10 106554 2.4461
314.40 7114 0.1633 316.00 35570 0.8166 317.60 69996 1.6069 319.20 109095 2.5045
314.50 8892 0.2041 316.10 37721 0.8660 317.70 72148 1.6563 319.30 111636 2.5628
314.60 10671 0.2450 316.20 39873 0.9154 317.80 74300 1.7057 319.40 114177 2.6211
314.70 12449 0.2858 316.30 42025 0.9648 317.90 76451 1.7551 319.50 116718 2.6795
314.80 14228 0.3266 316.40 44176 1.0141 318.00 78603 1.8045 319.60 119259 2.7378
314.90 16006 0.3675 316.50 46328 1.0635 318.10 81144 1.8628 319.70 121800 2.7961
315.00 17785 0.4083 316.60 48480 1.1129 318.20 83685 1.9211 319.80 124341 2.8545
315.10 19563 0.4491 316.70 50631 1.1623 318.30 86226 1.9795 319.90 126882 2.9128
315.20 21342 0.4899 316.80 52783 1.2117 318.40 88767 2.0378 320.00 129423 2.9711
315.30 23120 0.5308 316.90 54935 1.2611 318.50 91308 2.0961
315.40 24899 0.5716 317.00 57086 1.3105 318.60 93849 2.1545
315.50 26677 0.6124 317.10 59238 1.3599 318.70 96390 2.2128
12/1/99 11:6 :2 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc. page 4
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions Basin A
----------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
DISCHARGE LIST ID No. disA
Description: Infiltration Rate Discharge
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- -------
- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
314.00 0.4500 315.60 0.6100 317.20 0.8120 318.80 1.0400
314.10 0.4600 315.70 0.6200 317.30 0.8255 318.90 1.0550
314.20 0.4700 315.80 0.6300 317.40 0.8390 319.00 1.0700
314.30 0.4800 315.90 0.6400 317.50 0.8525 319.10- 1.0850
314.40 0.4900 316.00 0.6500 317.60 0.8660 319.20 1.1000
314.50 0.5000 316.10 0.6635 317.70 0.8795 319.30 1.1'150
314.60 0.5100 316.20 0.6770 317.80 0.8930 319.40 1.1300
314.70 0.5200 316.30 0.6905 317.90 0.9065 319.50 1.1450
314.80 0.5300 316.40 0.7040 318.00 0.9200 319.60 1.1600
314.90 0.5400 316.50 0.7175 318.10 0.9350 319.70 1.1750
315.00 0.5500 316.60 0.7310 318.20 0.9500 319.80 1.1900
315.10 0.5600 316.70 0.7445 318.30 0.9650 319.90 1.2050
315.20 0.5700 316.80 0.7580 318.40 0.9800 320.00 1.2200
315.30 0.5800 316.90 0.7715 318.50 0.9950
315.40 0.5900 317.00 0.7850 318.60 1.0100
315.50 0.6000 317.10 0.7985 318.70 1.0250
12/1/99 11 :6:4 am NL Olson & Assoc . Inc. page 5
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions Basin A
---------------------------
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAR-> OUTFLOW STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf)
100-year Storm Event ......... 0.00 8.41 pondA disA 318.13 3 0.94 81998.51 cf
6-month Storm Event .......... 0.00 2.62 pondA disA 314.67 4 0.52 11843.10 cf
Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name : N . Mason Fiber #5089
Comment : 6-month Biofiltration Swale A Design
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data :
Bottom Width. . . . . 11 . 00 ft
Left Side Slope . . 3 . 00 : 1 (H:V)
Right Side Slope . 3 . 00 : 1 (H :V)
Manning' s n. . . . . . 0 . 200
Channel Slope . . . . 0 . 0100 ft/ft
Discharge . . . . . . . . 1 . 31 cfs
Computed Results :
Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 33 ft
Velocity . . . . . . . . . 0 . 33 fps
Flow Area . . . . . . . . 3 . 93 sf
Flow Top Width. . . 12 . 97 ft
Wetted Perimeter . 13 . 07 ft
Critical Depth. . . 0 . 08 ft
Critical Slope . . . 1 . 3929 ft/ft
Froude Number . . . . 0 . 11 ( flow is Subcritical )
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 41 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods , Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
Circular Channel Analysis & Design
Solved with Manning ' s Equation
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name : N . Mason Fiber #5089
Comment : Basin A Pipe Capacity Verification 24" Dia .
Solve For Actual Depth
Given Input Data :
Diameter . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 00 ft
Slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0100 ft/ft
Manning ' s n. . . . . . . 0 . 015
Discharge . . . . . . . . . 8 . 41 cfs
Computed Results :
Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 92 ft
Velocity. . . . . . . . . . 6 . 00 fps
Flow Area . . . . . . . . . 1 . 40 sf
Critical Depth. . . . 1 . 03 ft
Critical Slope . . . . 0 . 0066 ft/ft
Percent Full . ... . . . 45 . 76 %
Full Capacity . . . . . 19 . 61 cfs
QMAX @. 94D . . . . . . . . 21 . 09 cfs
Froude Number . . . . . 1 . 26 ( flow is Supercritical )
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 41 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods , Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
BASIN B - WATERWORKS DATA
12/1/99 10 : 57 :48 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc . page 1
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions - Basin B
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: BDP-100 NAME: Basin B Dev. 100-year Pond
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 5 .38 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : TYPElA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 7 .00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 78 Acres 4 . 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 62 . 05 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 49 .41 min 8 . 99 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - Sheet L: 225 . 00 ns : 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0133
TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 36 . 00 kc : 21 . 00 s : 0 . 0200
TcReach - Channel L: 150 . 00 kc : 17 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 95 . 00 kc : 21 . 00 s : 0 . 0158
impTcReach - Sheet L: 300 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0108
impTcReach - Shallow L: 145 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 336 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0111
impTcReach - Channel L: 150 . 00 kc : 17 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 95 . 00 kc : 21 . 00 s : 0 . 0158
PEAK RATE: 6 . 85 cfs VOL: 2 . 77 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min
BASIN ID: BDP-6m NAME: Basin B Dev. 6-month Pond
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 5 .38 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 .34 inches AREA. . : 0 . 78 Acres 4 . 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 62 . 05 98 . 00
TC. . . . . 49 .41 min 8 . 99 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - Sheet L: 225 . 00 ns : 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0133
TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 36 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0200
TcReach - Channel L: 150 . 00 kc : 17 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 95 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0158
impTcReach - Sheet L: 300 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0108
impTcReach - Shallow L: 145 . 00 ks : 27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 336 .00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0111
impTcReach - Channel L: 150 . 00 kc : 17 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 95 . 00 kc : 21 . 00 s : 0 . 0158
PEAK RATE: 2 . 15 cfs VOL: 0 . 82 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min
12/1/99 10 :57 :48 am NL Olson & Assoc . Inc . page 2
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions - Basin B
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf\AcFt Acres
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
1 8 .408 480 146086 cf 6 . 55
2 2 . 623 480 42831 cf 6 . 55
3 0 . 940 1350 130437 cf 6 . 55
4 0 .517 790 42831 cf 6 . 55
6 6 . 845 480 120839 cf 5 .38 ---
7 2 . 147 480 35750 cf 5 . 38
8 0 . 762 1360 103345 cf 5 . 38
9 0 .376 800 35750 cf 5 . 38
12/1/99 10 : 57 :48 am NL Olson & Assoc . Inc . page 3
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions - Basin B
------------
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. pondB
Description: Basin B Retention Pond
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
--- -----------------------------------
314.00 0.0000 0.0000 315.60 19807 0.4547 317.20 43381 0.9959 318.80 70859 1.6267
314.10 1238 0.0284 315.70 21045 0.4831 317.30 44933 1.0315 318.90 72742 1.6699
314.20 2476 0.0568 315.80 22283 0.5115 317.40 46485 1.0671 319.00 74625 1.7132
314.30 3714 0.0853 315.90 23521 0.5400 317.50 48037 1.1028 319.10 76508 1.7564
314.40 4952 0.1137 316.00 24759 0.5684 317.60 49589 1.1384 319.20 78391 1.7996
314.50 6190 0.1421 316.10 26311 0.6040 317.70 51140 1.1740 319.30 80274 1.8428
314.60 7428 0.1705 316.20 27863 0.6396 317.80 52692 1.2096 319.40 82157 1.8861
314.70 8666 0.1989 316.30 29414 0.6753 317.90 54244 1.2453 319.50 84040 1.9293
314.80 9904 0.2274 316.40 30966 0.7109 318.00 55796 1.2809 319.60 85923 1.9725
314.90 11142 0.2558 316.50 32518 0.7465 318.10 57679 1.3241 319.70 87806 2.0157
315.00 12379 0.2842 316.60 34070 0.7821 318.20 59562 1.3673 319.80 89688 2.0590
315.10 13617 0.3126 316.70 35622 0.8178 318.30 61445 1.4106 319.90 91571 2.1022
315.20 14855 0.3410 316.80 37174 0.8534 318.40 63328 1.4538 320.00 93454 2.1454
315.30 16093 0.3695 316.90 38726 0.8890 318.50 65211 1.4970
315.40 17331 0.3979 317.00 40277 0.9246 318.60 67093 1.5403
315.50 18569 0.4263 317.10 41829 0.9603 318.70 68976 1.5835
12/1/99 10 :57 :49 am NL Olson & Assoc . Inc . page 4
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions - Basin B
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
DISCHARGE LIST ID No. dis13
Description: Infiltration Rate Discharge
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---Cfs-- ------- (ft) ---Cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---Cfs-- -------
314.00 0.3000 315.60 0.4280 317.20 0,5860 318.80 0.7660
314.10 0.3080 315.70 0.4360 317.30 0.5965 318.90 0.7780
314.20 0.3160 315.80 0.4440 317.40 0.6070 319.00 0.7900
314.30 0.3240 315.90 0.4520 317.50 0.6175 319.10-- 0.8020
314.40 0.3320 316.00 0.4600 317.60 0.6280 319.20 0.8140
314.50 0.3400 316.10 0.4705 317.70 0.6385 319.30 0.8260
314.60 0.3480 316.20 0.4810 317.80 0.6490 319.40 0.8380
314.70 0.3560 316.30 0.4915 317.90 0.6595 319.50 0.8500
314.80 0.3640 316.40 0.5020 318.00 0.6700 319.60 0.8620
314.90 0.3720 316.50 0.5125 318.10 0.6820 319.70 0.8740
315.00 0.3800 316.60 0.5230 318.20 0.6940 319.80 0.8860
315.10 0.3880 316.70 0.5335 318.30 0.7060 319.90 0.8980
315.20 0.3960 316.80 0.5440 318.40 0.7180 320.00 0.9100
315.30 0.4040 316.90 0.5545 318.50 0.7300
315.40 0.4120 317.00 0.5650 318.60 0.7420
315.50 0.4200 317.10 0.5755 318.70 0.7540
v
12/1/99 10 :57 :52 am NL Olson & Assoc. Inc. page 5
North Mason Fiber Company,
Final Storm Report
Developed Conditions - Basin B
-----------------
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAR-> OUTFLOW STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf)
100-year Storm Event ......... 0.00 6.85 pondB disB 318.77 8 0.76 70221.84 cf
6-month Storm Event .......... 0.00 2.15 pondB disB 314.95 9 0.38 11748.12 cf
12/1/99 11 : 0 :21 am NL Olson & Assoc . Inc . page 1
North Mason Fiber Company
Final Storm Report
Biofiltration Swale B Contributing Area
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: BDB-100 NAME : Basin B Dev. 100-year Bioswale
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 4 . 91 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 7 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 53 Acres 4 . 38 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 55 . 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 47 . 34 min 6 . 92 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - Sheet L: 225 . 00 ns : 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0133
TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 36 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0200
impTcReach - Sheet L: 300 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0108
impTcReach - Shallow L: 145 . 00 ks : 27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 336 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0111
PEAK RATE : 6 . 50 cfs VOL: 2 .56 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min
BASIN ID: BDB-6m NAME : Basin B Dev. 6-month Bioswale
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 4 .91 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 .34 inches AREA. . : 0 . 53 Acres 4 . 38 Acres
TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 55 . 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 47 . 34 min 6 . 92 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20
TcReach - Sheet L: 225 . 00 ns : 0 .4000 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0133
TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 36 . 00 kc :21 . 00 s : 0 . 0200
impTcReach - Sheet L: 300 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 3 . 65 s : 0 . 0108
impTcReach - Shallow L: 145 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 336 . 00 kc:21 . 00 s : 0 . 0111
PEAK RATE: 2 . 08 cfs VOL: 0 . 77 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min
Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name : N . Mason Fiber #5089
Comment : 6-month Biofiltration Swale B Design
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data :
Bottom Width. . . . . 8 . 50 ft
Left Side Slope. . 3 . 00 : 1 (H :V)
Right Side Slope . 3 . 00 : 1 (H :V)
Manning ' s n. . . . . . 0 . 200
Channel Slope . . . . 0 . 0100 ft/ft
Discharge . . . . . . . . 1 . 04 cfs
Computed Results :
Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 33 ft
Velocity . . . . . . . . . 0 . 33 fps
Flow Area . . . . . . . . 3 . 15 sf
Flow Top Width. . . 10 . 49 ft
Wetted Perimeter . 10 . 60 ft
Critical Depth. . . 0 . 08 ft
Critical Slope. . . 1 . 3895 ft/ft
Froude Number . . . . 0 . 11 ( flow is Subcritical )
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 41 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods , Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury , Ct 06708
Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name : N . Mason Fiber #5089
Comment : 100-year Biofiltration Swale B Design
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data :
Bottom Width. . . . . 8 . 50 ft
Left Side Slope. . 3 . 00 : 1 (H :V)
Right Side Slope . 3 . 00 : 1 (H :V)
Manning ' s n. . . . . . 0 . 035
Channel Slope . . . . 0 . 0100 ft/ft
Discharge . . . . . . . . 3 . 25 cfs
Computed Results :
Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 23 ft
Velocity . . . . . . . . . 1 . 52 fps
Flow Area . . . . . . . . 2 . 14 sf
Flow Top Width. . . 9 . 89 ft
Wetted Perimeter . 9 . 97 ft
Critical Depth. . . 0 . 16 ft
Critical Slope. . . 0 . 0336 ft/ft
Froude Number . . . . 0 . 58 ( flow is Subcritical )
open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 41 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods , Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
Circular Channel Analysis & Design
Solved with Manning ' s Equation
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name: N . Mason Fiber #5089
Comment : Basin B Pipe Capacity Verification 24" Dia .
Solve For Actual Depth
Given Input Data :
Diameter . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 00 ft
Slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0200 ft/ft
Manning' s n. . . . . . . 0 . 015
Discharge . . . . . . . . . 6 . 50 cfs
Computed Results :
Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 66 ft
Velocity . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 21 fps
Flow Area . . . . . . . . . 0 . 90 sf
Critical Depth. . . . 0 . 90 ft
Critical Slope . . . . 0 . 0063 ft/ft
Percent Full . ... . . . 32 . 94 %
Full Capacity. . . . . 27 . 73 cfs
QMAX @ . 94D . . . . . . . . 29 . 83 cfs
Froude Number . . . . . 1 . 83 (flow is Supercritical )
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 41 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods , Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708