HomeMy WebLinkAbout008RtrCEIVIEID
APR 0 1 2,19
JITffR$O[l IOtlHIY OID
Water Supply and Groundwater Impact
Analysis
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
Prepared for:
Statesman Group
November 20, 2008
ProjectNo. SG080l-11
SDEIS Groundwater v1 -3.doc Prcjed No.SG0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page2of 22
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Intoduction
2.0 Topography and Geographic Features
3.0 Climatic Conditions
3.1 Climatic Data
3.2 Evapofranspiration
4.0 Geolory
4.1 Regional Geologic Setting
4.2 Site Geology
4.2.1 Vashon Glacial Deposits
4.2.2 Pre Vashon Deposits (Qu)
5.0 Site Groundwater Conditions
6.0 Aquifer Testing
7.0 Aquifer tnfiltation Testing
8.0 Site Hydrcgeologic Perspective
9.0 Proposed New Well
10.0 Predicted Drawdown Affects On Adjacent Wells
11.0 CriticalAquiferRechargeArea
12.0 WaterBalance
l2.l Water Demand - Potable
12.2 Water Demand -Non-Potable12.3 Water Balance Calculations
13.0 [mpact Analysis
I
1
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
6
6
8
9
9
t2
l3
l3
15
l5
t6
t6
l8
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Projecl No. 5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page3ot22
List of Tables:
l. Regional Weather Station Monthly Climatic Summaries
List of Figures
1. Site Plan
2. Comparison of Precipitation and Potential Evapotranspiration
3. Measured Groundwater Level Fluctuations Compared to Precipitation
4. Piezometric Surface Map
5. Measured Groundwater Level Fluctuations Compared to Tidal Fluctuations
6. Pumping and Recovery Test Results, American Campground (pumping) Well
7. Pumping and Recovery Test Results, Monitoring Well MW4
8. Pumping and Recovery Test Results, Monitoring Well MW-5
9. Infiltration Test Results, [W-l
10. Infilration Test Results, Monitoring Well MW-5
I l. Surficial Geology
12. Generalized Geologic Profile A-A'
13. Generalized Geologic Profile B-B'
14. Generalized Geologic Profile C-C'
15. Domestic Well Locations and Predicted Wellfield Drawdown
16. Water Balance for lnitial Development to Full Build-Out
17. Annual Cumulative Aquifer Recharge During Resort Build-out and Completion
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page I of22
I.O INTRODUCTION
This report presents the approach for water supply at the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and
Golf Resort, and presents an analysis of the impacts and benefits of the water supply stiategy on
the groturdwater regime beneath Black Point and the proposed resort. The report is based on
our current understanding of the proposed development, climatic, and subsurface and
conditions.
The proposed marina and golf resort is located primarily on Black Point, bordering Hood Canal
in Jefferson County, Washington. The site is located within Water Resource Inventory Area
(WRIA) 16, in Sections 15 and 22 of T25N, R2W. As furttrer discussed below, an existing
marina, campground, and other smaller cornmercial entities occupy the site; however, the site is
largely undeveloped. Figure 1 presents the proposed site plan.
The water supply approach for the development is an innovative mixture of use of existing
groundwater rights, aquifer infiltation, rainfall water harvesting, and teatment and reuse of
wastewater. Groundwater wells will be the potable water supply source for the resort. Water
for other uses, such as irigatiorl will come primarily from wastewater and surface water
collected on the site. The resort water demand will be solely from on-site sources; as such, the
supply is dependant on climatic conditions. Irrigation requirements are highest during the drier
periods of the year; as such, water will be collected during the weffer periods and stored in a
central pond for use during the remainder of the year. Excess water collected from roads and
roof tops will be then infiltated to the underlying aquifer to maintain and enhance the aquifer
system beneath Black Point.
The development will consist of construction of the golf course, lining of existing topographic
depressions, and construction of residences on the Black Point property; and remodeling and
constuction of ttre marina facilities and additional housing.
This report presents the physical conditions of the site and groundwater observations and
analyses performed; we then provide analysis of the impacts and benefits to the aquifer system
based on the proposed site use.
2.0 TOPOGRAP}TYANDGEOGRAPHICFEATT]RES
The proposed site plan and topographic features are shown in Figure L The majority of the
development encompasses a220 acre part of Black Point. This area lies to the southeast of the
intersection of Highway 101 and Black Point Road. The ground surface throughout the area is
hummocky and reflects a site modified by glacial processes. The site includes a number of
kettles, which are large glacial depressions formed from melting of remnant ice blocks. Ground
surface elevations range from about 60 feet in the bottom of the deepest keffle, to elevation 320
feet on a hill in the southeast portion of the site. Though ground surface elevation varies
considerably across the site, the average site elevation is about 180 to 200 feet.
SDEIS Groundwater v1-3.doc Prcject No.SG0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page2of 22
Three of the larger kettles are located along about the central north-south axis of the site. The
northem kettle (A) is about 45 feet deep and roughly 1.4 acres in size at groturd surface. The
central and largest kettle (B) is over 100 feet deep and about 13 acres in size. The southern
kettle (C) is also about 100 feet deep and about 4.5 acres in size. Most of the kettles on site are
roughly conical.
Three elongate ridges, or pronounced topographic highs, are found on the Black Point part of
the project area. These are roughly oriented in a northeast-southwest direction and range from
1,000 to 1,400 feet long. The upper sur ces of these ridges are fairly flat, and range between
270 and 320 feet elevation.
3.0 CLIMATIC CONDMONS
Climatic conditions play an important role in the water balance of the resort and aquifer.
Climate govems irrigation requirements, infiltation requirements from harvested water, and
evaporation from ponds. As such, an understanding of local climatic conditions is necessary to
provide an understanding of water consumptiorl use, and availability at the site.
The site lies in southeastem Jefferson County adjacent to Hood Canal. The prevailing winds in
the region are from the west, as such, the site lies on the lee side of the Olympic Mountains, and
the area is buffered from large offshore storms. Low pressure off-shore weather systems
encounter the Olympic Mountains and are forced upward and over the mountains, releasing a
large percentage of the moisture on the west side of the mountains due to orographic effects. As
the systems move east over the crest of the mountains, temperatures increase and there is less
precipitation. This is locally referred to as the rain shadow effect of the Olympic Mountains.
The rain shadow effects in Jefferson County are strongest in the Port Townsend area; where less
than 20-inches of rainfall occur on average, and lessen toward the southem portion of the
County. Over 55 inches of precipitation fall in Quilcene, about I I miles north of the site. Most
of the precipitation events in the site area are generated from southerly storms that move north
up the canal. The climate is marine; winter months are typically moderate and wet, while
sunmer months are typically mild and dry. The measured differences in precipitation at
stations along the east side of the County occur primarily in the winter months and are related to
rain shadow effects; most stations have similar summer month rainfall characteristics.
3.1 Climatic Data
The climatic data used for the site analyses were from the Quilcene 2 SW weather station (No.
456846). The period of record for this station provides over 58 years of data between June 4,
1948 to present. The average precipitation at Quilcene over the period of record was 55.43
inches. The total average daily precipitation for one year is 56.7 inches. Quilcene lies about 11
miles north of Brinnon and Black Point. Only two other long-term weather stations are in the
region: Port Townsend and Bremerton. Table I compares climatic conditions at these stations.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No.5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page3 of 22
As mentioned above, Port Townsend experiences less than half of the precipitation at Quilcene,
this and other topographic and marine conditions make this site unsuitable. Bremerton lies
about 15 miles east of the site. Though this site experiences a precipitation rate of 51.57 inches
per year, which is more typical to ttre site than Port Townsend, the precipitation and temperature
monthly patterns are different from that of Quilcene. The Quilcene station was selected because
it is closer to the site and lies in a similar geographic and climatic environment. The data from
weather stations from Port Townsend to Shelton suggest that rainfall on the west side of Puget
Sound increases from north to south; as such, since Black Point lies to the south of Quilcene, the
Quilcene data may provide a conservative estimate of rain ll at Black Point. If actual rainfall
conditions are higher at Black Point, then the water supply and groundwater recharge estimates
provided herein may actually under predict site conditions, which is conservative from water
supply prediction and aquifer impact standpoints.
Average daily weather parameters were downloaded from the Westem Regional Climate
Center for the Quilcene gage. The available data of interest to this evaluation are average daily
precipitation and average daily maximum and minimum temperatures.
3.2 Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration is a calculated value that describes the combined loss of water through
evaporation from site soils, plant banspiration, and evaporation of intercepted water from
foliage. Potential evapotranspiration describes the amoturt of water that can evaporate from an
area under given climatic conditions; actual evapotranspiration describes the amount of water
that can actually evaporate given the amount of water in storage in the soils and plants. Actual
evapohanspiration is always less than potential evaporation in the Pacific Northwest because of
a moisture deficit in the surrmer months. The deficit is due to low precipitation and soil
moisture that has been consumed due to ffanspiration and evaporation processes. This deficit is
also an important variable when describing groundwater recharge conditions.
Potential evapotranspiration was calculated using the FAO Penman-Monteith (1998) method on
a daily basis from the Qulicene data set. This method is considered the intemational standard
for calculation of evapotranspiration. For comparison, evapotranspiration values were obtained
from Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Eastem Jefferson County, Water Supply
Bulletin No. 54 (1981). Figure 2 shows a comparison of precipitation and potential
evapotanspiration on an average daily basis for the year. The calculated annual potential
evaporation was 24.1 inches per year using the Penman-Monteith method, and 24.2 inches per
year using the Thomthwaite method in WSB No. 54.
4.0 GEOLOGY
The geologic conditions at the site are important to describe the origin, locatiorl and
characteristics of aquifers and aquitards at the site; they provide information used to evaluate the
water supply and recharge conditions at the site.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page4of 2.
The site geologic conditions were obtained from existing published data, performing site
reconnaissance and geologic mapping, excavating 66 exploratory test pits, 5 infihation tests,
and drilling 15 deep geotechnical borings to depths of 160 to 175 feet. The exploration logs are
provided in the Final Geotechnical lnvestigation Report by Subsurface Group LLC, Novernber
2008.
The following provides a description of the geologic setting and soil types found at the
development site. A more deailed description of the site geology and soils is presented by
Subsurface Group (November 2008). That report also provides boring and test pit logs
collected for these evaluations.
4.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The project site lies on the boundary of the Physiographic province of the Olympic Mountains
and the Puget Sound Lowland which has a complex history of orogeny (mountain building),
volcanism, faulting, erosion, deposition of sedimentary rocks, and several periods of glaciations.
Bedrock was mapped by others (Tabor and Cady, 1978) and identified during our field
reconnaissance of the shoreline from the southem shore of Pleasant Harbor Marina to about 750
feet south of the northeast comer of Black Point. Bedrock consists of Crescent formation
basalt: slightly weathered fine grained, hard, slightly weathered. Generally the basalt is not
friable (sound bedrock) and has widely to very widely-spaced fractures.
During the Pleistocene (10,000 to 200,000 years ago), continental glaciation advanced in the
Puget Sound Lowland and the Olympic Mountains at least four times. The Fraser Glaciation,
particularly the Vashon Stade (last glacial advance about 13,000 to 19,000 years ago) has
modified the project area to its present topography. As the glacial ice known as the Puget Lobe
advanced into the project area, meltwater steams began depositing advance outwash deposits
ofsilt, sand, gravel and cobbles over ancesffal topography.
Portions of the Puget lobe blocked the drainages of the outwash meltwater steams producing
ice dammed impoundments such as glacial Lake Leland. In the relatively quiet waters of the
glacial lake, glacio-lacustrine deposits of sandy silts, silts, and clays were deposited at the
boffom of the glacial lake. As the Puget Lobe advanced into project area, glacio-lacustine and
outwash deposits were overrun by the advancing ice and a homogeneous mixture of silts, sands,
gravel, cobbles and boulders known as Vashon glacial till were deposited in and under the
advancing glacial ice.
As the glacial ice retreated, the project site experienced active ice margin deposition and later
area ice stagnation. Deposits of ice contact stratified drift were deposited along the margins of
the Vashon Stade glacial ice. As the glacier wasted and ice retreated, large blocks of ice were
left in place (stagnant ice) and Glacial Lake Leland began draining and releasing large volumes
of water that flowed through the area and eroded the Vashon Stade glacial deposits creating
kame terraces and eskers consisting of coarsely bedded sands, gravelly sand, sandy gravel
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page5of 2.
recessional outwash. The large stagnant blocks of ice eventually melted and produced deep
localized depressions known as kettles.
4.2 Site Geology
The project sites are comprised of predominantly Vashon Age glacial soils that are
predominantly dense to very dense sand and gravel with varying amounts of silt and cobbles.
Older Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits consisting of dense to very dense fluvial sands and hard
lacusfine silc and clays were observed in test boring MW-2 and exposed in the bluffs along
Hood Canal. Bedrock outcrops were not present on the site areas or within the depth of the
exploratory test pits and borings performed for this project.
The glacial processes that formed the current project landscape left a complex assemblage of in-
place and reworked soils overlying an eroded or faulted bedrock surface. Figure 11 presents a
geologic map of the site formulated from exploration data, reconnaissance, professional
publications, and interviews. The surficial deposits consisted predominantly of ice contact till
and advance outwash deposits. Recessional outwash was observed on most of the higher
elevation elongate ridge features observed at the site. The bluffs along the southem edge of the
property indicate advance outwash overlying older non-glacial fluvial deposits. The
assemblage of these and other soils form a complex statigraphy that directly relates to the
aquifer conditions at the site. A summary of the significant soil types encountered is presented
below so the reader can gain an understanding of the differences between the soil types;
Subsurface Group 2008 provides a more thorough description of the soils on site. Descriptions
of the geologic deposits are presented in the following sections from youngest to oldest.
4.2.1 Vashon Glacial Deposits
Recessionol Outwash (Uro)
This deposit consists of a loose to medium dense stratified sand, gravelly sand, and sand and
gravel with scattered boulders. This unit is typically pervious.
Ice Contact Deposits (Qvi)
Ice contact deposits have been subdivided based on soil gradation characteristics into three
separate sub-units: glacial till, glacial outwash, and glacio-lacustrine. These units may gade
between each other in both the horizontal and vertical directions.
Glacial Till (Ovit)
The ice contact glacial till consists of a dense to very dense homogenous mixture of silt
sand, gravel, and cobbles. The glacial till in the kettle features can grade to sandy gravel
and gravelly sand with trace amounts of silt. The thickness of this unit can vary from a
few feet to tens of feet. Till typically acts as an aquitard due to its low permeability.
Glacial Outwash (Ovio)
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2OOB
Page0 ot22
The ice contact outwash deposit consists of dense well bedded sand, gravelly sand, and
sandy gravel. The deposit is usually interbedded with thin diamict layers and irregular
lenses of fine-grained lacustrine deposits. This unit typically exhibits low permeability
but has lenses or layers of high permeability soils.
Glacio-Lacusfine (Ovil)
The ice contact glacio-lacustrine deposit consists of a medium dense to stiff silt to
sandy silt, slightly laminated to massive. This deposit is occurs in the more granular
sub-units as thin discontinuous lenses and laminations. Lacustine soils form aquitards
due to their low permeability.
Vashon Till (Qvt, Qvtl)
Two distinct glacial till sub-units were observed in the project areas: a subglacial till or basal till
(Qrrt) and a sub-unit subglacial lodgment till (Q\41). The basal till consists of a very dense,
homogenous mixture of silt, sand, subrounded gravel, and cobbles. The estimated thickness
observed about 15 to 25 feet. The lodgment till consists of a very dense, homogenous, matrix
supported gravelly, sandy silt with subrounded cobbles to boulders to 3-foot diameter. The
deposit is stratified with sand, gravelly sand, and gravel lenses and/or layers. These units
exhibit very low permeability.
Vashon Advance Outwash (U")
The advance outwash deposit consists of a dense to very dense well bedded sands, with thin
layers of gravelly sands, and sandy gravel. Advance outwash forms the most prolific aquifer in
the Puget Sound region.
4.2.2 Pre Vashon Deposits (fu)
Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits underlie the Vashon-age glacial deposits along the south-
central and southeastem portion of the beach bluff. The non-glacial deposits are composed of a
very dense stratified deposit of fine to coarse sand intertedded with gravelly sand. It contains
occasional 6-inch clayey silt beds. This units exhibits high permeability and forms an aquifer
on site.
5.0 SITE GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Groundwater monitoring instrumentation was installed in borings MW-l, MW-2, and IVIW-3
and have been collecting a near continuous record of water level fluctuations since June 2007.
The groundwater elevation data from these locations is plotted in Figure 3. Precipitation data
from the Quilcene weather station is also plotted to provide an understanding of the effects and
timing ofrecharge to the aquifer.
As shown, groundwater levels rose between 2 and 6 feet at the piezometers in response to
seasonal precipitation. Annual groundwater recharge to the aquifer began in September 2007
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Ptoject No.5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November20,2008
PageT of22
and appeared to peak in January 2008. Groundwater levels then slowly decline wittr the
seasonal reduction of precipitation.
Based on our analysis of the data, there is a lag time of 2 to 3 weeks between large storm events
and measurement of recharge to the aquifer from significant storm events. Previous reports had
speculated on the timing and origin of the source of aquifer recharge. The data set collected to
date and the groundwater contour data resulting from that data confirms that recharge to the
aquifer is still relatively quick. However, the recharge is solely from rainfall on the peninsula
and from water shedding offthe bedrock hills to the west.
Two vibrating wire piezometers were installed in boring MW-l; these were installed to provide
groundwater level elevation data at both the regional aquifer (sea level) and what may have
been a perching unit at about elevation 65 feet. The data collected since installation indicates
that perched groundwater is not present at this location and the sea level aquifer is the only
water-bearin g zone on the peninsula.
Figure 4 provides a plot of groundwater level elevation across the Black Point site. This plot
also includes data from monitoring wells MW-4, MW-5, and MW-6 installed during the 2008
field program. As also shown in Figure 3, the water level elevation in MW-2 is the highest
measured at the site and is 27 to 29 feet above sea level. Figure 4 shows that the eastern side of
the site receives significant recharge. This higher magnitude recharge is likely related to the
effects from storm systems taveling up the canal from the south. The high groundwater heads
may also be related to the presence of bedrock on the east side of the peninsula. Many of the
domestic wells indicate similar groundwater elevations as a result of the perching effects of
bedrock. The high heads at MW-2 may reflect high recharge in the Qu sands, and possibly
drainage offperched areas to the north into a very permeable unit.
The site also shows recharge to the aquifer from the northwest. Groundwater likely sheds off
the steep slopes underlain by bedrock west of the site. Groundwater then moves southeast and
northeast into ttre Black Point lands. Groundwater then ultimately discharges into Pleasant
Harbor and Hood Canal.
Figure 4 indicates that the lowest groundwater level elevations are found beneath the central
portion of the site. This indicates that the majority of recharge to the aquifer beneath the site
comes from off-site areas of Black Point. This may be due to surficial soil types, but more
likely is because of oflsite areas have greater land catchment area and receive more rainfall
than the site proper. A small groundwater mound is demonstrated by the l0-foot contour line
beneath kettles B and C; this is one interpretation of the data that may show that the aquifer
receives limited recharge through infiltation of precipitation through the keffles.
The data shown in Figure 5 indicates a hydraulic connection with tidal cycles. B-1 and B-3 are
each about 1,200 feet from Pleasant Harbor and Hood Canal. The delay between a tidal high or
low and the corresponding groundwater level high or low varies, but is about 6.5 hours for each
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No.5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November20,2008
PageSof 22
These values are low from a tidal efficiency standpoint. The values for MW-l and MW-3 may
be a result of the distance from the salt water boundary and/or the fresh water gradient in the
vicinity of the wells. The tidal response for MW-2 is low when considering its proximity to the
shoreline. This may also be due to the fresh water gradient near the well or may be due to the
intoduction of drilling mud into the formation during drilling.
Analysis of the groundwater data shown in Figure 4 indicates that the aquifer beneath the resort
property is predominantly recharged from areas west, northeast, and east of the site. The
aquifer beneath the resort is an aquifer discharge area as groundwater flows to Hood Canal.
6.0 AQUIFER TESTING
A pumping test was performed at the existing American Campground Well (ACID to estimate
the permeability of the sea level aquifer beneath the site and assess its potential for grorurdwater
supply.
The well was pumped at a constant rate of 65 gallons per minute (gpm) for a period of 48 hours.
Groundwater levels were monitored in all of the on-site monitoring wells by hand and
datalogger methods. Groundwater level recovery was then also monitored. The test data were
then reduced for analysis. Data reduction included evaluating the data for antecedent frends and
removal of tidal fluctuations from the data.
Figures 6 though 8 show the drawdown and recovery results for wells ACW, MW-4 and MW-
5. Measured drawdown in the pumping well was about 8 feet. The recovery Mta (Figure 6)
indicates that most of the drawdown is due to well ineffrciencies; actual aquifer drawdown was
likely on the order of I foot or less. Drawdown in MW4, at a radial distance of 50 feet, was
only about 0.46 feet. Drawdown was not measured in any of the other monitoring wells.
The drawdown data were analyzed for aquifer coefficients such as fransmissivity and storage,
and aquifer boundary conditions. The Theis, Jacob, and recovery methods were used for the
analysis. The calculated fransmissivity from the analyses was between 8.3 and 12.2 square feet
per minute; the mean transmissivity was 10.0 square feet per minute. Storage ranged between
5.0x10-3 and 1.5x10-2. A delayed yield response was observed in the MW-4 data; however,
there were too few early time data to reliably calculate hansmissivity and vertical hydraulic
conductivity. These data indicate that the aquifer is very productive and is consistent with the
cleaner sands encountered in the boreholes at and below sea level.
Four water quality samples were collected during the test; chlorides were not detected in any of
the samples. Considering that the American Campground well is completed to over 127 feet
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
instrument location. The tidal efficiency, or the groundwater level fluctuation as a percentage of
tidal fluctuation, ranged between 0.008 feet per feet for MW-l and 0.01 feet per feet for MW-2.
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2OOB
Page9 of22
below sea level; these data indicate that the groundwater quality in the aquifer is high with
respect to chlorides. No other water quality constituents were sampled at the time.
7.0 AQUIFER INFILTRATION TESTING
The resort will operate without allowing surface water runofffrom the site. Consistent with the
no-impact approach of the resort, storm water will be recharged to the aquifer system through
surface ffilration. tnfiltration swales and conveyances distibuted around the resort will be
used to dispose of storm water from roof tops and roadways. As direct recharge of the aquifer
with stormwater is not permitted, a deep infiltation well (IW-l) was installed to evaluate the
feasibility of deep percolation. This well was installed to a depth of 150 feet; the bottom of the
well was about 50 feet above the water table.
Groundwater was pumped from the ACW to the infiltation well, located about 800 feet distant.
Water wux pumped at a relatively constant 60 gpm for a period of nearly 46 hours. Figure 9
shows the results of injection at IW-I, an injection head of aboutT2 feet was measured in the
well. Figure 10 shows the monitoring results at MW-5, located about 50 feet from IW-l.
Though much of the data was masked by tidal fluctuations in the aquifer, the effects of
infilration were not observed until about 2 days into the test.
The test indicated that ffiltration to the soils above the aquifer is feasible. However, the silt
content of soils observed during drilling of the two wells was significantly different in the wells
Ooring logs MW-5 and IW-l in the Geotechnical lnvestigation Report). The data indicate that
while infiltration is feasible, site selection for the wells will be important in order to minimize
the number of wells required. The current approach is to store excess runoff from stong
precipitation events in Kettle C; the infiltation well approach is not currently considered for
design.
8.0 SITETTYDROGEOLOGICPERSPECTTVE
This section provides a summary of the hydrogeologic regime on the Black Point peninsula.
This larger scale perspective is necessary for an undentanding of how the dynamics of the
peninsula geology affect local hydrogeologic conditions.
Black Point is composed of a mixture of bedrock, pre-Vashon-aged fluvial deposits, and
Vashon-aged glacial deposits. The disfibution of soils within the peninsula is complex and
fairly unique within the Puget Sound area. The formation of the present day soils and
topography likely began with fluvial and then glacial scouring and erosion of the basalt bedrock
of the Crescent Formation. Ice-marginal sfreams are erosive meltwater sfeams that flowed
along the margins of the glaciers and scoured channels in the bedrock during both advance and
refreat. An ice marginal stream may have cut a trough through the Pleasant Harbor area. This
left a bedrock high at the northeast and eastem margins of the point; and a deeper scour or
trough through most of the point. Figure 14 shows a geologic cross section across the northern
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 10 of22
portion of the peninsula; this shows that bedrock relief may change as much as 200 feet in a 200
foot-horizontal distance. The location of the section is shown is Figure 11.
Prior to Vashon-aged glaciation there was high-energy erosion and deposition from the
ancesfral Duckabush and Dosewallips Rivers. These formed the coarse-grained deltaic deposits
seen just north of Brinnon, and those on the southeast part of the development property shown
as Qu on Figure ll. Where below the water table, Qu deposits may form a prolific aquifer.
The geologic mapping and boring logs suggest that remnant Qu deposits are found above and
below sea level on the cenfral and southern portions of the peninsula. [t appears that the
bedrock high on the northeast end of the peninsula shielded the Qu on the lee side of the
bedrock from glacial erosion in this location. The bedrock high likely continues south along the
eastern peninsula margin. The Qu is either absent or below sea level in the remainder of the
peninsula. Figures 8,9, and l0 provide geologic cross sections ofthe area. These show how
the Qu has been scoured out from the interior of the peninsula.
The Vashon-aged glacial processes were responsible for erosion of existing soils and deposition
of a complex mixture of soils. Advance outwash (Qva) was deposited in front of the advancing
glacier. These deposits are found along the southern bluffof the site and on the eastem bluffof
the peninsula. Qva sands are generally found below about 50 to 100 feet elevation. Though
typically coarse-grained and pervious in nature, they may have lenses or layers of lower-
permeability silt and silty sand. The Qva and Qu form the principle aquifer of the peninsula.
Till (Q\4) was deposited as the glacier overrode existing soils. These soils are dense silty sand
and gravels that typically form a barrier to groundwater flow. Though groundwater can
infiltrate through the unit with time, the unit is not an aquifer. Basal till was observed along the
bedrock margins on the west side of the site and along the west and north sides of Pleasant
Harbor. Till was also encountered in MW-3, MW-4, and in the American Campground well.
Qvt was not found in most of the proposed site. Till was typically 25 feet or less thick.
The continental glacier that occupied Hood Canal and the greater Puget Sound region reteated,
or wastd in a south to north direction. As the glacier retreated, there were pulses where the
glacier may have re-advanced for a small time period. The Black Point peninsula appears to
reflect an area where remnants of *re wasting and re-advance of the glacier occurred. The ice-
contact deposits at the site reflect a mixing of previously laid till, glaciolacustrine, outwash, and
other units. The deposits were eroded in a glaciofluvial environment, and were then densified
as the glacier re-advanced over the site. The Qvi units are highly variable and complex in
composition and permeability characteristics. Qvi soil permeabilities can change dramatically
from soils with till-like characteristics to outwash characteristics, often within tens of feet. The
unit appears to exhibit vertical permeability as there is virtually no runofffrom the site; as such,
the soil unit is capable of infiltating precipitation.
As the glacier wasted and pulsed, part of it was likely floating. During that period, large blocks
of ice became remnant features of the ice sheet, were likely covered with soils, and wasted in
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Ptoject No.5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 1 1 of22
place over a period of time after much of the other ice had retreated. These blocks of ice
formed the kettles that are currently observed as deep depressions at a number of locations at
the site. As the ice blocks slowly melted, Qvi soils were being deposited around them; there
was likely a glacial advance over these deposits. As the stagnated ice blocks melted in-place;
sand, gravel, and silt soils entrained in the ice were deposited, forming a lowerpermeability skin
on the side walls and base of the kettles. The presence of this lower permeability skin is
reflected by the seasonal formation of wetlands at the base of some of the kettles. The fact that
the kettles do not hold appreciable amounts of water suggests that the Qvi soils surrounding the
kettles are pervious, and that the kettles are not underlain by till (Qrrt) soils. Qvt was
encountered in boring MW-3, located between kettles B and C, the bottom elevation of these
kettles is below the elevation of the till (till elevation about 90 to 100 feet).
Deposits of recessional outwash and ice contact glacial outwash form a thin veneer over the
peninsula. These deposits are typically pervious, but can have a wide range of permeabilities on
a local scale. Precipitation readily infiltrates into these soils. In areas where these deposits are
underlain by Qvi soils of lower permeability, they may store infiltrated water until the mass of
Qvi soils can infiltate water to the Qva and Qu aquifers.
The lack of runoff on the peninsula is contrasted with the seasonal runoff observed by
GeoEngineers (June 2006) on the site areas bordering Highway 101 and at the Maritime
Village. Glaciolacustrine silt and till underlies this area. These soils are low permeability and
typically do not allow direct infiltration, as such, runoffis generated by precipitation. Since the
streams on these areas are rather small, it suggests that the catchment areas for the streams are
also small, and/or supported by runofffrom Highway 101.
The peninsula is surrounded on three sides by sea water. Due to density differences, fresh water
essentially floats on sea water. The thickness of the fresh water lens is theoretically govemed
by the Ghyben-Herzbergrelationship which establishes a relationship between fresh water head
and the location of the salt water-fresh water interface. The relationship states that for every
foot of fresh water head above sea level, the depth to the salt water interface is vertically a factor
of 40. The fresh water head measured in on site wells and offlsite water well logs on the
peninsula ranged between 8 and 34 feet, as such there is a significant fresh water lens beneath
the peninsula. The depth of the interface would also be governed by the depth to bedrock; that
depth is not known with current boring data. Bedrock probably lies at depths greater than 100
feet below sea level; it is conceivable that salt water is not present beneath the peninsula and
there is only a fresh water lens lying above bedrock.
Though there is a significant fresh water body beneath the peninsula, it is important to maintain
a positive fresh water head above sea level in the aquifer. The change in fresh water head has a
large impact on the location of the salt water interface. A long-term reduction of head below
sea level could cause sea water infrusion (either laterally or through upcoming), which is a poor
practice for maintaining an aquifer (as it takes many years to recover from the effects of sea
water intrusion), and would also violate State and County policies.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 12of 22
The Qva and Qu form the principle aquifers on Black Point peninsula. The profiles in Figures
12 through 14 provide an understanding of how the recharge processes and soil conditions
affect the water supply capacities of the aquifer. Figure 12 shows that there are groundwater
gradients toward the center of the peninsula from the north, east, and west sides. These indicate
that groundwater is flowing toward the center and western portions of the peninsula, which is
likely composed of higher permeability soils. Groundwater flow from the west is anticipated as
discharge from the upland areas flows toward the canal. The flow on the east side of the
peninsula to the west indicates that recharge is greater on the west side of the point than at the
site. This may be in part due to the pervious Qvio sediments that lie at ground surface on the
east side of the site. In our opinion, recharge is greater on the eastern part of the site and
peninsula because there is a thinner mantle of Qvi soils and a thicker sequence of Qva and Qu
soils. The higher recharge may also be due to local weather pattems as southerly storms reach
the peninsula.
The presence of bedrock also affects groundwater flow directions. Geologic mapping indicates
bedrock highs on the northern and eastern parts of the peninsula. Qva soils directly overlie
bedrock in these areas. As such, bedrock will perch water in the Qva, and groundwater may
move along bedrock topography where above sea level. If the peninsula was merely an
accumulation of soil, groundwater flow gradients would typically be radially out from the
center. These data show that the bedrock plays an important part in the groundwater flow
directions and recharge characteristic of the peninsula.
The Qva/Qu aquifer is prolific. The soil types which form the aquifer consist of permeable
sands and gravels. Aquifer testing has shown that wells can be pumped at rates below 100 gpm
with only small drawdown. Though deep infiltation using wells may not be performed, site
testing has shown that Qvi soils can exhibit moderate permeability and can absorb and tansmit
recharge.
9.0 PROPOSED NEW WELL
The annual potable water demand for the resort is 121 acre-feet. Current peak projections of
water demand from groundwater supply wells are on the order of I l0 pm averaged on a daily
basis. On a simple approach, the risk of sea water intusion occurs when groundwater levels are
constantly drawn down below sea level. This risk analysis ignores the fact that there are two
very strong sources of recharge to the northwest and southeast. The pumping test demonsfrated
that the existing well can be pumped at 65 gpm without drawing water levels below sea level.
Given the substantial fresh water lens beneath the peninsula, the well can likely be safely
pumped at higher rates satisffing the 110 gpm demand. From a conservative standpoint we
recommend that the well be pumped at 65 gpm or so to minimize the potential for aquifer
impact.
We recommend that a supplemental well, consistent with the current resort design, be installed
in the southeast portion of the site. This location has a higher groundwater elevation and
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
T
I
t
t
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November20,2008
Page 13 ol22
saturated thickness above sea level. Based on the contours shown in Figure 4,there are no ofl
site wells down gradient of the proposed site. This location provides little to no risk of
impacting the water supply potential of off-site wells or seawater intrusion.
1O.O PREDICTED DRAWDOWN AFFECTS ON ADJACENT WELLS
Given the conservative approach of having the American Campgroturd well discharge at a rate
of 65 gm or so, the new well would need to pump at a rate of 45 gpm to satisfy the resort water
demand.
The effects of operating the wells were evaluated by performing analytical calculations. The
calculations were performed to evaluate whettrer groundwater drawdown would extend to and
impact the drawdown of wells operating outside the property bourdaries. These calculations
are necessary to address well locations, wellfield feasibility, and for water right application
purposes.
The calculations used analytical techniques. These utilize the Theis calculation with the Jacob
method of correction for unconfined aquifers. The principle of superposition was utilized to
calculate the cone of depression from both wells. This is a relatively simple but very
conservative method for calculating total impact. This conservatism is primarily due to the
American Campground well being down-gradient of all of the wells surrounding the site. The
proposed well locafion has groundwater heads in excess of most of the wells in the area.
Figure 15 shows the calculated drawdown assuming a uniform r elevation. As
shown, the maximum calculated drawdown at the offsite wells was on the order of 0.2 feet with
each well pumping 65 gpm, assuming a zero hydraulic gradient, and a uniform groundwater
elevation. These are aggressive assumptions; actual drawdown will be less because the
American Campground well is down-gradient of the exterior domestic wells, as such the
drawdown required to impact an adjacent well must exceed the change in static water level
elevation first, this may be on the order of I to 2 feet. Conversely, there are no down-gradient
or up-gradient wells from the proposed new well location; as such, drawdown must exceed the
difference in static heads (likely greater than 10 feet) benveen on- and off-site wells to cause an
impact. Since the calculated drawdown was about 0.2 feet at the radial distance to any oflsite
wells we conclude that there will be no measurable groundwater drawdown at any of the offsite
wells.
11.0 CRITICALAQUIFERRECHARGEAREA
Jefferson County has designated Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas on the site. Two types of
critical aquifer recharge areas are identified: 1) Seawater lntrusion Protection Zones (SIPZ); and
2) Aquifer Recharge Areas.
The SIPZ classification is due to the site being proximate to a marine shoreline. Jefferson
County has an existing Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones Policy (UDC Section 3.6.5). The
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 14 of22
site is a coastal Seawater Intrusion Protection Zone (SIPZ); all land within one-quarter mile of a
shoreline in Jefferson County fall within this classification. Based on the County's web site, no
At Risk or High Risk SIPZ areas have been identified on the peninsula. All of the wells
sampled in the vicinity of the site in the County's study had chloride concentations less than
100 milligram per liter.
Based on the analysis presented in Section 10, it is clear that the resort can be operated without
excessively drawing groundwater levels down and promoting sea water intrusion. As such,
operation of the resort will be consistent with the County policies that allow well use in areas of
low risk of sea water intrusion.
The proposed land uses at the site do not fall within the high impact land classification as
defined by the County. As such, the County policy requires protection standards using of Best
Management Practices for storm water and sewage disposal, and for land use such as golf
conrses. As describedby 2020 Engineering, storm water and sewage effluent from the project
will be contained in closed systems. Golf course management will conform to Jefferson
County's BuiltGreen Program Q020 Engineering, Iuly 2007). In addition, less than 15 percent
of the project area will be covered by impervious surfaces; the water from these surfaces will be
collected and eventually reintoduced to the aquifer. The only losses to the system will be
through evaporative and evapotranspiration processes. These losses have been estimated to be
less than I percent of the annual pre-development water budget. As such, recharge will be
maintained over the year; where the recharge rate over time will be more gradual with fewer
peaks and valleys.
Section 5 identifies groundwater flow pattems which show that the majority of the site is a
groundwater discharge area; siguificant recharge to the site occurs from off-site. As such, offi
site land use practices can impact the quality and quantity of groundwater beneath the resort
property. As part of the water supply plan, we will assist you in developing relationships and
policies with neighboring properties and the Washington State Departrnent of Transportation to
minimize the risk of introducing contaminants into the aquifer system.
A groundwater protection plan for the resort will also be prepared consistent with the
Washington State Deparhnent of Health requirements to establish best management practices
and land use practices that will minimize the potential for contaminant introduction to the
aquifer system.
Based on the soil conditions observed at the site, and the land use practices associated with
operation of this resort; it is our opinion that the site will have a low susceptibility to aquifer
contamination.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No.5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 15 of22
I2.O WATE,R BALANCE
The resort will be self-reliant wittr respect to water. The approach to water supply at the
proposed development is an innovative means of collection, distribution, treatment and reuse
intended to reduce the impact on natural resources and the underlying aquifer. The concept
consists of using groundwater for potable supply; and storage and use of reclaimed water for
irrigation. Potable supply will be from the existing well and a new backup well. Water from
the building rooftops and roadways will be routed to infiltration swales distributed around the
property (Peck and Associates 2008).
Wastewater from the residential and commercial uses will be routed to a featment plant, which
will treat the water to Class A standards and discharge the water to the cenbzl storage pond.
The proposed driving range pond will be partially filled and lined to hold about 60 million
gallons. The water stored in this pond will then be used to irrigate the golf course and provide
water for the Fire Smart Program.
The design of the development reduces the amount of constuction of impervious surfaces that
would limit nahral aquifer recharge, maintains or minimizes a soil moisture deficit in areas
(such as the golf course and Fire Smart program area) that would typically dry in an
undeveloped site, reuses water, requires a minimum of groundwater pumping, and provides
recharge to the aquifer through infiltration.
The proposed development will consist of construction of an 18 hole golf course, 890
residential units, and about 79,000 square feet of commercial facilities. Water harvesting will
be used for infiltration. [rrigation for the golf course and Fire Smart program will be from
feated water stored in the ponds. [n essence, the only consumptive losses from the project will
be from evaporation and evapotanspiration losses.
l2.l Water Demand - Potable
The residential water demand is based on a supply requirement of 175 gallons per day per
residential unit. This is based on using water saving fxtures throughout the units and a
reduction in potable water use by using reclaimed water for the toilets. A more detailed
description of the water use requirements per unit is provided by 2020 Engineers (July 2007).
The resort will have seasonal occupancy as described by Statesman Q007). Given the above
number of units and demand rates; the annual demand for the residential units will be about 93
acre-feet of water.
Statesman has provided an estimate of 25,000 gallons per day for commercial uses at the resort,
this equates to 28 ac-ft per year.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No.5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20, 2008
Page 16 of22
Given these estimates, the potable water demand at the design occupancy is about 121 ac-ft per
year.
12.2 WaterDemand-Non-potable
Non-potable water will be the primary source for irrigation. The inigation demand will be for
golf course irrigation and the Fire Smart program. This program will be used to promote
vegetation and to reduce fire hazards.
The total golf course area to be irrigated will be about 61 acres. Two methods were used to
estimate the irrigation requirement for the golf course: the first was to calculate required
irrigation based on an evapotanspiration deficit; this estimate evaluated a demand of about 17
inches per year of irrigation. The second method utilized the methods presented in publication
EB1513 by the Washington State Cooperative Extension. This method estimated an irrigation
requirement of about 15.7 inches per year. To be conservative, we used the higher rate, which
equates to about 90 acre feet per year or irrigation.
The Fire Smart Program has been designed to promote native vegetation growth and reduce fire
hazards. Native vegetation is primarily dormant in the surnmer months and we applied 20
percent of the evapotanspiration demand for the plants to wet them. We applied this rate to
120 acres of properly *rat will not be developed by the proposal. The total Fire Smart program
demand was about 3l acre-feet peryear.
Given these calculations, the total non-potable demand is about 121 acre-feet per year.
I2.3 Water Balance Calculations
Water balance calculations were performed to evaluate the potable and non-potable water
demand, the amount of water that can be collected from precipitation, losses of water through
evapotanspiration, and the gain or loss of water to the aquifer system. The calculations utilize
the daily weather data and evapotranspiration estimates discussed in Section 3.0. As such, the
calculations take into consideration the effects of evaporation on an exposed water body, such
as the ponds. Precipitation events less than or equal to 0.01 inch were not allowed to contibute
to the budget. Evapotanspiration was allowed to reduce the amount of precipitation before the
water was routed to infiltration. From these standpoints, the calculations are conservative.
Predevelopment recharge to the aquifer from precipitation was estimated using a water balance
method. This method consists of subtracting runoff, evapotranspiration, and change in storage
from precipitation that falls on the site. The climatic data used in the analyses wils collected
from the Qulicene weather station as discussed in Section 3.0. Evapotranspiration was
calculated using the Penman-Monteith method. Runoff was assumed to be zero. The soil
moisture capacity was assumed to equal4-inches, as presented in Water Supply Bulletin 54, and
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No.5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November20,2008
Page17 of 22
by our understanding of ttre site soil conditions. Predevelopment aquifer recharge was
calculated to be about 783 ac-ft per year.
An analysis of the build out of the resort was performed to evaluate whether the resort could be
initiated based on groundwater rights, limited rain water harvesting until full build out, and
storage. This analysis is also important to evaluate whether infiltration and aquifer recharge can
be performed in a timely manner to reduce aquifer impacts.
Figure 15 shows the results of the build-out scenario. [n this, it takes about one year for storage
to accumulate in the ponds to provide a steady reserve. Storage overflow will be infiltated.
Recharge rates will reach a relatively constant 842 acre-feet per year. There will be sufficient
storage in the ponds to account for natural climate fluctuations. Figure 15 presents the water
cycle, by component, on an annual basis.
Water balance calculations are performed to evaluate if there is sufficient water availability to
operate the resort, and to evaluate whether that water use will impact the aquifer conditions.
The basis for the water balance calculations have been presented in the DEIS. The water
balance calculations have been revised according to changes (reductions) in impervious areas,
the elimination of Kettle C as a holding pond for domestic supply from harvested rain water, the
change from direct infiltation through wells to surface ffilnation of the majority of the
stormwater, and minor changes to the build out schedule of the resort.
Figure 15 presents the results of the current balance. The balance indicates how water is
collected in the pond in Kettle B during the first years of resort development. Irrigation of the
golf course and moisture contol for the graded areas of the resort will account for a large
withdrawal of water from the pond. As waste water is generated and irrigation demands
decrease, a regular pattern of water availability from the kettle is reached. The balance also
reflects the increase in potable water demand as the resort grows. Total aquifer recharge is not
shown in Figure 15; the recharge indicated on the figu.e shows the timing of when the storage
in the pond is exceeded and when and how much direct infiltation will be required.
Figure 16 presents the annual cumulative aquifer recharge at the resort property. This figure
includes infiltration of the overflow water shown in Figure 8, and infiltration in nahral areas of
the resort that are covered by vegetation and turf. Figure 9 shows an increase in aquifer
recharge with time; predevelopment recharge was calculated to be 783 acre-feet, developed
recharge is calculated to be 840 acre-feet. The calculations indicate that aquifer recharge will
actually increase after development. The increase in recharge is due to 96 acre-feet of water
that normally would have been consumed by evaporation and evapoffanspiration processes but
is now directly infiltated. [n addition, about 34 acre-feet of additional water can now infiltrate
do to changes in soil moisture associated with irrigation of the golf course. The difference
between the potential increase in recharge (130 acre-feet) and the predicted increase (57 acre-
feet) is removed from the system by evapotranspiration during irrigation of the golf course and
the Fire-Smart program.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcjed No. 5G0801-11
!
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2OOg
Page 18 of22
13.0 IMPACT ANALYSN
A negative hydrogeologic impact with the development of the resort would be related to an
impact to a neighboring properly's water groundwater supply or would be associated with sea
water intrusion. The previous sections have demonsffated that the potential for impacting the
supply of adjacent properties is low because the resort is down-gradient of the other properties.
Conceptually, impacting a neighboring supply can occur with a lowering of the groundwater
table; since the resort is down-gradient of other users, the upgradient sources of recharge would
mitigate any lowering of the groundwater table. The aquifer testing showed that significant
decline of the water table will not occur.
Reduction of the amount of water used by water saving fixtures and through use of harvested
water for residential purposes will ultimately result in recharging more water to the aquifer than
is presently occurring. This benefit is due primarily to the decrease in evapotanspiration at the
site, that there will be relatively few impervious surfaces on the site compared to the overall
property; that the majority of recharge occurs dtring the fall, winter, and spring, that about one-
half of the site receives irrigation, and that the underlying aquifer is not a major source of water
supply. This analysis ignores the potential for off-site recharge. The potential impact during
build out and operation of the resort prior to acquiring water rights is small, and is not predicted
to provide an adverse aquifer impact. The estimated positive impact to the aquifer system with
time is due to an innovative system of capturing, use, and reinfroduction of water to the aquifer.
The potential for resort operations to promote salt water infusion is very low. First, the resort
wells would have to lower the pumping water level below sea level for extended periods of
time; confols will be placed on the wells to prevent this from occurring. Second, the supply
aquifer is very pervious and can readily supply the l2l acre-feet of water required by the resort.
Thfud, there are two strong sources of recharge to the aquifer from the northwest and east.
Fourth, the water balance indicates that there will be a net increase in recharge to the aquifer due
to resort operations.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prcject No. 5G0801-11
Draft Hydrogeologic Evaluation
November 20,2008
Page 19 of22
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Please call us at (360) 631-5600 if you have any
questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Scott F. Bender L.H.G., C.G.W.P
o 2020 Engineering, vertal communication, July 2007
. Crop Evaluation - Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements - FAO
Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Rome, 1998.
o EB15l3 [rrigation requirements for Washington. 2001. Washington State Cooperative
Extension.
o Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Eastem Jefferson County, Water Supply
Bulletin No. 54, Washington Department of Natural Resources and Jefferson County
Public utiliry DistrictNo. 1 (1981).
o GeoEngineers, Inc. Draft Wetland Delineation, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf resort,
Jefferson County, Washington. June 2006.
o Perrone Consulting, Inc. Geotechnical Report, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort, Jefferson County, Washington. July 2007.
. Jefferson County Master Plan (1978) description of geologic conditions in eastern
Jefferson County.
o Westem Regional Climate Center
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0801-11
References:
tf
s
oq
(\
$'
,$
$
6i
(\
\>(JlI
\>
\x
\>?r6o\4
H H H FH
E P F 9e
FFFgfi
aA
non
rI
tl
rl'tI]
{
-l
tdF
-loeo
Ji
o
FU
E'z
sF!
TA
U)-,
t,tl,
,JroeU)
z
z
E]
q
6
O
A
'/n,-,t
CORMORAN"W;Gi
uI
I
o
,x
#
'P
N
G/./
a
+
(.
F
I
T
T
T
T
T
I
I
I
T
t
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
THE STATESIIAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT }I.ARBOR ]I'ARINA & GOLF RESORT
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
sG0801
Figure 1
NPC
WDW
l',= 500'
11\-,
T
\
N
\
revrsrons Job No,dote 6gsigned by
SltglOB J;""i uy
scole checked by
opproved by
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
6@ 6& St/EorSo.rrr
Kddad,WA g&gl)
ph: (125) 828.7515
-I-'I-I'I'-IIIITI-I
0.60
0.50
0.40
oq)
C)0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
l-Jan 3l-Jan 2-Mar l-Apr l-May 31-May 30-Jun 30-Jul 29-Aug 28-Sep 28-Oct 27-Nov 27-Dec
+ Average Daily Precipitation (in)
-Potential
Evaportranspiration (l24ay rmving average)
-Daily
Precipiation (l24ay nnving average)
??
I I r.I
fififuJI il\,il??
Oct 6
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Comparison of Precipitation and
Potential Evapotraspiration
Project Number
sG080l-l I
Figure 2
IIII'I-IIIIII-II-II
3s.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
q)
.e)
o
6l
0)
rd
q)
c
o
0q)
^- e)
0)
6)(.)
2.0 ?
GI
o'5
GI
Q1.5 '6
q)
Er
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
l-May-07 2-Iul-07 2-Sep47 3-Nov47 4Jan-08 GMar48 7-May-08 8-Jul48
+ MW-l _-- MW-2 MW-3 + Quilcene Precip
T
^.A.rAr, .rl!lt"-
eVXr--^AI
-Y _k
_ - _ _TVtf
x TT
f
x x T
t rr*-Lfifrfrul*u &,,T il
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Measured Groundwater Level Elevations
Compared to Quilcene Precipitation
Project Number
sG080l-r r
Figure 3
?
-
t -/-
O
a*-..
I
1.-........
I
--,
z
il
---t-
Ja----
tr1
N:-
a;
L l-r-
Ct\.n
{\
)
260.
\
o-
)
\
--t-r S
\
220r
}.'-
{o
r
oIIol =€
N
N)o
*
lD
6o
E
t!
tD(t)
l)
rdxFd
p
t4tJp(+It.o)
E,lE 6 6o
i* * s
F
IFTEl!,-S E E E'
;s * i3ggE f; *
a"9 ? EEdT(t)65
ni,Fi:E:lo
$oq
n{r',t
A
(Jroo
N
Oro
o
(rloo
oo
(,loo
Nooo
o
oa
s)
(t)
Utoo
6"o
f
5
B
C
gt
a
o
o
)-
t
gr
bo
:!
7g
L
)
r/
9E-
t
o
r
=
=6!
re
J
)
oG
a
79
L
fi
!
"p
{
nr-
r)
=
=
=i
{
oP€o
:l
I
!nrogt
:!
oo
Ag
J
\T
I
=
=ol
{_
)
oP\\
:!
3o
oo
=o
=
o
L\
r
1
I5.b
:.,
:!
)t
it
l
)
(
ru\
(
r(
\
\
(
\
cr,
t\
(t
N
\
\^)
C\
\
?
{
)\
.\
\/1
(
\\
)
)
'/-\
D\
1
trA
"\*
uL
)g
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
T
T
t
T
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
T
t
T
T
I
T
630 6lf, Steef South
Ki*land, WA 98033
ph: (425) 82*7545
revrsrons
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE MAP sG0801
Job No.
Figure SB 4
dote designed by DAY
6/18108 drow: by WDW
scole checked by
1'= 5OO' oiproved by
E1
=
=(,,
.tI
oo
N(rl
IIII'II'IIIII'I'III
I1.30 20
I l.l0
l5
10.90
g
o.E
6t
o
fil
(u
o
Fl
6)
GI!
o
I
10.70 l0
10.50
10.30
q)
-6)
o0
q)
0)
F
5
10.I 0 0
9.90
-5
9.70
9.50 -10
6n2/2006 6n4/2W6 6/r6t2006 6/t8t20[6 6/2U2n6 6t2v2w 6/24t2n6 6t26t2w6 6t2A2W6 6/3012N6
+Bl ---r--B-3 TideHeight
SUBSURIACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Measured Groundwater Level
Fluctuations Compared to Tidal
Fluctuations
Project Number
sG080t-1 I
Figure 5
..III-I'IIIIIIIIIII
0.0
2.0
I
Irr
tr> 4.0o!
A
6.0
8.0
0.0
2.0
0 1000 2000
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
3000
0.0
0.1
E
e,
;o€
'6
4.0
0.2
Etu
-o
0.3
0.4
0.5
6.0
8.0
0 1 l0 100
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
1 000 I 0000 1 l0 100 1000
tJt',
l|||t t tll||t t ll
l|ilil t llll|il ttl|ll|il t tl|||t |l ll||t t tl
ll|lt t t lll|il ltl||ilt t |ll|l[ t |l|l|ilt t |l|ll|il t |l
l|ilt l t
-l
t-f ..t
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Pumping and Recovery Test Results
American Campground (pumping) Well
hoject Number
sG080l-l l
Figure 6
IIIIIII-I-III-I-'II
0,0 --f,h-r
I
rh\-.t
L-- i. --.!rt rt
10.00
0.r
t.00
go,
Bo€
E o,
o
tsrlr
; 0.10ot
E
lP'
tit-
t,/ilt
0.01
0.4
0.5 0.00
0 1000 2000
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
3000 0 I l0 100
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
1000 10000
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.1
i)0)
tr{
3o€
B
o
0.2
6o
E{
-o
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 1 l0 100
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
1000 10000 I l0 100 I 000
tlt'
-+
t
I ll$
\
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Pumping and Recovery Test Results
Monitoring Well MW-4
Project Number
sG080r-l I
Figure 7
lt
1:.4
I
I
It
I
-IIIIII-II-II-IIIII
-0.2 10.00
-0.1
EIri
B 0.0oE
BdLo
r.00
{.)c)
lrr
B 0.r0o€
cd
A I
0.1 0.0t
0.2 0.00
0 1000 2000
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
3000 0 l l0 100
Time Since Pumping (Minutes)
1000 10000
-0.2 -0.2
-0.I -0.1
I
r&
; 0.0
€
EA
8oo
-o
0.1 0.1
0.2 0.2
0 I l0 100
Time Sine Purnping (Minutes)
I 000 10000 I 10 100
t/t'
1000 l 0000
ts ^_^fi-
^.1^ ..ttl I {- !hII,Ur*.TL.^J
7
IIT
I
I|ilt Iil
lil
lil|il1
lil
ilt|ilt ilt
LlHllSL r ill
I I |Ii/
It
It
lil
I ItIl
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Pumping and Recovery Test Results
Monitoring Well MW-5
Project Number
sG080l -t I
Figure 8
-Y
|il
|il ift
|il |il
E H ULtffi-L
Il
i
--IIIIIIIIIII-IIII-
0)6,
0)0
&
6lo
{)
cl
'!
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
/m.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
^
-!7----
{
)
5/211200812:N 5t22J20080fi0 51221200812:N 5123/2ffi80:N 51231200812:00 5124/2ffi80:N
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Infiltration Test Results
IW-1
Project Number
sG080l-l l
Figure 9
III-I-I-II-II-T-III
0.20
0. l8
0. 16 fi#
,
^T
IF
Tidal Fluctuations
\i ru
\Sftt I'
lo t \rJ.Jrl ,,{r \t
.# L"illr-tt r
0.14
6'e
4)O
&
6l
6)
q)
6l
'E
0.12
0. l0
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
5/2112008 0:00 5l2tl2ffi8 t2:00 5/2212C[,8 O:ffi 5l22l2NB l2:N 5/2312C[,8 0:N 5123/2Cf,8 12:00 5124/2Cf,B 0:00 5124120[,8 12:00 5/25/2N8 O:ffi
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Infiltration Test Results
Monitoring Well MW-5
Project Number
sG080l-l I
Figure 10
o
-1
ao
-t
o
s.
B!
do
I
=of t!A{fi!
+
+
I!
AToss.
(
o
S+
\
\/>oi
E
(}
ID(r,
lD
*B
6o
ll Co
Ft
o
!D
ooo
oq r'{o
oao
a
ididgB+
AA(1Pi
'^=UHiipNoR3T^9o o V.X Eg i 6 .-_ yNpAJootE'F'n r'cos, DLt/
-!)1VDS<a
,1.
U
I
oooo
at
ofrl.po
06n
o
o'oU0
aa
D
'4 ',\J t
fi i€I ilE
-/ni\v!
) F.:=y 4;A ?X!jnC-ah qJ .v
P!)
;,L!u)LJ-2.8
aH.
^PL.,) o-
iH
('Dto
a
d0
D
X1'rr'lFiFzcpFrrx.g 659 E 3
E: x#E B ts I.lV:-'6Mt.9.d ='E.3."" g *6 iG .,,,
F= F< rirujra-Od-a
$o
a.(\
$',t
A)
it
lsli
:ltf
o
$T
lrj
\
U)
ftt
N
\\
lil
\\
Js
I
:s
#
)
s{
)
)
)
--\
0il
)
=..LE lot
of;
*
eb-('tb-N
Io
t
it
o
t
e
E
-j^o\
I
P
N
N
oI
t
I
PI
{
ac
@.
\
.ooz
a,
-r, O{
at!t
I!*
I!
\--
il
ii.
a-a
-1,,P
o
{!
I!#.i
idr
+I!s
W
1E=Ifrri3'
I!
N
09
c)
T
JT
4!IN
t(
th
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
t
!
T
I
t
T
T
t
I
T
I
T
t
T
T
T
I
T
T
6ilM SrltrelSoud,
K&and,WA 9W33
ph: (25)82&7515
fi E STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEA{Y\NT HARBOR II,IARINA & GOIF RESORT
SURFICIAL GEOLOGY
& EXPLORATION PLAN
sG0801
No
Figure O 11
dote
6/t8/08
s.nle
1" = 50O'
designed by
drown by
checked by
opproved by
DAY
WOW
e{
o\
r
..\€
{
j
a
J
\
(
-{"
\
(
'<\I )t)\\
(
L-
r<\
qa
D
e\
o@oo
U)dz
_oo--)
N
-l
F.
Ef
.9)II
*
o trl
HE
*Elu c)
ur !zo9o
uJo
F
CEoa
-lUo:
FJ#9P;6'oEz<<=2ncrxEH
EEAT
TIJ F-zF<'a
lU
o-
ococoo\'ao
0;
cocoo
z
E5(!o
tro
16
0,tr
oo+o@
oo+o+
oo+oN
F
UJ
lJJ]Lz
ozzo
F
Fa
8+o
r33J Nt NO|IV^313
o
o
2 o(n ,
o.o
Y a.(o
\o^/1 c ,(g
'br-,t (,
i.{6.,/9!ct )n -l
/l.a)(U
l
D
I
o)
(.
1
o5
LI U
o)\"q \FC
l)9
o)
6
o
dtaI(\.c.i (U
I
.l-Eo
'b^\aD
o
\/o I \!'I
I ))
b-\/oz FO (?)\t
A 'oa ./\
(E?s -Z
^
7)\
\
"9q
(
iq )^€a.I \I I I a )q (
L
,a (
?0f!(!\(
c I I o
Fo {I
)
I
o
(,
?n\\o I .!I
tt,ot6\o n i ,l
\A\ls'\)/o o)
b^\'a I Ri tr
co
\?A /f o (
0
)Et E
0
E'
ci ,\,7 9
T Ir,r zo ItIoI
,!
^
\l I >l
.",S2.x \o.I
\'(.fi (\.f a
./7
I
I c.
fl ,^E!)
\9-U
G
\br-G I
E
\!6.U.
6sv/.T'r
)E U'
(
I
(c p /c o !o -o z
a L ,L
UJ
(oo 2
dl IJ
ul
'oz'.))II(
C
g z.o
-. I o I a
.lJ'n ?/llJJ dr tr(Ln
(?t,c \
bo \
\"o'(t \
D a %
26 /A\(r.,Y i"",I (\.
\,o^.x b.u /
a^-/,6 ,O,F
-a r\.
I
I h -o \,x ,
)
z r'i
o
D
!oco'6
o!
-
o
!
c
=o
!
,
!o
ooEo
-
!o
o
doo
@ooN
FN
N
o
o!
c
=osoa
Ex
o
o-fotr(,
IJJo
IItfo
c0lU'
EET
Es$o*6
C PN6&So*..3AE
I'IIIII-I'I-'II'III
oq)
I
G,o
)ods1
D t,
(
(,
7 I
c
ri
D
c o
,c.g
rJr
o croJ.(
I
(o
q,
(o
(
o
l,
./s,
\t \
Jr
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
t
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6tl Streef Soufh
K&and, WA 98033
ph: ff25) 82&7545
E
B So ilh
-oN)rtt /^4 -<\b\sr-7
.!d{,('ov '/,\
%.h(/^r/Pz ,/.-,'Y\{t b{
I
.(Cn-<
97 a \./.to-Y D-
YoQ
l-si /A is S
/a!,d Z-\v ^C ,t /;'^o\,Z po ts-o-\
I sN.,
/ol/f ZA I e/-,u',o)}i )-
-$:7;t fr1 V \@",/'\S's ,//I
I I \I
.a
2.r'
\
a ')A-.tI,,n
\(Q,I
veller'el 7
!'l
\'l !
\7 !!7 7
7 I ?
7
\7
\
?
$
o tun AG ET JDI rSlr'LE Jtr,I ID V NL,'tEi
p"tn.rtg\
-7 g 4t1 /8€(iror ndv le'el i rnd lak m(red lc )Ct ,t ct )
II,rr Io
aal ar<
cTc
fnr
rs€
r lir lae
lto
fra 'ql
ar rlIIIItEck(n Its ltn :OS )3.r lgs DI IL WN tre Gn ,up rY.
-
Br tsal TiI (Q'rt)4.SS]laI ,e)tg0 wa er\
I I Ar rna t(l )va
IIII rN(ilac al s ried
300
200
100
0
F
IJJ
IU
lJ-z
zotr
UJJ
u.l
Fut1!
l.l-z
zo
F
uJJ
uJ
0+00 STATIONING IN FEET 20+00 40+00 60+00
Elevation Datum: NAVD 88
dote
7 /27 /06
designed by DAY
drown by CAH
scole
As Shown
checked by
opproved by
revision s
9/1o/2008 THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
GENERALIZED
GEOLOGIC PROFILE B.B'
Job No,
sG0801
Figure 8 13
/_,
'!
-
,t5t T-TW
.t,,c,iL ,v((\t,
?7
a),
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
T
I
T
t
I
T
T
T
T
I
t
T
T
T
I
I
T
I
t
630 6tt Straef Soufh
Krkland, WA 98033
ph: (425) 82&7545
c
We St Ei tst
\r\
ls,{{-t v
!a'\)
G D to
s')
(y/
I.ot;N"
)
t">9\
("d ,1{:\(?.t AO\J ss-./_Z(:)3\uq
t-),n ,/,i"s:G V'I .$P-rzc($'sq /
<)s-v{t\3 ,l-$,(,-
/s'
II
A\\\\I \
\\)/
I\u
a
)3
L
=Gr
:ND
E 4l 6 er lr an(da e]I ,
/a I ialt
tL,r\/'\lJ tr,L JDI to
\r rA,/)I I I Rr lal rD(its )
/la
rh-r?(n )ts olE lin osl Ita )
1, r+T I :A(rce 1(
N
4
Jtt
D.
U:
E
2.Ve rl s(ale is f<rur I ith ,h(sc€le.
ssl }S tqr ECtIttlar I
t^ls.
'v
100
11
0
Ful
IUl!z
zotr
ulJ
lrJ
0+00 STATIONING IN FEET 20+00 40+00
Elevation Datum: NAVD 88
dote
7 /27 /06
designed by DAY
drown by CAH
scole
As Shown
checked by
opproved by
revisions
e/1o/2oo8 THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
GENERALIZED
GEOLOGIC PROFILE C-C'
Job No.
sG0801
Figure 9 14
/
,
I
*t1 ,
?
rtic
)te itDJu(
T
I
t
T
I
t
T
t
t
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
5,6,
7r8
3, 13,
16,34
18, 19'17,25,
26,27,
, 31, 39
48,49
37
41,42
22,44,
45
15
12,20,
21,23,
24,29,
38,40
1) Well locations are approximate. Locations typically to nearest
quarter quarter unless beffer known.
2) See Appendix for well logs
3) Groundwater drawdown contours in feet
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Domestic Well Locations
and Predicted Wellfield
Drawdown
Groundwater lmpact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Project Number
sG080l-l I
Figure 15
I
I
/
/
American*1'
/va,:.
I
I
I
I
To...Y
*o ('artr;tgroulrrlI \\ cll Locatiolr . J'q-.g. i':ii'i. gj
i \.i ,: -r#d"
..$F ". l't'o;lttsctt lf.tr !,_" *"i \\elt l,ocaliorr\:".{'"i t.\$J
;,
1
t,EAI{AL
\
\
-ui v_L-T
II-IIIIIIIII-IIIII-
70,000,000 3m0
60,000,000
2500
50,000,000
2000
40,000,000 0
s00 .9e
()(Jc
1
30,0m,000
1000
20,000,000
500
10,000,000
0 0
0l/01/09 0l/01/10 0l/01/ll 0U0Ut2 t2t3yt2 t2t3Ut3 ta3vw t2t3vt5 ta3urc ta30/17 l2J30ll8
-+ Wastewater Storage Reserve (Pond B) Aquifer Recharge + Cunrnulative Annual Well Supply + Occupied Units
SUBSURTACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Water Balance Calculation Results for
Initial Development to Full Build-Out
Project Number
sG0801-1 r
Figure 16
II--I-II'IIIIIII-II
900
800
7m
e 600c)
-0)rr
q)
e)
GI
&sm
cl
q)
6)
I aoo.l,
6l
t :oo
2W
lm
0
II IIIIa
II I
II
I
t
)
I
(
(
I
I
I
,
))
)
I
I
,
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
i(
I
I
{
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I i
I I
I
I
J
I
I
SUBSURIACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Analyses
Statesman Corporation
Annual Cumulative Aquifer Recharge
During Resort Build-out and Completion
Project Number
sG080r-r r
Figure 17