HomeMy WebLinkAbout010-ECEiVED
pPR 012009
� JEFfEBSONCOUNiYbCS
� Pleasant Harbor Marina
� and Golf Resort
1
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
TECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
ISeptember 4, 2008 Draft
' Craig A. Peck & Associates
11402 40th Avenue E.
Tacoma, Washington 98446
' 253.840.5482
1
1
I�
i
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
iGrading and Drainage
Technical Engineering Report
1
' September 4, 2008
Draft
Prepared for.-
Statesman
or:Statesman
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. S.W.
Calgary, Alberta, T3H 4H9
' Prepared by:
Craig A. Peck & Associates
11402 40th Avenue E.
' Tacoma, WA 98446
Table of Contents
Section Chapter and Section Titles Page
Number Number
1.0
PROJECT OVERVIEW
1-1
1.1
Pre -Developed Conditions
1-1
1.2
Proposed Development
1-2
1.2.1 Preferred Alternative
1-9
1.2.2 No Action Alternative
1-9
1.3
Phased Development
1-9
2.0
CLEARING AND GRADING PROPOSAL
2-1
2.1
Existing Conditions
2-1
2.2
Proposed Developed Conditions
2-2
2.3
Design Requirements
2-3
2.4
Project Impacts
2-3
Potential Construction Impacts
2-3
Onsite Gravel Processing
2-5
Stockpiling
2-5
Potential Operational Impacts
2-6
2.5
Mitigation Measures
2-6
Applicable Regulations and Commitments
2-6
Other Recommended Mitigation Measures
2-7
2.6
Phased Development
2-7
3.0
STORM DRAINAGE
3-1
3.1
Existing Conditions
3-1
3.2
Proposed Developed Conditions
3-5
3.2.1 Preferred Alternative
3-6
3.2.2 No Action Alternative
3-6
3.3
Stormwater Management Standards
3-6
3.3.1 Stormwater Quantity Control
3-7
3.3.2 Stormwater Quality Treatment
3-9
3.4
Project Impacts
3-10
Potential Construction Impacts
3-11
Potential Operational Impacts
3-12
3.5
Mitigation Measures
3-13
Applicable Regulations and Commitments
3-13
Other Recommended Mitigation Measures
3-16
3.6
Phased Development
3-17
4.0
REFERENCES
4-1
List of Figures
Figure
Figure Title
Page
Number
Number
1.1
Vicinity Map
1-3
1.2
Existing Site Conditions Aerial Photograph
1-4
1.3
Existing Topographic Map
1-5
1.4
Preferred Alternative, Overall Site
1-6
1.5
Preferred Alternative, Marina Village Area
1-7
1.6
Preferred Alternative, Water Touch Unit Area
1-8
1.7
Preferred Alternative, Golf Resort Area
1-9
2.1
Preferred Alternative, Grading Plan — Cuts and Fills — Golf Resort
2-4
2.2
Preferred Alternative, Grading Plan — Cuts and Fills — Marina Area
2-5
A.1
Soil Infiltration Map
A-1
B.1
Existing Drainage Basins
B-1
B.2
Developed Drainage Basins — Golf Resort
B-2
B.3
Developed Drainage Basins — Marina Area
B-3
B.4
Infiltration Facility Locations
B-4
List of Tables
Table
Table Title
Page
Number
Number
2.3.1
Clearing Estimate for Site Plan
2-3
3.2.1
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Projected Impervious Cover
3-5
3.3.1
Estimated Stormwater Runoff Rate
3-8
3.3.2
Estimated Required Volume for Infiltration Facilities
3-9
3.3.3
Estimated Required Volume for Water Quality Treatment —
Wet Pond Facilities
3-10
List of Appendices
Appendix Number Appendix Title Page
Number
A Soil Infiltration Map A-1
B Storm Drainage Calculations B-1
A
1 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
' This report documents existing site conditions and provides analysis of the proposed clearing
and grading and stormwater management for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, a
Master Planned Resort proposal in the Brinnon Subarea of Jefferson County, Washington.
' Included in this report are calculations and analysis of projected impacts associated with
proposed land use and the No Action Alternative, with discussion of proposed and other
possible mitigation measures.
The Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort site is approximately 252 acres in area and is
located on the Olympic Peninsula adjacent to Hood Canal in southern Jefferson County in
Sections 15 and 22 of Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian (see Figure
' 1.1). The site is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA
16), and is part of the East Olympic and Hood Canal River Basins.
t The site consists of three (3) sections. Section 1, the largest of the sections, is approximately
220 acres in area located on the southwest portion of Black Point east of SR 101 and south of
Black Point Road. Section 2 is a narrow strip of approximately 20 acres in area that lies along
' the southeasterly side of SR 101 north of Black Point Road and fronting Pleasant Harbor.
Section 3 is triangular shaped parcel approximately 12 acres in area lying northerly of SR 101
and Section 2. Section 1 was previously developed as a 500 -unit NACO/Thousand Trails
' commercial campground containing paved and graveled roads and parking areas, tent camp
sites, recreational vehicle pad sites, picnic areas with shelter buildings, recreation building and
swimming pool, restroom buildings with septic tank drainfields, wells for domestic use, gravel
' borrow areas, entry guard house, and fenced equipment storage areas. Section 1 has been
previously logged, has single-family dwellings on the west and east sides, and has undeveloped
land on the north side. Section 2 contains a single-family dwelling, domestic well houses, bed
and breakfast structure, real estate office building, commercial marina with restroom building,
' laundry building, store and deli building, fenced equipment space, and paved and graveled
roads and parking areas. Section 2 is border by SR 101 on the west, Pleasant Harbor on the
east including the Washington State Department of Fisheries boat launch, single-family
' residential development on the north, and Black Point Road on the south. Section 3 contains
septic tank drainfields that serve portions of Section 2. Section 3 is bordered by single-family
dwellings to the north and is undeveloped to the west.
' 1.1 Pre -Developed Conditions
' Site elevations range from about 270 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the north central
portion of Section 1, to MSL along the southern boundary of the site on Hood Canal and in
Pleasant Harbor. Slopes on the property range from less than 2 percent in the western portion
' of the Section 1 to greater than 100 percent along the southern shore bluffs along Hood Canal.
All three sections of the property were previously logged. Section 1, the site of the proposed
golf resort and Black Point Properties, contains a former 500 -unit NACO/Thousand Trails
' commercial campground for recreational vehicles, trailers, and tent campers with paved and
graveled roads and parking areas, tent camp sites, recreational vehicle pad sites, picnic areas
with shelter buildings, recreation building and swimming pool, restroom buildings with septic
tank drainfields, wells for domestic use, gravel borrow areas, entry guard house, and fenced
equipment storage areas. Section 2, the site of the proposed Maritime village, contains a
285 -berth marina with associated retail commercial outlet, restroom building, two swimming
pools, laundry building, paved and unpaved roads and parking, a single-family residence,
1-1
r1
L�
bed and breakfast residence, a real estate office, and several water -supply wells (see
Figure 1.2).
The site is located in an area of glaciations that occupied the Puget Sound Lowland
approximately 30,000 to 15,000 years ago. It is likely that the glacial ice advanced and
withdrew several times over the project area during the glacial period, depending on climatic
conditions. Thus, geologic material beneath the site consists of sand and gravel outwash
with some glacial till exposures. Depressions and hummocks formed in glacial outwash
material deposited on and around stagnant glacial ice as the underlying ice melted. The
numerous potholes identified on the property (see Figure 1.3) are kettles formed as sand
and gravel was deposited around stagnant ice blocks that subsequently melted. Several of
the kettles have silty soils in the bottom overlying sand and gravel. A soils map and
additional information describing site soils are provided in Appendix B. Three (3) wetlands
have been identified on the site, one along the east property line, a second in the largest
kettle, and a third in a local depression southeast of the largest kettle.
Existing utilities on the site include power, water, and telephone.
1.2 Proposed Development
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort was submitted as a Master Plan Resort proposal to the
t Jefferson County Commissioners as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The resort is
to consist of an 18 -hole golf course, central resort facility, additional commercial uses, marina
with 285 berths, and a total of 890 residential units including onsite employee housing and
' additional residential units in the marina area. Figures 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7 illustrate the
proposal.
"I
L�
1-2
M
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Figure 1.2 - Existing Site Conditions Aerial Photograph
1-4
�•-,J,r-
r � ���n/q�rfrf(/01rq/rrn /// rJ //rte �%�--' �3H1^\, ✓ r/ :_ __�..,; ..�j�Jr
2;_ J
�11! (�' �\'.�:^ i _.•�=r/�_-J/=:iJJf/ ,l\ �i✓iii �r�/i r r r _�� /////1/l riJj /\ 1pJ^�-'/irr „.�// r 'i'�r / !/ 1 \1� ri \\� irr_. _/ ._ �\� /ii ✓� .%ii / /rri f r // / / ! r r
!
rl ♦ ���-/jam ii�'� %/C/� � i'/ � � .�J, .mrir / .rr �_J i (r%%i / /////1! J%. Jri rr r'/�
J'�/
t)�\r'`�... ��_��.\ ����_�-- -• /,�rJ/ J Jam.-=/rJii M\\11r.-.Jlll/jfrlr);1 rr r "�/i'✓ � /..!,!
/// \\\ t == s���✓ft� �_"=.� .. » J J JJ t r �.r / / / i ,r rf ri�� �,.r \ ) 1\ /�ri�..
�on
��r r^� :�= r✓`�: =J�' I �Jr �/ f�ffiJfriff ii _�='''-�i! r=�� / i �iJ J J� r' \'/ / 3 1
i
"iii^ %'rii/ i/ rir
' -� r-s-.�r ..-1���%ri /!// r/ /i i -� .- /j = �rr�� iii/ /i Jr✓! ,/i l )
%` rte' .y /i/ / i //rr ✓i --!"ice / - / / ? l
ter` ��'•-, ^/ .. :�%` � __-'-/r%r. J � �• ��rJ r !!, n ! (r., /4' ii-- ' ' riq, rri h l . � }l/`� ' l!
it-ir /A�i�i=
�r� �i i....�_r r/ rj !1 / l/ /r r''•' ri ., r_i/ �/ / l 1
ri l
rte': ^..� \
'�-== irr �``..i r --i �r /%i� �N � �ri Jj! / /f /%/Jr � it /J �, Jj' yf✓r �/ter \ J ( Vii- „/
J J =� �^�✓ rf�� `.�/JJ/ /y / vJ r rJH /I //! // r r ,r ✓/r r 1 /—/ 11 //^_'
J// -r_..... r % .r �• JJ r/ r J r✓, !/ 11 1 -.= ri Ste— r I/ ! 1 ! !
�!.!lr., r/ice 1 ✓j /���: J r// '/f r'� i/ ' ' i•-.—'' r -ir \\\
•ter r/„/"'rii�ii-!r^��///iJ .. r/r/J///J( l / /j/ J/ /i! /J \r rr �rrr / ///rl/ /r 1 J Jr
/ r /r/i__ ^ri��..r r//.-✓ r/rif///r/1!1(// �f/ r /r f r r $O /r /J// .. /I f r j-1 j _.
-� // /r( r / r� // ��.!�//JJ/////// 1 J ! f/ ! ✓ �r _..r // / ig(1 / / fri- Irr^
//
J / �� � �r�,'i �.j //i / //rill JJ%%fJy�r �'�• �,
111rf \\ r'-.1 /11 //i /:rJ vi/ // ) ! ,, if /// r r --=r/ �^/// J ✓'' =J !%! y!'
111♦ .rJl/•-- J i� J r/! til rrlJ! J!J 11N) (1 %� J r rri ..r /!�/! �-. JJ/f Jj/ r'\ l Jam; 1
(` \.. ))\1\ ) \�✓ /\ l! 7// \ \ fl r/.w-�t- r��,`y.:s'��.. i -.^� ✓-\ \Jf / / r/i \t r�-)
. i •_\ \•,\ \\\ 11111 �\.y��-rI/ `-\ \ t.f \� �., •�- _� r �`' Jr�s1'�.'/ _ r ri',,�%--^��` \ nrrj/ l /`_/ (7/ !\\-J L\\ \\ /
/ 1\1x(11\\i \\=`rJ//%i/// 11\ \\\ x`11 �?/ J!s�✓/Gr��\ \\\_rl/ jfr j ryl(r \'�,�'
)%,) r- =iii r✓/ Ill 1 t l) r iS '.G= /^`�� rr-s'�i^���%��= \L� \ J f Jl 1 -\-^J % J� it l
1 \ J r l\
/1 �. J/1 \\ 1: � 1 J !// %.•-r �-•._ rev J= �^\��\ \/� (S ! Jr ) !-i
( 1 // Itl�l\II //!) ) ( r f / r \ d ^� ..7"' / i� f \.: �// \\..\\ )/r J l It J r =^ // f 1 ✓
\ , 1 1 II 131 t{/ 3 / ": '� \ti //j' �rrr,-- �ri�9 _- .,, \ \\� /i/ / // \ 1 ♦\-^ri Ir G
1 -�� 1l`\\})1 l I}Ir 1 r ! \ � 1) ,11 '✓/J l//Ji c- '%'� _� � r J r / /'� _ )S J
1111
fl r,✓, /.:\\\1\(1\1)111){ )/} ( 1\� �!. / � ^,�J/ )/UJj!^ \..`�O ,//r..��_�_ ��-�_ �� \ ! /i' /J 1 l..r\� /
fr
t / \ r 11 \1 l \ll t \ � 1 �1`� �.- ( \tllllf \ =___.� �. _ ,./ �% //� _ \\\C �� / r/ /i ✓ r 1 f II ! !
?3it'll +,�lj14t111j1/i\l�rI �f "✓ \/ %/r�fJj / /
�!-.\ (1/r� / l,l /f(((ill\1\\^ 1 ,(\ JJ J !J(\ flit \ /1�1 �aA%/// r rr , /� /rll /i iii// `'�: \\\�\\1 \\`\\\\\`Z\ � r`ft � j >r•,�/i!�//!J
✓/ )Il { 11) 1) \ \
Itr-'A✓ / /i ! //// r r,^_,��.�\\\l Nl\l �� / 11 / rfJ !
\ } ( f \1C///// 1 V ` C \ 1 S {<)/.,�r,l Jii /i %•1 r// / lJ/•- // /!!�- ( � \\ 1 1 l i\ 1 J !r � r ri
1 r 11 1 \ S r (( \ 1 t \_ r / /- '_ `✓�� \-- '^/i / /� / 1/! J / t/ //� \\ \\ )\\11111\ \ \ \) t- J c�..�_/ f` / r)1 1/ i 1, �
,) Cl /111\t13 \ I ) }f1 //`)• / \\\\ , /r 11 / JI l/// r=_-) \\\ \)111111)1i\it\ 1 Ji -ate ✓ / f11 ( //!) \//
r!i//,/1 ✓11/f t iS----^\ 1\\ \ll 11 1 \\ �r !� \ l \1 i /! !� \
/-iF-'' J3 i t }li \ ((l J r� /rte \�\\\\ l t ` r/ lJ fl r i ! 1 /1l( \C-\.✓ / �1 IIJ/ll! Ill 111111 l � l \\�J �__1)ri/ IJ) 1 �.-J
�'. .;' -r\ `/Jj 1j 11 I �J r'f / \ 111 ) 1 J// /! Jr ! �� f!%t 1�`!, 111 ) I ll •11 ( J / .r/ ^!/✓- 1 1
•/ /r ! / / rl l!" , 11113 I)
/ \ P _ \\\ r //J1 ri 1 It l rt }1 I 31
1 \ U/ � �\ \ 1 1 � � /r (// 1 !l t 1 11{113 11
ryY \\\ 1'+�\ D ///� / r '`���\ ( -�•. //////f/��/ )� �\ 1`. 'l N� J ! )� J//((S� \ 113 � �/.; l�r� /�.�
��Jr 1 ( )J � .`-•Jr"' � `f///r/( 1, 1 I lx 1 11 > ,\r I // r \� � .. /r/i x�t )ji
t ( L \ \ \ / (!JI I1{ �r+'�.r/ S //! )I \�� 1 ( // /( 1 Ip r•... 1 \
r
J )1! ✓a^ {/Ili �/ ]I%Zr_//1{tlr/
tl,�
/\
='�: �riil_ %�\/ 1N f � :- / 1 5) 1 ! � fir(\`tom^\\ t �r ��/ / � t 1 !r^ \�"•1 llilll J- t-- <\ r/�-� � )1 J l�rJ J
�\lj11, ( (� ( 1\\ ,!) ) ! !/ r _ •-
✓1 / ( / \ ✓=s? a 1 /' - 1 ri-- '/ rte\ ! ( 1 \\ r r 1 1 /
11\,
\l\�-
j� / I f l 1 \ / ✓ \\ 1 /n \ ) li 11 // 1 1 P\ \\ 1 \ \ ) \ (/ / / v J J / -" i !
) llf>tl fi /f��\I( l !iJ `illtb\ ( 11 a! Ji✓��.,1� }13 I 1 \ \\/� / �1 r^ \� \\\\11 l n\-^ \\\\ `\ \ !r !� rJ J /
�,"" cls q ` /, 111111 ) /y r ,f,, 1111\!\111\� „ r�\\`i /),p(�1111!!,\\\�\\.•'�--\\�\l/ , !rf J //i '�
�� �`/ ( I \ Il) 1 +1 til �`-,✓' 1 it � f 111i 1 ) \\ 1 11 14r \ �/!/r/r r� (r ) J! ! x\\ 1 J Q� \\\..\ �\\ 111 \ \ \ J
\\, \ r / r 1 � � tis 1)/rt\ .—/ ! 11 1 /l a lrl /kr \ ri _ =•'�� ` \ I fin_; )\ `� i J
__,�-. r Ji / it 1/ X111 �, f/�11/Il Il/) 11}( lli l\ (( I/Ill \ \\)dG = •'�\ \ �\ i \ y\ \ \\\�\� \ \ 1 l lilt{( '
It
1111 1\(1 ✓ \ \ I!) )\-. / ! \ \\ 1 ✓I I // \1\ \ \ \ C rJ/ \J \� t\ \ \ l 1r /J
! / I r\ 11/ 1(i!r/1J t1Sl r ,✓ Il 1 J l 4 �\ \ l \ �-"� \Ji J J 1 i\ �I it 311 r \ \ \ \ 1) 1 /r c,
1 /( 1 ( 1 I\r \^^moi/ \\�:.=..1 1t 11 \ )t Jr' \t\\ t /r! I✓l ��
\\
/1/ 31 111
/!rte 131 /11!
l(( 11 t • _\ r/ 1 \ `\ `�/ R �!�/�� ,�� �� : Z\\)) 1� r(�: \�
IiIlk(11!*\!\ f/ � 1 1 \\ \\ �-• \\_!� // r, �\ \\\ ��` '�`, J )J,1 lJfvi j ll\��
y�/
�. ) \ 1 11 111111( \\1\j r 1 t1 / // )G/ /i j � \1 \ \ •-/t \\ 1/ 111 1lf �\\�� 1 \
r \, `+\\\ l ( /f ( I1 \ p \l !%/ !%/ a r/ ) \\ \\ \� \1\ \ W 4,///It \\\\ ♦;.-. / \ �� 1Jt \
_�\ � / \ \ 1 1 l > `t. -. \ � \, I/ r (1 / J ! ✓ ) 1 1 � � 11' �i \ \ \ (
\.• -.1� 1 (1 rf 1} t\-`/-� ) \ t 11\1\\ i Il 3f3 3 3 \� l \S1\ 1/ I i / J /i,. �i !! /�.�1 t x\��vl�G�-, � 1 O( \
J J 1 I II \ ",t) t�\ 1/ f � J I r-� 1 II) !r•-.. \
• \\ 1 (x1)111 \�`` !\\ it\� � i 1 ,•1(( \\\ 1111/!! � 11� � / J!J/./� �� !/ 1/ f31(L )\ter/ !r ! JJ/ J \ !/ 1('-�,
} l�\1 \ / \\, / f\� \)r \\\\11� INJ/(/ i 11111( /iri�i=-J/ ! 7� Ifl\ y✓rJ)1(i JJiJ r�� J 1) Jar/
ll ( 1 1 ! 1 \ \ I I 1 �. \I l i 1 5 ) t JI 1 % itl RiiNi i(! -y
\-ti \\ 1511 �I11111(l (\t) 1 !1 r r!( 3 1 ♦� I / (!1 > 1
\\ \ \ Is• ) \ //! ( �'\ !� � 1 /ii1 I'- r 1i 1/ !ice r \\\�� \ t / ! � 101 �
\ fl \ 11 \ ( �l 1
}x 1 \Nl \\ 1 / r( I r / ),// l
�{ \\ 1 1N \\ ,- 1 � \ f/f/ 1 1 JO 1 11x\\\1 irr �,^ J f r ( \ �. tl � �✓ _
(!l r'/Or .1
L \\\\ l \\\l
'10
^ \\\
l It(1 \\\ �\ \\ �\\ \ i l � \ � r S 1\ \.,/r ✓ � := -_ ! % y .-_J�\\\ \\O r J 1 J( > t \ \ J !
\\ l ..� \ \-� \. rr/ ✓{ \r /il ( \ r„ � �/ // _✓� =\\ � \^ / 1 r !/' \\'t r.�\tr 1 \ \ \ r _-r
�S \ \ \ �.1\\\� � `^\.•r r 1 1J J- �`��..-... � / ! 1 i_ vim_ r \ �� , \` \ \\ ., ✓
\ �"i \^'�\ \� T 1 \II` (✓ (\ rrf 1 r ~\) \i\\ \ ' lmz
VI
`r... \ tri •\ -'') kl\t\ ``^�"%I% (1i ! �,\ !h�//// r -\�� 1�\\\ 1��\\ \ rte\ t �/r •'\�-a-\\\l\\\ ����`- `..-` 'r/�
----- , � \\ ,\r'\ /-/ c \) �`� \(\ r rte.--\ I ! \l \Il\1` ---J/i
-^----- ----- - � � ��,;., ��\ � \I I� i\ \\ r f / � ... it \ \ _ \�,.r!-/r
\\1U1\
.J/
l\I
J
/-- \ \ \ \ ///� -\ �; // x'71 1rf1 f%r�_ - i 13)1\\ \ \\ "\\ \ sem"' I .,� /fit // /1fj%/ �i�^ . �\�\/-• i1\l-��i �=�i� 5�✓//
\\ �, '✓ /�1 l3 //i � J/1! ! .-Jjl(�J!/1///r \�\ � \\�\\\il�` \\�� � `_ r r-\)\\\ \\^/ I
\re
It
' \\\\\\\ytIt( \ 1��' �� ✓Jif _ ~�llti (II) t \1 .Jr i��J/ -r!/\,
DUCKABUSH (
OYSTER TRACTS
1
\ 11 \l\\ �)
\\L��J///�J!///
I 1 yi mil x\111\\ \\�^ JirJJi✓ \� �%�_\� \\l\\ t t\�) 1 � i_3 !` \ , JIJ / r
L I \
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT -----------------
SECTIONS
_-----SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M. GRAPHIC SCALE Hoon Calvo,
Fi ure 1.3 �°° z� 500
,ow soon
g
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY ( IN FEET )
1 inch = 500 ft.
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W, W.M.
US 101
HIGHWAY
BLACK
POINT
RD.
1% f \MMMACE 3
3
.2
e
TEMmcr 2
STAFF
- 52 UNITS
TERRACE
- 486 UNITS
CHALETS
- 192 UNITS
VILLAS
72 UNITS
GOLF TOTAL
802 UNITS
OHWM
aolL
VOL
Ll
WATER
MARINA 59 UNITS
WATER TOUCH - 28 UNITS
F-1
WETLAND
EXISTING - I U141T
MARINA MAL - 55 UNITS
F-1
WETLAND BUFFER
FNATIVE
DEDICATION
1% f \MMMACE 3
3
.2
e
TEMmcr 2
STAFF
- 52 UNITS
TERRACE
- 486 UNITS
CHALETS
- 192 UNITS
VILLAS
72 UNITS
GOLF TOTAL
802 UNITS
NO
1��
I
,will,
DUCKABUSH ME
OYSTER TRACTS
Figure 1.4,//�
GRAPHIC SCALE W4
500 0 250 500 1000 2000
IN FEET
I inch = 500 ft.
OVERALL SITE MAP
HOOD CANAL
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
GRAPHIC SCALE G��P�
300 0 150 300 800 1200 ^ 0`
( IN FEET) /
1 inch = 300 ft.
,e 1.5
LLAGE - NORTH
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
BLACK
POINT
RD.
GRAPHIC SCALE
300 800
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 300 ft.
�0IR
Figure 1.6
MARITIME VILLAGE -SOUTH
ROBINSONI, �ji;, n�
.
400
US 101
BLACK
POINT
RD.
SEWAGE TPEATWFN7
A
TERRACE 3
STAFF
- 52 UNITS
TERRACE
- 486 UNITS
CHALETS
- 192 UNITS
VILLAS
72 UNITS
GOLF TOTAL
802 UNITS
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 400 am 1600
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 ft.
Figure 1.7
GOLF RESORT
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
TERRACE 2
S
TERRACE f
JJEOS `FULTON LAKE)
IThe "build" alternative would include:
' ♦ Residential structures with a mix of single-family detached homes, single-family
attached dwelling units, and multi -family multi -floor dwelling units
' ♦ Commercial area at the marina
♦ Golf course, recreational facilities, open space and trails
' ♦ Wetlands and wildlife habitat areas to be preserved
' ♦ Stormwater and utility infrastructure, including water, sewer, reclaimed water, and
franchise utilities.
1.2.1 Preferred Alternative
' The land use plan for the Preferred Alternative includes 890 total dwelling units in duplexes, 4-
plexes, 6-plexes, 8-plexes, 9-plexes, and 4 story "terrace" buildings all with parking provided
' underneath; approximately XXX square feet (sf) of retail commercial development;
approximately XXX acres of permanent open space; an 18 -hole golf course; services and
utilities (e.g., water supply, wastewater collection and treatment to Class "A" standards,
' stormwater management facilities, electrical power and communications, and improvement of
Black Point Road from SR 101 to the proposed site entrance at the northeast corner of the
development. The Preferred Alternative is expected to be completed in phases over a ten- (10)
' year period.
The Preferred Alternative would yield suburban residential densities of 3.5 dwelling units per
' gross acre (890 units/252 acres) while concentrating that density into compact building
footprints that reduce overall impervious surface areas to more rural densities of approximately
13 percent site coverage (see Figure 1.7). The site plan locates golf course fairways in areas of
' higher permeable soils to allow for infiltration of site stormwater runoff to recharge the local
groundwater aquifer. Existing local depressions throughout the site would be used to collect and
retain site runoff for infiltration.
' 1.2.2 No Action Alternative
If the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort did not proceed, there would be no need for the
' site preparation and utilities infrastructure described in this report until another development
proposal was submitted at some future time. Based on the site zoning and Comprehensive Plan
designation, it is presumed that the site would not be developed further and would continue to
' operate as a 285 -berth marina and a 60 -unit recreational vehicle park until a Master Planned
Resort could be successfully implemented.
' 1.3 Phased Development
The applicant proposes to complete the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort over a period
' of 10 years in response to market demand. Terrace #1 would be the first structure constructed
with approximately 50 to 100 residential units per year to be built and made available for
occupancy. Full build -out is expected to be complete by approximately 2020. (All to be verified
' with Garth/Natalie)
1-10
1
2.0 CLEARING AND GRADING PROPOSAL
' This section describes potential earthwork, clearing and grading operations that would occur
onsite to support the development and will identify impacts and address alternatives to mitigate
those impacts for the following items:
' ♦ Clearing and grading activities to create suitable areas for the golf course and
building/residential pads.
' ♦ Onsite gravel processing to create road -building material, building materials, utility trench
backfill, and building pads.
♦ Clearing and grading in and around sensitive areas.
' 2.1 Existing Conditions
' The existing 256 -acre site has variable topography and landscape, shaped by the repeated
advance and retreat of continental glaciers. Site topography is generally rolling in nature, with
average grades ranging from approximately 2 to over 100 percent. Maximum grades exceed
' 100 percent (1 horizontal to 1 vertical) along the southern shore bluffs facing Hood Canal (see
Figure 1.3). Aerial topographic surveys of the area indicate that elevations range from a high of
approximately 270 feet in the north central portions of Section 1 to a low of 0 feet along shore of
Hood Canal and Pleasant Harbor. Section 1 of the proposed project area contains several
' "kettle" depressions, formed when blocks of ice buried in glacial moraines melted. The largest of
these kettles near the center of Section 1 occurs in soils with lower permeability and supports a
wetland. The other kettles occur in soils with high permeability and are well -drained.
' Three (3) wetland systems have been delineated on the property (GeoEngineers 2008a). These
are located in the central and eastern portions of the site. The two western wetlands are small,
' isolated systems with no outlet. The first isolated wetland is located at the bottom of the largest
kettle and is 0.475 acre in area. The second isolated wetland is located southeasterly of the
largest kettle and is 0.279 acre in area. The eastern wetland occurs on both sides of the east
' property line of Section 1 with 0.274 acre on the project site of its approximate 0.5 to 1.0 -acre
total area. This wetland is the headwater of a drainage that flows easterly to Fulton Lake and
continues easterly to Hood Canal approximately 0.5 mile to the east.
t Five (5) streams have been identified on the property in Section 2 (GeoEngineers 2008b).
These streams are classified as Type N (non -fish bearing). No streams occur within the Section
2 project arch_ emphasizing the depressional topography prevalent throughout the landscape.
' Wetland systems, along with their functions and values, are described in a separate technical
report prepared for the site (GeoEngineers 2008b).
Existing vegetative cover is remnant of earlier logging activities and development as a 500 -unit
NACO/Thousand Trails seasonal campground for trailer and campers. Existing development
includes paved and unpaved road and campsites, office buildings, restroom buildings, storage
buildings, well houses, and picnic shelters. Electric and telephone services, water distribution
systems, septic tanks and drainfields are in-place. Most of the land is covered by second -
growth mature coniferous forest with a healthy understory of shrubs (GeoEngineers 2008b).
Coniferous species include Western hemlock, Douglas fir, Western red cedar, and Eastern
white pine. Deciduous species on the site include Pacific Madrona, red alder, and big leaf
maple. The understory includes ocean spray, Pacific ninebark, salal, evergreen huckleberry, red
huckleberry, bracken fern, deer fern, sword fern, Scot's broom, and Himalayan blackberry.
2-1
1
Wetland area vegetation includes Scouler's willow, salmonberry, hardhack, baldhip rose,
thimbleberry, lady fern, slough sedge, and false lily -of -the -valley.
' 2.2 Proposed Developed Conditions
' To complete development of a suburban -density Master Planned Resort, significant clearing of
vegetation, demolition of structures, and grading would be required in all areas not designated
as sensitive or protected. It can be expected that approximately XX acres or 80(?) percent of
' land will be cleared and graded. As each phase of development occurs and areas are stabilized
with either permanent or temporary methods, another area would be cleared and graded.
The first phase of clearing and grading would be the largest area of clearing and the largest
volume of earth to be moved. The area of the bottom of the south kettle, the area within and
surrounding the central kettle, and above the southeast shore bluffs would be cleared in Phase
1. There are three (3) objectives for this phase of grading.
a. The first objective is to clear and fill an area at the bottom of the south kettle to
create a wetland to replace the existing wetland in the largest kettle. The existing
bottom elevation of this kettle is approximately 85 feet. The finished elevation of
the created wetland will be approximately 110 feet.
b. The second objective is to fill and reform the central kettle as an approximately
50 million gallon lined reservoir for the Class A treated reclaimed water. The
bottom elevation of the existing kettle is approximately 60 feet. At the conclusion
of grading, the bottom elevation of the reservoir for the Class A treated reuse
water reservoir would be approximately 140 feet, or approximately 80 feet higher
than the existing wetland at the bottom. The surface area of the reformed kettle
would be approximately 50 percent of the area of the top of the current kettle.
c. The third objective is to fill and reform the southeast portion of Section 1 above
the shore bluff north of the 200 -foot setback line from the ordinary high water
mark. The fill would raise the elevation from approximately 115 feet at the
existing low point to form a uniform berm with a minimum elevation of
approximately 152 feet. This berm would provide the form for the ninth fairway of
the golf course. This fairway would be shaped to slope away from Hood Canal so
that runoff on the fairway would no longer flow toward Hood Canal but to a pond
along the north (right) side of the fairway. This berm would be further elevated to
create building pads and a road bed north of fairway 9. The roadway would have
a minimum elevation of 185 feet. The area north of this roadway and building
pads would be reformed to create a second pond to collect runoff from the
roadway, buildings, and the areas surrounding fairways 7, 8, and portions of 9.
This elevating and re -contouring of the existing drainage basin would direct
runoff from the developed fairways, roads, and structures to the two ponds for
conveyance out of the newly formed drainage basin to prevent discharge of golf
course runoff to Hood Canal. The two formed ponds would be lined to prevent
saturation of the created embankment. Conveyance from the pond adjacent to
fairway 10 would be by stormwater pumps to the upper pond. Conveyance from
the upper pond to the east central portion of the site to the north would be
through a gravity -flow pipe placed using a directional bore process or through a
forcemain from stormwater pumps.
2-2
Stormwater runoff will be conveyed to stormwater management facilities in each of the drainage
basins or conveyed to a drainage basin with superior infiltration capacity. Stormwater
management facilities will be created in areas with the highest infiltration capacity or with
existing detention volume in each basin, including some existing kettles. Kettles or local
depressions could be reformed and/or filled with selected soil materials from onsite sorting
operations to create a designed permeability for the infiltration bed. Runoff occurring during the
clearing and grading operations will be directed to the kettles and local depressions for use in
the temporary erosion/sedimentation control system during site development. Fine sediments
would then be removed, and they would be converted to permanent stormwater
detention/infiltration facilities once the site is completely stabilized.
2.3 Design Requirements
Clearing and grading activities will comply with applicable state and local regulations at the time
of each phase of development. More restrictive measures may be identified in other Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort technical reports, including:
♦ Final Geotechnical Investigation, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson
County, Washington (Subsurface Group 2008)
♦ Wetland and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (GeoEngineers 2008a)
♦ Habitat Management Plan (GeoEngineers 2008b)
2.4 Project Impacts
' Potential Construction Impacts
To complete development of a suburban -density master planned resort, significant clearing of
t vegetation and grading would be required in all areas not designated as sensitive areas,
protected habitat, or permanent open space. Buffers for any protected area including slopes
would be established, and guidelines would be created for work that could occur in the buffers,
t subject to restoration and/or enhancement requirements. Slope instability and erosion would be
possible if clearing and grading occurred either on slopes or close to the toe of slopes. Erosion
from instabilities could contribute to sediment in wetlands and streams.
The site plan and grading plan illustrate that the majority of the areas not designated as
protected would be cleared as outlined in Section 2.2, and topography would be significantly
altered (see Figure 2.1). Table 2.3.1 shows the percentage of the site that would be cleared and
graded. Site grading is estimated to be approximately 2,200,000 cubic yards.
Table 2.3.1. Clearing Estimate for Site Plan
2-3
Estimated Clearing
Percentage of the Site to be
Land Use
(acres)
Cleared
Site Plan
176
80%+/-
2-3
Appendix L
Transportation Impact Study
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC Memorandum
i f"o' 4CV Ci4"4
DATE: January 30, 2012''�,�, yONA7F� °ae
Ave F
TO: David Wayne Johnson,Jefferson CountyDCD
.
Garth Mann Statesman Group of Companies Ltd. u =
FROM: Michael Read, P.E. �'y�fi 33 35 F,�;t
Transportation Engineering Northwest ('TENS`(/), LLC oatd.�'�. ;'��3 �4.�;.•���a�
°4ss/Ot M.
RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS Transportation Impact Study --Jefferson County, ��SFlah000c,,®�
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEISt;XPI(tC 2/28113
Technical Report to Evaluate the MPR Alternatives �—
This memorandum serves as a second addendum supplement to the Pleasant HmborEIS
Transportation Impact Slit,#, dated November 27, 2007. It evaluates Master Planned Resort
(MPR) Alternatives 1 and 2 changes to vehicular site access assumptions, project trip
generation, and the resultant changes in potential traffic impacts. This memorandum
documents the following updates from the original transportation impact study:
➢ Summary of Alternatives description as it relates to transportation impacts.
➢ Estimation and assignment of daily and p.m. peak vehicular project trip generation.
➢ Analysis of daily traffic volume impacts to vicinity roadways.
➢ Evaluation of level of service (LOS) impacts to the intersection of US 101 at Black Point Road.
➢ . Assessment of site access, safety, and circulation issues.
➢ Construction traffic impacts.
➢ Evaluation of on-site parking demand.
➢ Mitigation commitments and requirements.
➢ Responses to Public Comments on SETS in November 2009.
MPR Proposal Modifications that Affect Transportation impacts
As the project has progressed, and to respond to Jefferson County Board of County
Commissioners requirements and mitigation commitments made in the FEIS that addressed
a Comprehensive Plan amendment, there axe four key elements of the project that affect
transportation impacts to the vicinity transportation system:
Modifications to the distribution of land use throughout the site; most notably the
proposed Maritime Village has been relocated to the vicinity of the US 101 and Black
Point Road intersection and a larger number of proposed residential units were
relocated to the Golf Course/Golf Resort area of the site. Roughly 1/4 , or
approximately 20 units were shifted.
➢ Modifications to the proposed vehicular access to the site to consolidate all vehicular
access for new land uses to the US 101 and Black Point Road intersection. Existing
www.tenw.com
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 ♦ Toll Free (888) 220.7333
tot
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives-- Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 2
access to the marina and renovated land uses within the northern portions of the site
would remain unchanged. In addition, to accommodate transit access to the site by
both Jefferson and Mason agencies, a transit layover and bus zone would be
accommodated on-site within the southeast quadrant of the realigned US 101 and
Black Point Road intersection.
The applicant proposes to purchase two shuttle buses to transport groups to/from
the site and SeaTac Airport for conferences and other events. The shuttle buses
would also be used for group excursions within Jefferson County and the Puget
Sound area. Resort residents would also have the option of daily renting resort -
provided electrical carts to travel between the Golf Course/Golf Resort and the
Maritime Village and other internal trips. The electrical carts would be able to
circulate within the properties off of US 101 by utilizing the private frontage road
paralleling US 101 between Black Point Road and the Maritime Village (proposed
Marina Access Drive). A designated crossing point along Black Point Road would
be constructed to provide for safe crossing for both pedestrians and electric carts.
The existing substandard Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFM
boat launch access to Pleasant Harbor on Black Point Road is addressed differently
among the two MPR Alternatives. Under Alternative 1, the %VDFW boat launch
access is relocated and interconnected with the proposed Maritime Village Access
Roadway at new intersection east of SR 101 /Black Point Road, Under Alternative 2,
the WDFW boat launch access to Pleasant Harbor on Black Point Road would be
realigned east of its present location at a new intersection approximately 1,000 feet
east of SR 101 on Black Point Road.
In summary, vehicular site access would be consolidated for the Maritime Village and Golf
Course/Golf Resort at US 101 and Black Point Road under.Alteroadves 1 and 2. To
accommodate redistribution of land use within the site, the existing roadway approach of
Black Point Road onto US 101 would be shifted to the south to align with US 101 with a
nearly 90 -degree intersection angle, providing optimal intersecdon geometry. Additionally, a
new southbound left turning lane, median refuge area, and a northbound right turn lane
would be constructed at the US 101 and Black Point Road intersection.
Immediately east of US 101 along Black Point Road, a new intersection would be
constructed to provide access to the Pleasant Harbor properties north and south of Black
Point Road, provide a new consolidated connection into the adjacent %VDFW boat launch
(access at Pleasant Harbor under Alternative 1 only), provide access to a new transit
stop/layover area, and serve as emergency vehicle/maintenance access to the main Golf
Course Resort area.
The existing northern -driveway on US 101 from the Maritime Village would remain in its
present condition; however, sight distance and other safety improvements would be
constructed at its approach to US 101 and along the US 101 frontage. All other existing
access connections onto US 101 would be closed and removed. This would include access
to the northeast from the existing Pleasant Harbor Marina to old Pleasant Harbor Marina
access onto SR 101, two informal access connections directly onto SR 101 north of Black
Point Road, and closure of direct access onto SR 101 that serves a large gravel parking area
immediately south of Black Point Road.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 ♦ Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361.7333 • Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27107 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 3
Figures 1 and 2 provide exhibits of the overall site plans/circulation plans to the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Course Resort under Alternatives 1 and 2. Figure 3 provides an
exhibit of the proposed main site access intersection approved by WSDOT and Jefferson
County that would also serve as the new access to the WDFW access to the Pleasant Harbor
Boat Launch under Alternative 1. Under Alternative 2, this new intersection on Black Point
Road would only serve the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort as the WDFW access
would be relocated further east along Black Point Road. There would be three site access
roadways onto Black Point Road to serve the Golf Course/Golf Resort and Maritime Village
with Alternatives 1 or 2, including:
A private frontage road system that parallels US 101 between Black Point Road and
the Maritime Upland. Onto Black Point Road, a common 24 -foot wide frontage
road system would be located approximately 300 feet east of US 101. Beyond the
Maritime Village, the frontage roadway would reduce to a minimum of 12 feet in
width for pedestrian circulation, staff vehicles, emergency vehicles, and golf cart
access to the Marina Upland. No public vehicle access would be allowed.
Currently the WDFW driveway does not meet geometric standards, nor does it
provide adequate sight distance onto Black Point Road. This must be completed in
order to resolve driveway spacing issues and deficient sight distance conditions at
this unsafe existing intersection, and mitigates the project's traffic impacts to Black
Point Road due to proposed access and increased traffic volumes. Under Alternative
1, the existing traffic and access driveway onto Black Point Road from the State
OVDFV� Boat Launch would be realigned to intersect with the common frontage
road to the Maritime Village north of Black Point Road. Under Alternative 2, the
configuration of the Maritime Village is changed that impacts the alignment of the
roadway that serves the Maritime Upland, and therefore, the WDFW Boat Launch
access roadway would be realigned further east and intersect Black Point Road
approximately 1,000 feet east of SR 101.
➢ A proposed Marina Access Drive would serve the proposed Maritime Village,
Harbor View House, Reunion House, Bed -and -Breakfast (owned by others), and
terminate at the existing Pleasant Harbor House. A single lane, 12 -foot minimum
wide roadway above the common frontage road would provide directional vehicular
access to the reconstructed buildings in the Marina Upland area (staff and emergency
vehicles only; no public vehicle access would be permitted).
➢ A primary access roadway onto Black Point Road, approximately 1.0 mile east of
US 101 would serve all traffic to/from the Golf Course/ Golf Resort.
➢ A secondary access roadway onto Black Point Road, approximately 300 feet east of
US 101 would be gated and used for emergency vehicles and staff/maintenance
access only. A bypass path for golf cart circulation would be provided at this gate
location. This access roadway would align with the Marina Access Drive into the
Maritime Village. This proposed four-way intersection with Black Point Road would
also provide a crossing treatment to serve both pedestrian and golf cart circulation
within the properties and serve as a turnaround area and access to the transit stop
and layover space for both Jefferson and Mason transit agencies. During design
review of this new intersection, an alternatives analysis of pedestrian crossing
treatments on Black Point Road would be undertaken,
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 + Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 + Toll Free (888) 2207333
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 4
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361.7333 o Toll Free (888) 220,-7333
Maintain Existing Access on SR 101
Make Sfght Distance Improvements '
Main Pleasant Harbor Access
SR 101 /Black Point Road r" )
Two -Way Enter/Exit r'
Maritlme VilfaeeAccess
�Q P'rlmaiy Access All Vehicles
Combined with WDFW float Launch
6 `K
Golf Coarse/Conference Center
Se0 nyAlm Pdmary Access All Vehicles
Gtemc+7 amt
n y
{ 1U3-a<arcN
1'W�7 ^^ SmktYdtcH
out
Cr �j C rA S" f �• e�$ nn�o 0
h S-
s
t
PIT
PI-EASANT HARHOFi
qtr. '�•� �✓. '+� - v c, t'r,%
�� 31
MR! X314
OmSQ NsltV100R AIch.MY,i :'� �t moi' '� -.:
V�aian °na
+
Yc lUirfmnodTwtct _ _ 1
ba`e ibecerrt6er 33, xD11 • � _ ~"'"`^•�.
(Not to Scale)
Transportation
^JAccess
Engineering
t
Figure 1
�`
Project Site 8l" Plan
Pleasant
Harbor SEIS
�7 Northwest, LLC
MPR Alternative l
Jefferson County, WA
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361.7333 o Toll Free (888) 220,-7333
Malntaln Existing Access on SR 101
Make Sight Dlstance Improvements
Maln Pleasant Harbor Access
SR 101/Black Polnt Road �!
Two -Way Enter/Exit ,
4`
it
PLEASANT I•IARffUR
Da, U H"Iben Archbct 1
VIA tl'i
IxOiiF Jip
P4obcl F:arr�a JKfAWI IL -MOR
V! W Ihrs6 R+eJtc
.Fb�!Altar,.U— 21 Overall Sib �,—'
Daiv�}SacemberY3, 2031 _�_�_
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 5
Maritime Vlllige Access
Plinlary Access All Vehicles
Reall*Bned WAFW Access
G0f cm V
S((.5m Acmi
L+teiv'ry kW
JW".4f.14a'" WA".Y
(1JRhtii`13.
Golf Course/Conference Center
Primary Access All Vehicles
(lblto Scala)
Transportation Figure 2 Pleasant
Engineering Project Site & Access Plan Harbor SETS
Northwest, LLC MPR Alternative 2 Jefferson County, WA
Transportatlon Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Office/fax (206) 361-7333 e Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SMS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 6
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361-7333 ♦ Toil Free (888) 220.7333
v
a Z
n.
_ o
y
1 U
N �
Zr•USif
!� ri
�O f
_dN10 ..
bNi21 b
_
-
�
r Ci
�Z
-
��Wa' .�Xo.
aoo
M a toosn,
a '
lH5"g
5
/AT y
Q 00
—•_. Z1 -.._� �
_ •I
vr
m 3
1A 0
Do so
COO 0 '
a ad /A tl JOOS/A
h t
Figure 3
Pleasant
Transportation
Englneeeing*
SR 101 and Black Point Road
Harbor. SEIS
NoahWest, LLC
Intersection with Alternative i
Jefferson County, WA
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361-7333 ♦ Toil Free (888) 220.7333
v
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 7
Trip Generation of MPR Alternatives
The land use assumptions for Alternatives 1 or 2 would generally remain the same as those
previously evaluated at the time the DEIS was prepared for the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. Under any build alternative, the MPR proposal includes 890 residential units,
an 18 -hole golf course, and associated commercial development, The distribution of land
uses on-site changes slightly under the MPR Alternatives however, the overall trip
generation of the project development remains similar. Internal trips between on-site uses
(i.e., the Marina Upland, Maritime Village and Golf Coarse/Golf Resort) were identified to
be accommodated in the 20 percent reduction of total internal trips identified in the original
transportation impact study. Therefore, no trips were added or reduced for this assumed
roadway connection and more proximate adjacency of land uses.
Under the MPR Alternatives however, a reduction in total project trips was estimated based
on the proposal for shuttle buses to transport people to/from the Seattle -Tacoma Aitport
and for group excursion trips. Implementation of the proposed shuttle bus system would
decrease the overall level of trip making to/frorn the site. It should be noted, that these potential
reductions were not itred in design sltpporl thresholds at SR 101 and Blaek Point Road
Shuttle Bus Trips
On any given day, it was assumed that 1 shuttle bus would be reserved for transporting people
to/from the Seattle -Tacoma Airport and 1 shuttle bus would be reserved for group excursion
trips in the local area. The airport shuttle bus would most likely experience a maximum of 8
total daily trips on a peak day with morning, mid-day, evening, and late evening round -trips.
(Note that each round trip would count as two one-way daily trips). Thus, it is estimated there
would be 2 p.m, peak hour trips (1 entering trip and 1 exiting or two coaches arriving or
departing from the airport). The proposed shuttle buses would hold up to 40 passengers;
therefore, there would be a total of up to 320 passengers per day or 80 passengers during the
p.m, peak hour. Accounting for average vehicle occupancies (AVO = 1.2 persons per
vehicle), the resultant potential in trip reduction would be up to approximately 260 daily (268
daily vehicle trips minus 8 total daily shuttle bus trips) and 65 pan. peak hour trips (67
passenger trips minus 2 total p,m. peak hour shuttle bus trips).
Net Project Trlp Generatlon
Table 1 summarizes net project trip generation for Alternatives 1 and 2. As shown, net
project trip generation would be reduced as a result of the proposed shuttle bus system to
approximately 298 p.m. peak hour trips and approximately 3,840 daily trips.
Table 1; Net Project Trip Generation -- Alternatives 1 and 2
P.M. Peak
Project Alternative . Enter Exit Tris
Daily
Trips'
A[ternative 1 and 2 Project Trip Generation' 186
177 363
4,100
Less Shuttle airs Trips -35
-30 -65
-260
Alternatives 1 and 2 Net Project Trip Generation 151
147 298
3,840
1— Based upon Net Project Trip Generation identified in the Plrnwnt NortonEISTmn.gwtrlkn Impm/ SixAy, November 11, 2007.
2 -- Rounded to the nearest 10.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Sox 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361-7333 • Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives-- Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 8
Trip Distribution
Overall trip distribution and assignment would remain the same as identified in the original
transportation impact study from the site and along US 101. However, trip distribution and
assignment at the critical site access intersection of US 101 / Black Point Road and the other
site access points onto US 101 and Black Point Road were redistributed based upon site
access changes identified in the Piofect Description section above. Given these changes, level
of service impacts were reviewed only at the main site access intersection proposed onto SR
101 at Black Point Road.
Traffic Volume Impacts
The reduction of approximately 260 vehicular daily project trips and 65 p.m, peak hour trips
with MPR Alternatives 1 or 2 due to the proposed shuttle bus service would have little
change in the relative impact along vicinity roadways analyzed in the original transportation
impact study. The reduction in project trips would reduce total traffic volumes at full
buildout of the site by approximately 6 percent. Traffic volume forecasts in p.m, peak hour
at the main site access intersection are provided in Attachment A.
Intersection level of Service impacts
Intersection level of service impacts during the p.m. peak hour were evaluated at the critical
site access intersection #7 — US 101 at Black Point Road in 2017 tinder Alternadve 1 or 2.
As shown in Table 2, all stop -controlled movements at this intersection would operate at
LOS B or better with and without this development alternative in 2017, thereby meeting
adopted local and State level of service standards. Intersection turning movement forecasts
and detailed level of service summary worksheets for the US 101 / Black Point Road
intersection are provided in Attachments A and B, respectively.
Table 2: 2017 P.M. Peak Intersection Level of Service Impacts
Unsignalized
intersections
Approach
Baseline With Alternatives I
Without Project or 21
LOS Delay LOS Dela
#7 — LIS 101 at
Black Point Road
EB
-
WB
B 10 B i i
NB Lett 1
••
SB Left I
A 8 A 8
Note: AnatyAs based on HCS 2000 results using 1-ICni 2000 control delays and LOS.
1 — Updated per revised trip generation numbers.
Site Access, Safety, and Circulation Issues
This section updates the following: Site Driveway Operations, Left -Turn Lane VVarrants and
Right -Turn Lane Warrants based upon the MPR Alternatives site access and trip generation
changes previously identified above. In addition, alternatives for the existing WDFW access
onto Black Point Road are addressed.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
OfOce/Fax (206) 361.7333 o Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/2 7/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 9
Site Driveway Operations
Under either Alternative 1 or 2, critical stop -controlled entering/exiting movements at
project site driveways onto US 101 and Black Point Road would operate at LOS B or better
with little or no vehicular queuing. The critical site access intersection of US 101 at Black
Point Road would operate at LOS B or better with queues of 1 vehicle or less under
Alternative 1 or 2 at an assumed site buildout in 2017. Intersection turning movement
forecasts and detailed level of service summary worksheets for the US 101 and Black Point
Road intersection are provided in Attachments A and B.
Left -Turn lane Warrants
Left -turn movements represent critical turning movements at unsignalized intersections,
increasing the potential for intersection delay and safety issues. Based upon procedures and
guidelines found in WSDOT's Design Manual, November 2007 (Figure 910-12a Left -Turn
Storage Guidelines Two Lane-Unsignalized), a southbound left -turn lane is warranted under
either MPR Alternative. Based upon WSDOT's Design Manual, November 2007 (Figure 910-
13b Left -Turn Storage Length: T`wo Lane-Unsignalized), for a 50 mph posted speed limit on
US 101, the southbound left -turn lane should be a minimum of 100 feet. Attachment C
contains the results of this warrant analysis.
Right -Turn Lane Warrants
Right -turn movements represent critical turning movements at unsignalized intersections,
increasing the potential for intersection delay and safety issues. Therefore, at the critical site
access intersection of US 101 at Black Point Road, the potential need for a noxthbound
right -turn lane was analyzed considering typical evening commute periods.
Based upon procedures and guidelines found in WSDOT's Derign Marural, November 2007
(Figure 910-11 Right -Turn Lane Guidelines), a northbound right -turn taper/ pocket is
warranted under either MPR Alternative. Based upon WSDOT's Design Manual, November
2007 (Figure 910-16 Right -Turn Pocket and Taper), the northbound right -turn pocket
should be a minimum of 60 feet with a 100 -foot taper. Attachment C contains the results
of this warrant analysis.
WDFW Drlvecmy Access to Pleasant Harbor Boat Launch
As noted previously, the existing alignment of the WDFW driveway for the Pleasant Harbor
Boat Launch does not meet minimum geometric intersection angles or provide adequate
entering sight distance for safe egress onto Black Point Road. As such, two alternatives are
considered as part of the MPR Alternatives in development of the Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort project:
Alternative 1: Under this development alternative, the existing traffic and access driveway
onto Black Point Road from the State (\XfDFW) Boat Launch would be realigned to intersect
with the common frontage road to the Maritime Village north of Black Point Road as a "T -
intersection" interior to the site. This driveway alignment and configuration is shown
Transportation Engineering Northwest, I.I.C.
PO Box 65254 ♦ Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361-7333 ♦ Toil Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 10
conceptually in Figure 3 (provided previously). Under this access configuration, both traffic
associated with the Maritime Village and the WDFW Pleasant Harbor Boat Launch driveway
would utilize a common new intersection constructed as part of the project east of SR 101
on Black Point Road. To construct this realignment of the WDF\V Pleasant Harbor Boat
Launch driveway, substantial fill material and topography changes would be required to
construct this interior T -intersection. In addition, property transfer or stringent access
easements across private property would be needed to allow for public access to occur
within the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort properties. Although not ideal, WDFW
representatives have conceptually agreed that this access solution would be possible,
The new four way intersection onto Black Point Road and the new T -intersection interior to
the Site would be designed to accommodate vehicle -boat trailer combinations and provide
adequate queue storage and traffic operations between these adjacent intersections.
However, this configuration would mix both project -generated traffic and WDFW boat
launch traffic within a closely spaced intersection system. As such, during peak use of the
WDFW boat launch utilization that occur during several weeks out of the year, periods of
traffic congestion and vehicle queuing within this system could result. During typical and
seasonal traffic fluctuations of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort in combination
with the WDFW boat launch traffic for 50 weeks out of the year, no vehicle queuing or
traffic operational issues would occur.
Alternative 2: Under this alternative the WDFW Pleasant Harbor Boat Launch access
roadway would be realigned further east and intersect Black Point Road approximately 1,000
feet east of SR 101. As such, the new four way intersection constructed by the project just
east of the SR 101 and Black Point Road intersection as site access would not have traffic
and vehicle -boat trailer combinations turning onto/off-of Black Point Road, The new
alignment of the WDFW Pleasant Harbor Boat Launch would follow an old road grade
within property owned and managed by WDFW, and therefore, not require any easements
or property transfer agreements. As such, impacts to existing topography and public lands
would be kept to a minimum. In addition, complete separation of traffic off of the public
roadway system would be provided in this concept with construction of entirely new access
roadway that would only serve the WDFW Pleasant Harbor Boat Launch. This concept is
preferred by %VDRV representatives as wellas the applicant of the Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort project.
Construction Traffic Impacts
Statesman Corporation proposes to complete the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
,vith two main stages envisioned:
➢ Stage 1 would involve three main phases including a) site preparation, preliminary
utility development, and mass grading for future development of the Golf
Course/Golf Resort Area, b) utility development completion of major site access
improvements onto SR 101 and vicinity, site access and parking facilities to support
construction of the Maritime Village, Harbor House, and Reunion House, and c)
remodeling/reconstruction of buildings and support facilities at the Marina Upland,
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 0 Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEES MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 11
A Stage 2 would involve completion of on-site utilities and support infrastructure,
construction of buildings and golf course area, and completion of mass/finished
grading and other support facilities for completion of the Golf Course/Golf Resort
area.
A more detailed description of expected construction elements and sub -phases is provided
in the Chapter 1 of the SEIS.
Within each of these major construction stages, off-site vehicle trips would be generated
impacting vicinity roadways and intersections over the course of the 10 -year period. Given
that the first "development" within the site to be built that would generate continuous
activity is the Maritime Village (with associated supporting infrastructure) would trigger
realignment of Black Point Road near US 101, completion of major intersection and
roadway improvements at the US 101 and Black Point Road intersection would be
completed early in the construction period. As this intersection and immediate vicinity
would provide access for construction activities during the first two phases of Stage 1,
accommodation for major turning movements to/from US 101 would be mitigated by
completion of this project element.
During the course of each construction stage, three main types of traffic would be generated:
Employee trips
➢ Transportation of construction materials and equipment.
➢ Miscellaneous trips generated by agency inspectors, related business trips, etc.
Throughout the course of construction, trip making associated with these types of
construction trips would vary based on types and level of on-site construction, weather and
seasonal fluctuations (i.e., certain types of construction activities would not occur during
inclement weather or winter periods), and also be dependent on the various stages of
construction. Typical site preparation, utility development, grading, and other
earthwork/wetland construction activities would involve between 20 and 40
employees/contractors on-site on a typical weekday. However, during construction of
specific buildings or infrastructure (i.e., waste water treatment plant, etc,), an additional 30 to
40 employees/contractors would be on-site. During peak construction activities, ranges
between 75 and 100 construction employees would be on-site during periods in which
intense construction activity is taking place; generating upwards of 250 daily vehicle trips.
Transportation of materials and equipment would involve short periods throughout the
course of the day to accommodate specific equipment transfer or occur over several days to
handle specific material transport needs. During these limited periods, larger trucks would
be utilized but would typically be limited to less than 50 trips on any given day. Depending
on construction activities, truck access into construction areas would typically be completed
via the new intersection created onto Black Point Road, although occasional trips of
deliveries or equipment via other access points from SR 101 or Black Point Road would also
be required. Given that SR 101 is a principal arterial that is designed and currently handles
large truck traffic loads on a consistent basis, there is no need to establish a truck route for
Transportatlon Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 a Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 a Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 12
material hauling. Best management practices for heavy equipment or material transport
would be implemented by the contractors during construction, including necessary on-site
truck wash facilities or oversized load transport routing and operations. Based on expected
reuse of on-site materials, over 5,000 one-way truck haul trips will be eliminated by the
project during the course of construction. This would result in a reduction of over 200,000
vehicle miles of travel but large trucks, eliminating nearly 900,000 pounds of green house gas
emissions by these vehicles alone. For more information on vehicle emissions related to trip
reductions, a Carbon Neutrality Report (under separate cover) for the Pleasant Harbor Master
Planned Resort is available from the applicant.
In total, typical daily vehicle traffic generation related to construction activities are estimated
to be up 300 daily vehicle trips. This level is less than 10 percent of the total site buildout
daily trip generation under any of the Alternatives, and therefore, would not represent a
significant adverse traffic impact.
®n -Site Parking Demand
Proposed parking supply by Alternative is summarized in Table 3. Parking would be
provided in a variety of structured and surface facilities at various locations throughout the
development to meet the parking needs of each Alternative. Alternative 1 proposes 1,534
while Alternative 2 proposes 1,421 stalls.
Table 3: Proposed Parkinq Capacity by Alternative
Alternative
Structure
Parking
Surface
Parking
'total
Parkin
Alternative 1
1,001. stalls
533 stalls
1,534 stalls
Alternative 2
708 stalls
713 stalls
1,421 stalls
Source: David Hamilton Architects and the Statesman Corporation, January 2012.
Demand for parking was estimated for each land use Alternative using parking generation
rates compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Gerrerntla�r, 3`a
Edition, 2004. For those proposed uses not documented in 11aking Geseratiorr, an activities -
based parking generation analysis was conducted.
Average peak parking rates for Low-Rise/Mid-Rise Apartment (ITE Land Use Code 221),
Residential Condominium/Townhouse (ITE Land Use Code 230), All Suites Hotel (ITE
Land Use Code 311), Resort Hotel (ITE Land Use Code 330), Marina (ITE Land Use Code
420), Golf Course (ITE Land Use Code 430), Shopping Center (ITE Land Use Code 820),
and Quality Restaurant (ITE Land Use Code 931), were used in estimating parking demand
by various land uses proposed under each development Alternative.
There were no parking rates for Specialty Retail (ITE Land Use Code 814), and therefore,
the shopping center land use was applied as a conservative approach. The golf course land
use only had parking rates for the weekend, therefore as a consewative methodology,
weekday parking rates were assumed to be 50 percent of weekend parking rates since there
would generally be less golf course users on the weekdays than weekends. It should also be
noted that many of the golf course users would already be on-site vacationing in one of the
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 a Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 4 Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11 /27/07 FE'S
January 30, 2012
Page 13
residential units and would have shuttle buses or electrical carts available for use. The resort
hotel land use only had parking rates on the weekdays, and thus, weekend parking rates were
assumed to be the same as on weekdays; and therefore is also a conservative approach.
Each of the land use Alternatives include a main Resort building, where multiple functions
and activities are centered. In addition to hotel rooms, a restaurant, lounge, and other
ancillary spaces are typically found and are inherent within the parking demand for a resort
hotel land use except for conference area. Therefore based on our historical experience of
resort conference uses, an activities -based analysis of parking demand for the conference
area was conducted by TENW base upon trip type (e.g., extended conference and day
conference) as described below.-
Given
elow:
Given the relative capacity of the extended stay conference facilities (roughly 6,500
square -feet), an estimated total of 100 guests/attendees would be on-site during
peak conferencing days (assuming a 100 percent occupancy factor). In addition to
the attendees, it was assumed that spouses would accompany 25 percent of the
attendees; these individuals would use the hotel for relaxation purposes outside of
the conference periods', bringing the total guest count to approximately 125
persons during conferencing events.
Along with the extended conference trips, day conference trips are also anticipated
under a worst-case scenario. To determine the maximum level of day conferencing
activities, it was assumed that all additional meeting space on-site not utilized by
extended conferencing activities would be used. Day conference trip generation
was based on a ratio of square feet (so of conference room space to number of
attendees (assumed at approximately 50 sf/person). Assuming that the additional
conference breakout room areas would also be fully occupied during the same
periods that extended period conferencing was in session, up to an additional 50
conference attendees would be on-site; bringing the maximum number of
conference attendees to 150 persons. Given the market draw expected by the
conference facility, an average vehicle -occupancy (AVO) of 1.5 was used to
account for carpooling trips when traveling to/from the site' for both extended
conference trips and day conference trips.
For parking demand, the analysis considered the extended conference trips and day
conference trips individually over a worst-case 24-hour period. Entering and
exiting profiles of each trip group were distributed throughout the day given
knowledge of periods for conferences sessions, and arrival/ departure
characteristics of other similar conferences facilities. The analysis was based upon
a worst-case period and assumes the following:
➢ Extended and day conferencing at 100 percent utilization;
➢ Extended conference would end on a peak weekday, and another extended
conference would begin the following day. Thus, all extended conference
I Source: Trip Generation Study of Semiahmoo Resort and Conference Center, KJS Associates, Inc., August 1997.
2 Source: 'rip Generation Study of Semiahmoo Resort found an AVO of 1.5 persons per vehicle.
Transportation Englneering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 a Seattle, WA 98155
Office/fax (206) 361.7333 ♦ Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 14
attendees on-site would leave during the afternoon, typically between 3:00 p.m.
and 5:00 p.m.
Conclusion: Under these worst-case assumptions, additional peak demand for
parking generated by the conference area would be about 34 spaces at
approximately 8:00 to 10.00 a m Average parking demand throughout a 24-hour
period would be about 20 parking stalls during peak weekdays in the summer.
Parking demand was assumed tQ be the same on weekdays and weekends ,
Table 4 summarizes estimated peak parking demand by Alternative during peak weekday and
weekend day use. It should be noted, that this demand analysis does not consider shared
parking between proposed uses, and as such, represents a const native. scenario. Detailed
breakdown of individual demand components is provided in Attachment D. As shown in
'fable 4, peak parking demand for the site as a whole would be less than proposed supply
under Alternative 1, while peak demand for the site with Alternative 2 exceeds supply during
both weekday and weekend periods. Again, this analysis does not considered shared parking
that would occur between hotel resort and golf course peak patking demands which occur at
different times throughout a typical weekday or weekend day. When considering for shared
use between the hotel resort and golf course, adequate supply wottld be available as the golf
course demand diminishes after 7:00 p.m. as hotel demand increases.
Table 4: Estimated Peak Demand for Parking Stalls by Alternative
Alternative
W ekday Demand Analysis
Weekend Day Demand Anal sis
Subarea
Marina Golf
Area Area
Total
Demand
Surplus/
Deficit
Madna
Area
Golf
Area
Total Surplus/
Demand Deficit
Alternative 1
230 1,273
1,503
+57
291
1,185
1,476 +84
Alternative 2 1
248 1,264
1,512-91
307
1,192
1,498 -77
Source: TFNW using parking generation rates published by Parking Generation, 3^1 Edition, ITE.
It should be noted however, that based upon the detail parking demand analysis provided in
Attachment D, parking supply deficits are estimated to occur in the vicinity of the Golf
Resort building and in the vicinity of the Marina under Alternatives 1 and 2. Proposed
implementation of an on-site shuttle system, valet parking, and other on-site parking
management measures would provide adequate mitigation for these specific areas of parking
deficits.
It also should be noted, that currently a limited number of parking facilities are provided for
the existing Marina slips, and as such, no demand for parking is currently generated. This
parking demand analysis however, assumes parking demand would occur for the existing
Marina slips based on standard parking generation rates as published by ITE in Parkhg
Generation, as a conservative approach. As under both Alternatives, a limited number of
dedicated parking supply for the Marina is maintained, and any increase ill demand would be
shared with other land use components within the Maritime Village parking supply. This
shared parking relationship would be considered reasonable, given the existing presence of
parking supply and lack of demand for existing slip tenants.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 ♦ Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 ♦ Toil Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— )efferson County, WA
Second Addendunt Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 15
Mitigation Measures
This section summarizes the various mitigation measures proposed by the applicant to
comply with mitigating conditions in the Final EIS on the Comprehensive Plan amendment,
Board of County Commissioners conditions imposed through Jefferson County Ordinance
No. 01-0129-08, and applicable regulations.
Compflance w1th FF IS Cond/tlons
Compliance with FEIS conditions established for transportation impacts and proposed
mitigation to satisfy the conditions include:
Condition: Fully fund and construct associated improvements for Black Point Road to
meet County standards from US HWY 101 to the project entrance.
Proposed Mitigation to County Roads: Upon completion of major on-site construction
activities, Black Point Road would be upgraded to satisfy minimum County requirements for
pavement conditions and width. This work is currently identified in Stage II: Phase 2 of the
proposed construction sequence.
Condition: Provide adequate sight distance to the east of the proposed main site driveways
onto Black Point Road and the egress from the Maritime Village onto US HWY 101 to
improve and maximize entering and exit sight distance.
Proposed Mitigation for Sight Distance DfficiencT: The applicant has met with
WSDOT to discuss sight distance constraints at this existing driveway even though
development either Alternative 1 or 2 would no longer increase traffic impacts at this
location. In addition to re -grading the adjacent topography on the east side of this existing
site access roadway, guardrail, line of sight clearing, and an emergency -only zone would be
established within WSDOT right-of-way to provide for additional fire and emergency
vehicle access purposes adjacent to US 101. A right-of-way use permit would be applied for
by the applicant with WSDOT to make these proposed improvements.
Condition: At the US HWY 101 and Black Point Road intersection, provide a southbound
left -turn lane as part of project development in all scenarios except the no action alternative.
With Alternative 1 or 2, the expansion of the existing T -intersection would also provide for a
median refuge area for left turns from Black Point Road onto US HWY 101,
Condition: Provide a northbound right -turn pocket or taper at US HWY 101 at the Black
Point Road intersection.
Condition: Reconstruct the Black Point Road approach to US HWY 101 with adjacent left
turning lanes, a widened approach onto US HWY 101, and an "entry treatment" on Black
Point Road at US HWY 101. The proposed site access concept would also include a
consolidated intersection onto Black Point Road with a realignment of the WDFW boat
launch at Pleasant Harbor either in a combined or separate intetsecdon.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 a Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/fax (206) 361.7333 o Toll Free (886) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEISMPR Alternatives-- Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 16
Condition; Guests of the Maritime Village shall be given access to the golf course resort
without traveling US HWY 101. A detailed traffic design to accommodate traffic on US
HWY 101 returning to the resort must be developed, with further traffic analysis and design
approval by WDOT and Jefferson County.
Proposed Mitigation for Site Access Impact to WSDOT/County Road Intersection
and HighwaySystem: To satisfy the above four conditions, the applicant has developed
and received an approved Plan for Approval (PRA) channelization plan with WSDOT to
implement the turn lane improvements, Black Point Road reconstruction/realignment,
access consolidation, and other elements. Construction documents would be prepared prior
to reconstruction of this intersection.
Condition: Provide all access roads and internal roads available for public use to County
road standards. Private drives may be to a lesser standard approved by the Pubic Works
Department and emergency service providers during the preliminary plat phase if desired by
the applicant.
Condition: Provide an internal pathway and circulation systern within the site that would
not impact County or State highways, would provide for pedestrian and bicycle circulation
between the two main development districts, and would allow US HWY 101 bicycle traffic
bypass through the resort (i.e. Black Point properties and Maritime Village).
Proposed Mitigation: To satisfy the above I1C'9 conditions, the applicant has proposed
construction of the Marina Access Drive that would provide a. parallel route to US 101
between Black Point Road and the Maritime Village. Access to the Marina Upland area
would be provided via a paved connection with minimum width of 12 -feet for
nonmotorized, staff, emergency vehicle, and golf cart access beyond the Maritime Village.
Condition: In addition, the preliminary plat approval for the golf course portion of the
resort should evaluate trip management plans as an alternative to simple roadway expansion.
Proposed Mitigation to Reduce Off --site Traffig Impacts and Reduce On-site
Circulation: The applicant has proposed a shuttle bus system to reduce off-site vehicle
trips for airport shuttle services and excursions to local destinations. In addition, an on-site
fleet of electric carts would provide for internal travel within the site between the Marina
Upland, Maritime Village and the Golf Course/Golf Resort areas of the MPR. An on-site
layover and transit zone to accommodate intercommunity transfers between Jefferson and
Mason Transit systems as well as access to public transportation systems is proposed on the
southeast corner of the redeveloped US 101 and Black Point Road intersection.
Compilance with Board of County Commissionem Condltlons
Specific to transportation, Condition 63.c) of the Board of County Commissioners
conditions in Ordinance No. 01-0128-08 requires development of Memorandums of
Understanding (MOU) that relate to the fire district, emergency medical services, and transit.
The proposed mitigation measures support these MOD's through development of an
emergency -only space for fire service to the Marina Upland area at the existing northern
driveway access (emergency vehicle parking along US 101 adjacent to a fire water standpipe
to supplement on-site water storage for fire response), provision for secondary
fire/emergency vehicle access to the Marina Upland via the 12 -foot wide roadway and
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 a Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361-7333 o To[[ Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SETS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 17
Maritime Access Drive, significant improvements to the US 101 and Black Point Road
intersection, provisions for primary and secondary fire and emergency vehicle access to the
Golf Course/Golf Resort development area, and accommodation for on-site transit
circulation, layover, transit zone within the site.
Mitigation Required by Applicable Regulations
To satisfy Jefferson County Code with respect to maintaining :adopted level of service
standards and for driveway spacing/safety standards, the applicant proposes to construct
turning lane, intersection realignment, and access consolidation at the US 101 and Black
Point Road intersection.
Other Mldgatlon Measures Proposed by the Applicant
No other transportation mitigation beyond those elements identified above are proposed or
required by the Applicant to mitigate off-site transportation impacts.
Other Mitlgatlon Recommendations
TENW has not identified any additional mitigation recommendations.
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 o Seattle, WA 98155
Offlce/Fax (206) 361.7333 o Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor S£IS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 18
Responses to Transportation -Related Public Comments Received on SETS —
November 2009
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 2, bullet 1: While the
analysis of Transportation impacts did indicate a reduction in level of service would occur at
some of the study intersections as a result of the project, mitigation was identified in order
for level of service impacts to meet adopted level of service standards by both Jefferson
County and WSDOT.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 2, bullet 3: While
ongoing traffic counting programs have been complete by `'VSDOT and other public
agencies within the study area of the proposed project, there have been no comprehensive
Plan updates, transportation studies, or traffic impact studies of other proposed
development that would changes the baseline data, assumptions, or conclusions of the
original transportation impact analysis completed in 2007.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 2, bullet 6: Previous
comments made during the Programmatic EIS process were responded to the FEIS issued
by Jefferson County on November 27, 2007.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 5, last bullet: Existing
shoulder conditions were documented using a combination of field inventory completed by
TENW staff and highway roadway logs provided by WSDOT of existing roadway
conditions. Off-site biking is not expected by the development, although on-site trails will
be developed for both walking, bicycling, and hiking throughout the property and encourage
between various proposed land use destinations on-site. As no off-site biking is not
expected nor would it be encouraged, availability of off-site shoulder conditions in the
general vicinity on SR 101 is not project related nor would any' mitigation be warranted.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 6, bullet 1: All
recreational activities by the development are encouraged to be facilitated on-site (walking,
hiking, bicycling, water access, golf, etc). Off-site excursions would be accommodated by
the proponent through a shuttle bus system to various destinations throughout the
community.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 6, bullet 2: There is
not evidence of unsafe driving or roadway conditions evidence through review of historical
collision records or review of general geometric conditions in the general site vicinity.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 6, bullet 3: This
statement is contrary to thousands of collision records recorded and established throughout
the Country where a majority of collisions occur where drivers need to make decisions,
complete turning movements, or change speeds for such purposes described above. While
collisions do occur along roadway segments, there was no evidence noted to suggest specific
review along roadways. If WSDOT or Jefferson County had identified a specific "high
accident corridor" in the vicinity, then a review of roadway segment collisions statistics
would have been conducted. Absent this determination, this analysis was not warranted.
Transportation Englneering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 ♦ Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361.7333 a Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Pleasant Harbor SEIS MPR Alternatives— Jefferson County, WA
Second Addendum Supplement to 11/27/07 FEIS
January 30, 2012
Page 19
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 6, }gullet 4: The
transportation impact analysis does recognize and disclose the relative increases in traffic
impacts on local and principal arterial roadways in the site vicinity. These increases do
appear high given the existing low volume on certain roadway segments, most notably Black
Point Road. The applicant has been conditioned and would provide mitigation to reduce
off-site traffic impacts through implementation of a transit shuttle service and on-site
trail/circulation system between the Upland Marina and GolfCourse / Resort areas.
Response to Hood Canal Environmental Council (11/27/2009), page 6, bullet 5: Traffic
evaluation, design, and carefully planning have been developed to address this new 4 -way
intersection along Black Point Road. Access consolidation, realignment of Black Point
Road, and significant improvements along SR 101 in the Black Point Road vicinity will
mitigate these traffic impacts.
Response to Gerald Streel, PE (11/30/2009), page 3, Traffic Planning: Traffic evaluation,
design, and carefully planning have been developed to address this new 4 -way intersection
along Black Point Road and impacts to the SR 101 and Black Point Road intersection.
Access consolidation, realignment of Black Point Road, and significant improvements along
SR 101 in the Black Point Road vicinity will mitigate these traffic impacts. Site topography,
property ownership, and most importantly WSDOT Access Management Guidelines and
Standards all limit and control alternatives for site access. A majority of site access restricted
to Black Point Road was a major directive by Jefferson County and WSDOT during site
development.
Response to Gerald Streel, PE (11/30/2009), page 4, Parkingand Road Standards: There
are clear underlying conditions of approval and land use code that already drive site plan
development within this zone. In addition, the applicant has lone above these standards
through proposals for a significant trail/nonmotorized network throughout the properties
and discreet structured and surface parking to serve land uses ptoposed in each Alternative.
Response to James Pearson, Jefferson County Project Manager (11 /30/2009), entire
comment letter: All statements, conclusions, and mitigation references have been proposed
and included within each Alternative to address Jefferson Cottnty Public Works comments
with regard to Transportation Impacts.
Response to Richard Horner, PhD (12/6/2007), page 4, Potential Traffic Impacts: There
were several typographical errors within the Table referenced within the report that were
subsequently responded to and corrected in later documents within the FEIS. The relative
ranges of traffic impact cited within the text however, are accatate.
Response to Jefferson Transit (11/17/2009): Inclose coordination with Jefferson Transit,
an on-site transit facility and parking area has been identified for development within the site
within the southeast quadrant of the redeveloped SR 101 and Black Point Road intersection.
Staging for interagency transfers and access between SR 101 and the site have all been
accommodated within this proposed transit facility.
Transportatlon Engineering Northwest, LLC
PO Box 65254 • Seattle, WA 98155
Office/Fax (206) 361-7333 4 Toll Free (888) 220.7333
Attachment A
P.M. Peak Hour
`traffic Volume Forecasts
Pleasant Harb®r master Planned Resort
Alternative 1 and 2
Pleasant harbor EIS Growth Rate= 2.0%
2017 With Statesman Alternative Existing Year= 2006
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts Future Year= 2017
Ernor Exit Entor Exk
151 147 ss 50
TM INFO 2006 Existing 2097 Baseline Proiect Distribution Proiect Trips Internal Trios 2017 With Alternative 1 or 2
Count Date_ MliCa
Coots Some: TCC
7
SR 10tl BLxk Point Rd
7
SR 1011 Stack P.I. Re
T
SR 101161xk Point Rd
T
SR 1011 BI.* PO4M Rd
7
SR 10t l Block Point Rd
SR 1011 e!=k Point Rd
Count Pock
Hour.
4:005:00
0 0 4 10
0 all 0
0 0 E 12
—
{e lnaeeac. 21.5K
dt
g
%HV
PFO:
ES
WS
NB
SB
-
0.0
11.0
5.0
-
0
0.8d
O.EE
0
0
260
0
5
a
10
0116
0%
200%
d07.
J2%
100'.4
100%
0
0
700
208
47
147
151
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
620
104 157
0
50 101
e
zhtcy Stxo- 47.AW
Note: This accounts for trip reduction measures proposed by the applicant that would be up to approbenatoly 71 -'NW. LLC
260 daily and 65 p.m. peak hour trips lower than originally estimated. D010 Pd d0d: 1=12
Attachment B
Level of Service CalCUlations at
US 101 / Black Point Road and
Site Driveway Intersections
Pleasant harbor Master Planned Resort
Alternatives l and 2
Minor Street
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
general Information
Eastbound
Site Information
7
8
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
Analysis Time Period
MJR
TE'NW
2115/2011
PM Peak
10
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
#7 - SR 101 /Black Point)
WSDOT/Jefferson County
2017 Aftemative 1/2
Project Description Pleasant Harbor
L
T
R
East/West Street: Black Point Rd
T
NorthlSouth Street: SR 101
rolume
53
Intersection Orientation:
North-South
IStudy
Period hrs : 0.25
0
0
ehicle Volumes and Adjustments
0.91
0.91 _
0.91
0.91
Major Street
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Northbound
0
Southbound
114
Movement
1
2
3 4
5
6
L
T
R L
T
R
Volume
0
157
49 114
152
0
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
0.91
_0.91
0.91 0.91
0.91
0.91
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
0
172
53 125
167
0
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
15
-
-
Median Type
Undivided
_
RT Channelized
Lanes
1
0
0
Lanes
0
1
1 1
1
0
Configuration
R
T
R L
T
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Upstream Siqnal
0
0
Minor Street
Westbound
Eastbound
Movement
7
8
9
10
11
12
L
T
R
L
T
R
rolume
53
0
104
0
0
0
aak-Hour Factor, PHF
0.91
0.91 _
0.91
0.91
0.91 0.91
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
58
0
114
0
0
0
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
0
0
D
t 0
0
Percent Grade (%)
1
0
Flared Approach
N
N
Storage
0
0
RT Channelized
0
0
Lanes
1
0
1
0
0
0
Configuration
L
R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach
NB
SB
Westbound
Eastbound
Movement
1
4
7
8
9
10 11
12
Lane Configuration
L
L
R
(vph)
125
58
114
C (m) (vph)
1326
429
877
is
0.09
0.14
0.13
95% queue length
0.31
0.46
0,45
Control Delay
8.0
14.7
9.7
LOS
A
B
A
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
--
-
13
('ghts Reserved
S200OT M Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reser, ed Version 4. If
Version 4.1 f
2/17/2011
Attachment C
`earn sane Warrant Analysis at
US 1®1 and Black Point Road
Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort
Alternatives 1 and 2
' httersectlonsAtGrads Chapter910
% 'total UFIV Turning left (single turning movement)
Notes:
(1) UHV !,-,total volume from both directions.
(2) Speeds are posted speads.
Lett -'Turn Storap GLOdelinos: Two -Lane, Urlsignalized
Figure 9f O.12a
1000
900
800 %2
�rtt
O
700
600
500
GflIC
3011
Page 910.26 Design Manual M 22.01.02
November 2007
KEY:
Below curve,
not
/S�storige
needed for
capacily.
�-/ Above curve,
furiher analysis
�V recornmendod.
-r--rte--r •r -t -r -r--
Iternative
1 or 2
ho
50
GO caPh t2',
% 'total UFIV Turning left (single turning movement)
Notes:
(1) UHV !,-,total volume from both directions.
(2) Speeds are posted speads.
Lett -'Turn Storap GLOdelinos: Two -Lane, Urlsignalized
Figure 9f O.12a
1000
900
800 %2
�rtt
O
700
600
500
GflIC
3011
Page 910.26 Design Manual M 22.01.02
November 2007
Chapter 910
100
RE 80
a�
0
E
60
4
R
40
0
x
rad
� 20
M
Intersections At Grade
Consider right -turn lane lel
Consider, right -turn
pocket ar taper i'l
---Alternative 1 or 2
Radius Only')'
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Peak Hour Approach Volume (DDHV) Ill
Notes:
(1] For two-lane highways, use the peak hour DDHV (through + right -turn).
For multilane, high-speed highways (posted speed 45 mph or above), use the right -lane peak hour approach
volume (through + right -turn).
[2] When all three of the following conditions are met, reduce the right -turn DDHV by 20.
• The posted speed Is 45 mph or less
The right -turn volume Is greater than 40 VPH
The peak hour approach volume (DDHV) Is less than 300 VPH
[3] For right -turn corner design, see Figure 910-11.
[4] For right -turn pocket or taper design, see Figure 910.16.
[5] For right -turn lane design, see Figure 910-17.
[6] For additional guidance, see 910.07(3).
Right -Turn lane Guidelines[61
Figure 970-45
Design Manuel M 22-07.02
Page 970-37
1 . 0
Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort - Alternative 1
Marina and Maritime Village Area
ITE
LU Code
Size
Size
/T pe
Parking
Supply
Weekday
Weekend
Parking Parking Surplus
Rate Demand /Deficit
Parking Parking
Rate Demand
Surplus
/Deficit
Condos
230
36
units
148
1.4653
15.40
2.65
39
27
30
0.84
30
45
Quality Restaurant 931 2,500 square feet
17.20 43
Shopping Center 820 10,000 square feet
2.97 30
Reunion/Harbor House
230
24
units
34
1.46
35
-1
0.84
20
14
Marina
420
285
slips
26
0.27
77
-51
0.59
168
-142
Marina Area Total
-
-
-
208
-
230
-22
-
291
-83
Golf Course and Resort Area
Resort Hotel
330
500
units
639
1.42
4.34
--
710
78
20
-169
1.42
710
-105
Golf Course 430 18 holes
8.68 156
Conference Area 6,500 square feet
- 34
Golf Vistas - Condos/Townhouses
230
76
units
187
1.46
111
76
0.84
64
123
Sea View Villa - Condos/Townhouses
260
200
units
441
1.46
292
149
0.84
168
273
Staff/Agri Bldg - Low/Mid-Rise Apartment
230
52
units
85
1.20
62
23
1.02
53
32
Goff Course Area Tota!
-
-
-
1,352
-
1,273
79
-
1,185
167
Marina Area & Golf Course Area Total
-
-
1,560
-
1,503
57
-
1,476
84
Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort - Alternative 2
Marina and Maritime Village Area
!TE
LU Code
Size
Size
/Type I
Parking
Supply
Weekday
Weekend
Parking
Rate
Parking Surplus Parking Parking
Demand /Deficit Rate Demand
Surplus
/Deficit
Condos
230
42
units
211
1.46
61
39
36
75
0.84
17.20
2.97
35
43
40
93
Quality Restaurant 931
2,500 square feet
15.40
Shopping Center 820
13,500 square feet
2_.65
Reunion/Harbor House
230
24
units
49
1.46
35
14
0.84
20
29
Marina
420
285
slips
26
0.27
77
-51
0.59
168
-142
Marina Area Total
-
-
-
286
-
248
38
-
307
-21
Golf Course and Resort Area
Resort Hotel
330
520
units
717
1.42
738
78
20
-120
1.42
8.68
-
738
156 1
34
-55
Golf Course 430
18 holes
4.34
Conference Area
6,500 square feet
--
Golf Vistas - Condos/Townhouses
230
44
units
101
1.46
64
37
0.84
37
64
Sea View Villa - Condos/Townhouses
260
206
units
231
1.46
301
-70
0.84
173
58
Staff/Agri Bldg - Low/Mid-Rise Apartment
230
52
units
86
1.20
62
24
1.02
53
33
Golf Course Area Total
-
-
1,135
-
1,264
-129
-
11192
-57
Marina Area & Golf Course Area Total
-
1,421
1,512
-91
-
1,498
1 -77
US 101
HIGHWAY
400
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
BLACK
al.,al,1. POINT
aataaaa.■
a•• ■tilt:"
a.a a:.,.. RD.
aaaa•.{{{..
I....IN...
11:11 ala 111
111.."11:.11
..
■11
I 11.1 Y.ala
•`21Ya 1: • i { i { {
Slflilff{{��
L.a.aws'
a{j{j • y
I YYYaa.
t. 3 yY
YY/Ya.• YYY i
•.srsff lt. + 1
I •ss;;;: �1 ` Sij'33j
i■.fal �+♦ a.
Nall: ••• MIAMI
I�au ■sa q u{j{ja Yi Y
at
•rs■llal Jla.Yfff■
.aaaa • faal.lYaatl•
....alfa ala/.111{
sssa.a■ "..fall Y
alta i'■taltj
ii..a 1
1:1`1'
— alit
.YYY.11lllt
a♦QNr.af al ala {{{l
`/. ws. `t.lsjs. t a..1:
as/.Yat
►1 a
:::1—a.aaaaal3fa
aro
■uaaua■■aa
r r auau.aaaaa
vi;l i
fu • j{{
pf■ 11l111aail� 1
O.• •SI.La.11.111
�tlial111LL111♦I♦♦"all
Na,iLl l,llallllllf
etaaa.aall .lata
rYY.Ya•.A
I •1. r
r.1AN...
rrwasi•}}i;;iy++
�v.rsi•
f�.rsaaa
wrauaa•lauu ♦♦`
Ns.sslllll.tl• i�
.r./..Nal' lafl� t♦
owrsaat aaua
rrrfallll =ta} ���
arra. 1,
Ytiall t1t J!•
L/la jy llalllQY
t al j lty+{layyal tllltl•vY
A. l.1 .fil2w
Lll :aaaa■:
as u.■ �aa uilaar
1llaY• Ja lLlllw
laasa....l■l3•l•.■
1........1....3E la a■
fLl a La.at,a■f
l ta.taa lJ.. .al aatY
• Jf ll lllllalllalf
l 1l t llllll.11f■
'� ill' �llaaa,3llit
+ i� } te;•ula s. u•aafaaua \\
if ■f tt■1■lil.xii.a.wf.
r ► 1lfY.faft.a aa• lawrl a:a1
ala: lata
• all„u.a.l.a
ar�ffffrNa aaua u.QQvrssuw.a
5;—f ■!f. •2YfsvYffOw•lt
afa ..
asjAw—
.awwww��♦ � a2.rw.. u..
atirra �a }� t.Q.wsY..ss■t•
aur a y r alwww.r.w o.
you • � r • YSQQrrwluu
tar t •r V a;.w.vrw u•a■
afff�frs/ffff��a rrr ..........
Hjuaaaa-.
rr.f.oa■.■a. ...........
... u
f.�t��• ifs• 1 a{}•.1jj•l•t;■m....., f.l
f� ■i // ll
rr/a....s.ss.�Qs�fl i �11i...iiif aallYQ.f.laJla...Jl
r•//fs.s...ss�s.l.s�f..lr.• l ■Z 1111...1.if.11trf.11t ■1111:1
ra.a.rw.o.Ywfs.aaa..��ir•e ulltuauw..rs.Yf.z.a }
waa.Nr.rN�.ajyafrarrffruu ■ww.Yww uffrrrrwwu {+ _'
rNarNNw.t•ra taaffrafal r ....... f.rsrYY.raa...w.sla {
Nrt•.NrNrr.waj♦{l■•.ala■ .......Q•..f.N..■rNiv.Ot la 11 \
f-...��:A::::.# Y Is/s/sf..........0..f..�.YLa,
.ssssssOfQ•laafa�fl..■al
Ns.MSNNa��Y! . i 1•.wflvfr..3•..YNYfrYfffY.31 _
N l i..... .........art wa.
• I awvsatlaQ/rr.rYtrYa;l. a.l a.*....
w.srNrNrwrrraN. a irfff.�rrwrrruera l a a
1 arrNswvrrrrwa■ a ■ a
a ••a_�QYf::::::::A }}j1
�rfia li 1:;111;;}e}
fe fvffa
......... I! •i•......i;iaa;u la
..mfr/a ■ff ■Ysr..11a l
Qwrwf.rrraas + jjj yy
.Q..Yt.NQlla �lffrYallj x.til•lll.t.l f jt a
..arf.vsYu1 :visit' ■Yw.a 111 /1} IM. uaalu + } u a e
.aY...i 11• irsss.• fa,"I a.I .ail ■t. y l 1�
asa Ia i :acral►+ fr.rrx11j
f.f alfa: 3 ` a:fa• y �af�.u./ lal.al�:` � ii.■wf..
a.lA. i ` fall • .Ns.tl1 ...l llf i• 1 t1.r.r..• i1 y
i.ial }� • +{{{{{lt+ �#� �ir�i.a[a■..lt��f lai•�
11a ■ +�) 3N.ie,af;;i1 aa.zz..rrrrQirrt.•
*S ■av a afffarvw�stl►+
' T•i •.a)l{♦{{{
............. 1...........ONr�fSS •+Sy1�
�� ♦lltl 31'11••• fY.Q.rN�.Y.111 } •".112.1 iy ll3ftrY.r..vNNlYaljl/ :.lata
laa.rsrYrfYYYYYfa
■ti
A.
11.iZa• Y f..fY.Y.Sjf /+a llf.afll � .r.Yfssffil�
t as at•ll• ifi...'jj{•ll�t•fi.i.••fft•rQr 1111
■ 1:....1 iii•il.•ll lllall.l..)s.frYa..YQflf
a lu uaa.■■e u."t'" afrff�frQal
I a u_• SL"•all■alflw.
a tl3• y . Yrw.al[11„..
a • � � 3 a .if1.w.�r.t11y 11 .ta.�..f•
1 .. 1 •.......r..i /i{1..:. -f..•
1 l 1 il...rf�fl 1 1.33./.aa�apa.
• • SSal.iwf�r3a.i..2.OfO�Y 2ll
•l llaafff�ffifa.faYff..fss■
.IY • iilllaar�ffa■®a..Yraff
• • ,atilt { 1:21N, wfffwf�wafr�s:et
i} t j 1 a l t a luvwr�.r�Ya afrYr.rw.l1
y ai la a a.aufffffr�rai.a2.a1a
Ill al.••a. al 1l a lla.lYfffla..anff.3111
•.!• t ■1•.111 .frrria.l•
al { lila. ♦♦ / ■f l■ lwY.illa
a aaua 3 1 { lf• usuau at
"aaaa■al■ • • jala • a;i' ll.aaaaal
laatial...:2 • ......N 111.1 ti1.1.1.111 1l al.lal
aa2..a....... lll...A.if 3! ♦t t■tla.t fYYYrlf .1f.Yr.2 l.f..ill•
.............1.1.....• •• 11111: til ,lll) .Y.1/Y.w.• lf.L.f 1•
.161.1:}j al 11.111
ltl ; {{j i:;iifat lu•lia M L...........•...o11 uuf
........... 11 y • 1• jjll if 11A 211J
Y•••N Qf .•:tyfy • li.iait 1",l1t{l... ff. a 11��11}�+ s+ !i!i 1• }ijj! yy
.A•.� 1 usaaa.Luxuaaa aa. F!•• }j
ffOSN q
■•.11/filo •3al•+. u■al.aufa: a Ilia:.:.:...":....IA. •�}���i •♦�� alfa
�f ••":..a......... A.,,a33 11111 .1112 }
as■al of L■ia.t.a.a ■Zlii■
!t.■ t...........,•i1�111t111a3.f ■af.l■
rfa� �.uaulusa al hash: aaaa:. y�
r� �rYfrl�la 2ai..• ..'I...... ■frau■1
rr .Y.f•if 131.111 ►1. aura la. f....
ffA frYYYYfff.2� 11■!1 a}e ifr.iau:ass.
t artQN.���fralr�•r�o f.i.. • •� . S ■i.s.irYanrwfar.�.f�Y.rf��rel'.l.rosww.r.ar.i..:ri.;a �• ja"iulii ;al;ai::;.• [ua{+/l
�ar#ft•i
*Nit �r.rw..
la■ ............. lYff
a�:
l
A.itaf..�f1,1111
y
f•t 2YYf•a
...ffrfw�ffwaa s .........
■uwvrwuu.�..►1 r♦ al • . .acral a. ulu I•l+} illufla
al...a.a.a•....... al �•1A..:.*.Qr.t•.IYr.■•.21..,a `
..■........ 1}.+i �� •$ a..Q..rt�. .....[lata il..fa
Illy !!S Y • +l l }=a..YYr.M..lr/l.al{a.a..l •..Y...f
a i ♦r . "♦ ♦j♦j ,a../.YMia•il{'+ yII t�Y.Zf'•••♦1♦ v♦{ ylal..a•1 V
•y�311 /lEOYY/sYf.l l:lvf�..w_fil•1a•
• t t {_♦jell lla..sYY/l1 1'1 wfa.>•If.rY.f■ x..a...i.lal+jj
• ars.vssf�. ■ li..aw•!tiY�NM.�frY.Qrrrrrlll.lil[y
iS li3.fff. 333333 /I�I}laf`
•y "alar-.Ql� � l).aa1 � • 11}} ���f aa.
j♦` ■la2Yr�.YQ. yy .11.E[}} • 7 , ■
♦ .SSaft�ff..QY)! ll.a.l}}}} • ..l•i tl.i.
lN
a � aaa.ff�/.rralaat•aaa..a�� ! aaaa•
llf■ f�/...r.ax. .•ally y y .• 11.11:
of �.I..Y..ala.)ilyl� Nil • f.•ll• tat
y y■ ....�1/.sl/fuufJa ■i u.i aua #,..3■■,ann:
■
<i.Y.f.1ll■..•f..r.fOrf�N•L��.Y..• }f lai■lt■1
.Nr�wfalla■■aaaa.•• 11:11 Ia lt•"l■
�u.f alaa.aa.. r.f laal
uau a.l aaaa. ...aaua ..ala a:
aluuuuu ffwwff■■aa •u•it •:
aaaa al.al ffwwrrsu•
au# ua ■u ".aaua y ii
.. ;; •' j i;s
l/ i •11 ► j} a...N
ti
31��}}}t�I!•
DUCKABUSHI ufl�•ii..!!
OYSTER TRACTS
Yy
fiYt� .ffff�..f.rwf.all� t t YYl Il:l.a.I..al•
+
GRAPHIC SCALE \
200 400 800 1800
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 ft.
F-1 NATURAL
❑ FILL TOTAL PROJECT AREA = 253.58 Ac.
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS: 31.29 Ac. = 12.34 %
F-1 CUT
PROPOSED PERVIOUS: 222.29 Ac. = 87.66 %
PROPOSED NATURAL: 67.86 Ac. = 26.76%
Do
Figure 2.1
GOLF RESORT
GRADING PLAN
CUTS & FILLS
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M. ,
1
8LACK
POINT
RD.
i
400 0
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 400 800
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 ft.
TOTAL PROJECT AREA = 253.58 Ac.
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS: 31.29 Ac. = 12.34 %
PROPOSED PERVIOUS: 222.29 Ac. = 87.66 %
PROPOSED NATURAL: 67.86 Ac. = 26.76%
1600
Figure 2.2
MARITIME VILLAGE
GRADING PLAN
CUTS & FILLS
1 A detailed description of habitat values in areas to be cleared is provided in the Habitat
Management Plan (GeoEngineers 2008b).
' The wetland proposal will be evaluated by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology)
and County decision makers in accordance with recommendations presented in the
tGeoEngineers reports.
Onsite Gravel Processing
' Another earthwork impact would be excavation and grading in areas with suitable gravel
material to be used for onsite construction material. The intent of this element of the proposal is
' to utilize existing gravel material for purposes such as road building, utility trench backfill,
building pad construction, and building materials. The main area targeted for gravel processing
is in the east central portion of the site, where golf course fairways are indicated on the site
plan. The estimated quantity of gravel available from this source is approximately 800,000
' (check Vinnie report) cubic yards (in-place material). Using a 25 percent swell factor, it is
estimated that it would require approximately 20,000 large off-road transport vehicle trips to
move this material from the source to its final destination onsite.
' Grades will be altered, but hydrology should not be impacted significantly as areas targeted for
gravel extraction are high points where runoff has high potential to infiltrate or surface -flow to
' lower areas.
Noise associated with excavation, screening of the gravel, possible rock crushing, onsite
t hauling and distribution of material must be considered when placing the equipment and
establishing hours of operation. (Note for Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement being
prepared for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort -Vinnie) Types of machinery that may
be used for these purposes may include scrapers, excavators, bulldozers, wheeled front -
loaders; a portable screening plant, feed -hopper, portable gravel crusher, finishing crusher,
water trucks, highway/off-road trucks for transport, conveyor belt systems, and vibratory/sheep-
foot compactor rollers.
Stockpiling
' Stumps, branches, topsoil and other materials would be stockpiled on the site as clearing and
grading activities take place. Stumps, branches and other vegetative materials will be stockpiled
for possible wood chipping, saved for use in landscaping, soil amendments, salmon habitat
' enhancement or disposed off site. Live trees would be removed by mobile tree spades for
temporary storage in an onsite nursery for later transplanting within the site. Other trees and
stumps would be stockpiled for reuse in stream and wetland restoration projects. Although it is
' difficult to assess with any certainty approximate quantities of material given the varying
conditions and number of trees throughout the site, it is likely that multiple stockpiles of wood
debris approximately 25 feet high and 100 feet in diameter will exist for each area cleared.
Once each phase of the development site is completely cleared, the material will be chipped, or
' otherwise disposed off-site. Excavators, stump pullers, bulldozers and off-road trucks are
possible machinery needed for this activity.
' Topsoil material is expected to be stockpiled as clearing and grading activities occur. Once
clearing and vegetation removal has occurred, it can be assumed that roughly 3 -inches to 6 -
inches of topsoil material may be scrapped off the surface for future use. For each 1 acre
tcleared, approximately 400 to 800 cubic yards of topsoil could be scrapped from the site. This
2-6
material can be reused in areas to be landscaped, placed in non-structural embankments, or
sold for offsite uses. Topsoil stockpiles could be as large as 30 feet high and 90 feet in diameter.
' Scrapers, bulldozers, front -loaders, excavators, and off-road trucks are the types of equipment
that may be used for this activity.
' Potential Operational Impacts
There would be no clearing and grading in the developed condition of the Master Planned
' Resort after all construction is complete.
There would be no earthwork impacts if no development activity took place under the No Action
' Alternative.
2.5 Mitigation Measures
' Applicable Regulations and Commitments
To minimize potential instability associated with newly -constructed steep slopes as well as
' existing steep slopes, the proposal includes locating all roadways and building foundations
outside a setback from the top of the slope equal to the height of the slope. Where additional
geotechnical and engineering analyses show that safety requirements can be met, the width of
' this setback may be reduced (to be discussed further with Vinnie). Drainage would be directed
away from steep slopes to areas where infiltration would not impact stability.
' Mitigation measures for impacts to kettle wetlands and wetland buffers are described in a
separate technical report prepared for the project (GeoEngineers 2008a).
Noise associated with gravel processing could be addressed by appropriate location and
' orientation of plant facilities away from sensitive areas and sensitive receivers. Temporary
screens could be erected around this equipment to minimize sound levels transmitted off-site.
Consideration should also be given to the proximity of existing haul routes and batching plants
to sensitive areas and sensitive receivers. The existing haul roads on the site (former
commercial campground and logging roads) will be utilized. The gravel source and onsite gravel
processing capability would minimize the need for heavy-duty hauling vehicles to transport this
' construction material on local streets and state highways for a prolonged period of time. Most
construction vehicle traffic associated with road building would occur internal to the site.
t Vegetation stockpiles will have a relatively low potential for erosion or wind -spread particles, so
these should be located out of the way of construction activity. Topsoil stockpiles have a greater
potential for erosion by wind or precipitation; therefore, they should be covered per standard
' Best Management Practices in addition to being located out of the way of disturbance, and
away from sensitive areas.
All clearing and grading activities, including stockpiling, would be conducted in compliance with
' Jefferson County and Washington State regulations. Best Management Practices for
erosion/sedimentation control and construction stormwater management would be implemented
consistent with the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington
' (SWMMWW). Water trucks could be filled from onsite wells or stormwater ponds located on
site and be used daily for use in dust control, as needed. Additionally, exposed soils could be
covered with a number of mulch or cover materials outlined in the SWMMWW.
2-7
The applicant would be required to comply with applicable regulations for work near wetland
buffers and steep slope buffers.
Construction -related noise would be regulated by Chapter 173-60 Washington Administrative
Code (WAC). Work hours would be limited to allowable hours provided under state and local
laws. Subject to some restrictions on the duration of maximum allowable noise levels, Section
173-60-050 WAC exempts noise related to construction activity between the hours of 7:00 AM
to 10:00 PM.
Other Recommended Mitigation Measures
More thorough geotechnical evaluations could be performed to characterize subsurface
conditions at the time of each phased development proposal to address erosion potential, slope
stability, and other potential earth impacts. All proposed development should be designed and
constructed to prevent stormwater runoff from discharging onto slopes in a concentrated
manner.
2.6 Phased Development
The phased development proposal would result in preparing approximately 20 to 50 acres of
the site per phase. As residential units are constructed, sold, and the site is stabilized, the next
20 to 50 acres would be cleared for development. In this manner, only approximately 20 to 50
acres would be cleared with temporary stabilization, undergoing development, and/or awaiting
landscaping at any one time.
' The Phase 1 development area encompasses the large kettle, the smaller south kettle, the
wetland "C" area to be protected. The existing topography of the Phase 1 development area is
' rolling with the steep sided kettles. Clearing and grading in excess of 1,000,000 cubic yards of
earthwork would be required in the Phase 1 development area.
The Phase 1 proposal will include filling the kettle wetland in this portion of the site. The
' Wetland and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (GeoEngineers 2008a) describes wetland buffer
restoration and/or enhancement, and compensatory replacement of wetland for wetland fill.
It is anticipated that gravel base for the roads and building pads would come from within the
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort property. Existing haul roads (former commercial
campground and logging roads) would be used to transport material from the gravel extraction
and processing area in the eastern portion of the site to the Phase 1 development area.
As grading begins in future phases of the development, it is possible that some areas may
require more fill than cut or vise versa. Under these circumstances, it may be necessary to
move material from a future phase area (but for which a Grading Permit has been issued) to the
current phase area. Proper erosion and sedimentation control measures would need to be in
place at all locations where material is disturbed.
2-8
' 3.0 STORM DRAINAGE
' This section describes alternatives for the management and mitigation of stormwater generated
within the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. The potential impacts of storm drainage
infiltration on the Black Point aquifer are presented in reports by Subsurface Group (2008).
' 3.1 Existing Conditions
' Based on studies performed Subsurface Group the hydrology of Black Point aquifer is strongly
influenced by recharge over the upland areas including Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort.
' Project Watershed
' The site is located in the Hood Canal Watershed.
Project Sub -Basin
' The proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort development is located in the southwest
quadrant of $lack Point and along the west side of Pleasant Harbor.
' Based on studies performed by Subsurface Group (Subsurface Group 2008), the hydrology of
the Black Point aquifer is strongly influenced by recharge over the upland areas to the west of
Black Point, including Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. The Subsurface Group report
' concludes that when stormwater is infiltrated within the surface water basin in which it originates
the majority of the infiltrated stormwater enters the aquifer. However, this amount could be
increase by locating some or all of the infiltration facilities in areas where there is greater direct
' flow to the aquifer.
Topographic Relief
' Topography in the area of the project site and the Puget Sound region in general has been
formed by repeated continental glacial advances and retreats. The topography within the
' project area is rolling with numerous local depressions and kettles. Slopes range from 0 percent
to more than 100 percent. Based on aerial topographic surveys of the project site, elevations
range from a high of 270 feet in the north central area of Section 1 to 0 feet along the property
' line and within Pleasant Harbor in Section 2. Section 2, Black Point area of the project site,
contains several kettles, one occurs in low permeability soils and supports a wetland, while the
others occur in high permeability soils and are well -drained.
' Geology and Soils
' Geotechnical investigations (Subsurface Group, 2008) including 76 test pits and 14 deep
borings throughout the site, indicate that the majority of the onsite soils are Vashon Age glacial
sands and gravels. These results are consistent with the Natural Resource Conservation
t Service (NRCS) soil designations. The NRCS soil maps show onsite soils as a combination of
Grove, Hoodsport, Coastal Beaches, and Rough Broken Land series soils.
3-1
The drainage analysis performed with WWHM software, classifies the site soil condition as
either till, outwash or saturated. The soil distributions used in the WWHM drainage basin
calculations are based on the soil map prepared by Subsurface Group (Figure B.1). Their map
shows infiltration rates on the site from soil logs and proposed finished grades from the grading
plan.
Site -Specific Drainage Basins
Craig A. Peck & Associates analyzed the topographic map of the site prepared by
GeoEngineers from LIDAR data and delineated thirteen (13) existing drainage basins within
Section 1. Of these existing drainage basins, seven (7) drain away from the site, but only three
(3) of these drain directly to Hood Canal. Runoff from six (6) drainage basins enters local
depressions and remained within the site and is infiltrated. These areas are shown in Appendix
B, Figure B.1. Five (5) existing drainage basins were identified within Sections 2 . Each of
these basins drains to Pleasant Harbor.
The proposed grading plan was analyzed and seventeen (17) future drainage basins were
delineated within Section 1. (Appendix B, Figure B.2). The same five (5) drainage basins
delineated in Sections 2 were used as future drainage basins in that area of the site. The level
of detail of the delineation is appropriate for preliminary calculations and comparisons of
drainage options for the entire site. Because significant areas of clearing and grading will occur
to create fairways and developed areas, soils for the developed condition are modeled as till to
obtain conservatively high runoff rates and volumes as indicated by the conditions of approval.
Through review of the Geotechnical Report (Subsurface Group 2008) and the soil infiltration
map prepared by Subsurface Group, it was determined to select till (C) soils. Existing
conditions for the site are modeled as forested till to produce conservatively high requirements
for detention, retention, and infiltration facilities. Descriptions of the proposed graded basins are
as follows:
Basin 1:
' Drainage Basin 1 is located in the northwest area of the project site, and consists of 2.02 acres
of forest. Runoff from this basin leaves the site and enters Pleasant Harbor (Hood Canal).
Drainage Basin 1 is the proposed location of the sewage treatment plant.
' Basin 2:
Located southeast of Drainage Basin 1, Basin 2 is 3.85 acres in size. This basin slopes to the
' low point in Basin 6.
Basin 3:
' Drainage Basin 3 is located along the north boundary of the site to the east of Basins 2. It
consists of 3.4 acres. The low point occurs as a closed depression at the center of the basin.
' Basin 4:
Drainage Basin 4 is located south of Basin 3. It is 6.42 acres in size. This basin drains to a small
closed kettle where runoff infiltrates on site.
Basin 5:
Drainage Basin 5 is located south of Basin 4. It is 6.3 acres in size. All stormwater within this
basin is infiltrated in a small kettle.
3-2
' Basin 6:
Drainage Basin 6 is located west of Basins 2 and 4, and is 10.7 acres in area. All stormwater will
' drain to a created closed basin in the northeast portion of the basin for infiltration.
Basin 7:
' Drainage Basin 7 is located southwest of Basin 5 and is 6.24 acres in size.
Basin 8:
' Drainage Basin 8 is located north of the shore slope of Hood Canal in the eastern portion of the
site. It is 14.26 acres in size. Runoff is contained within the basin and is to be conveyed
northward to Basin 10 for infiltration in outwash soils with high permeability to prevent direct
' discharge to Hood Canal.
Basin 9:
' Drainage Basin 9 is located north of Basin 8 and is 19.58 acres in area. Runoff is contained
within the basin and is to be conveyed northward to Basin 10 for infiltration in outwash soils with
high permeability to prevent direct discharge to Hood Canal.
' Basin 10:
Drainage Basin 10 is located along the eastern boundary of the site, directly north of Basin 9.
' Basin 10 is 35.78 acres in size, and contains soils with the capability to infiltrate significant
volumes of stormwater. This Basin is adjacent to wetland D that is partially on site and continues
off site to the east. Runoff from the developed basin must be maintained to the wetland to
preserve its hydrology.
' Basin 11:
Drainage Basin 11 is located west of Basin 10 and contains wetland C. The basin is 1.95 acres
tin area.
Basin 12:
Drainage Basin 12 is located in the northeast portion of the site and is 10.13 acres in size.
Runoff from this basin leaves the site to the southeast of Black Point Road.
' Basin 13:
Drainage Basin 13 is located at the central kettle and is the largest of the basins with an area of
68.24 acres including the Class A reclaimed storage pond. Wetland B is located in the central
' portion of this basin. Runoff is contained within the basin, but a portion may be directed to Basin
10 because of higher infiltration potential in that basin.
' Basin 14:
Drainage Basin 14 is located southwest of Basin 13 and is 4.66 acres in area. Runoff drains to a
closed depression at its southwest corner.
Basin 15.-
Drainage
5:Drainage Basin 15 is located within the south portion of Basin 13. Basin 15 contains the south
kettle where a replacement wetland is proposed. The area of this basin is 12.86 acres. Runoff
will be limited to the hydrological requirements of the replacement wetland. Overflow runoff
during less frequent storm events will be directed to this basin from Basin 10 and 13.
3-3
C
Basin 16:
Drainage Basin 16 is located at the southwest corner of the site south of Basin 6 and is 3.42
acres in area. Runoff from Basin 16 enters a closed basin for infiltration at the southwest corner
of Basin 16.
Basin 17:
Drainage Basin 17 is located at the northwest corner of the site adjacent to Black Point Road
and is 1.29 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 17 will required detention and treatment before
release to Pleasant Harbor.
Racin 1R -
Drainage
R•
Drainage Basin 18 is located at the southwest corner of the Section 2 on the north side of Black
Point Road and is 1.25 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 18 will require detention and treatment
before release to Pleasant Harbor.
Basin 19:
Drainage Basin 19 is located north of Drainage Basin 18 in the southwest corner of the Section
2 and is 2.50 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 19 enters Stream A which discharges to Pleasant
Harbor. Runoff from Basin 18 will require detention and treatment before release to Stream A
and Pleasant Harbor.
Basin 20:
Drainage Basin 20 is located north of Drainage Basin 19 in the southern part of Section 2 and is
0.99 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 20 flows directly to Pleasant Harbor and will require
detention and treatment before release.
Basin 21:
Drainage Basin 21 is located north of Drainage Basin 20 in the northern part of Section 2 and is
2.06 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 21 enters Stream B which discharges to Pleasant Harbor.
Runoff from Basin 21 will require detention and treatment before release to Steam B and
Pleasant Harbor.
Basin 22:
' Drainage Basin 22 is located north of Drainage Basin 21 in the northern end of Section 2 and is
14.33 acres in area. Runoff from Basin 22 drains directly into Pleasant Harbor. Runoff from
Basin 22 will require detention and treatment before discharge into Pleasant Harbor.
' Proposed grading of golf course fairways 10, 11, and 12 will result in runoff flowing away from
Hood Canal in the future rather than toward Hood Canal as it does in the existing condition. This
' redirection of runoff by altering topography (i.e., regrading the area) will prevent golf course
runoff from entering Hood Canal as required by a condition imposed by Jefferson County.
IWetlands
Wetlands are present on the project site, as described in Wetland Delineation document
(GeoEngineers 2006). Wetlands are important natural resources that provide multiple
stormwater benefits, including groundwater recharge, sediment capture, detention, biofiltration,
flood attenuation, and stream channel erosion protection. Wetlands can be severely degraded
3-4
' by stormwater discharges from urban development due to pollutants in runoff and disruption of
natural hydrologic functions. Changes in water levels and changes in frequency and duration of
' inundations are of particular concern.
Three (3) wetland systems were identified on site with the first located in the large central kettle,
' the second in a smaller depression to the southeast of the central kettle, and the third along the
east central property line (see Figures 1.3 and 1.7). The two onsite wetlands are isolated
systems located in kettle basins with no outlet to surface waters.
' Delineation of onsite wetlands was completed by GeoEngineers in 2006. This delineation is the
first step to ensure that wetland boundaries are recognized.
' Hydrologic Characteristics
' Rainfall:
The average annual precipitation in the site area is over 56 inches (Bender 2008). Rainfall in the
' regional area that includes Black Point is modeled with the Western Washington Hydrology
Model v.3 (WWHM) accepted by Ecology as a continuous simulation model. Historical rainfall
information incorporated into the model was provided by 17 precipitation stations representing
the different rainfall regimes in western Washington. WWHM uses long-term (43 to 50 years)
t precipitation data, and based on the site location, determined a precipitation factor varying from
1.33 to 1.44 relative to the Quilcene station across the site. The higher factor was used for the
runoff analysis for the site — see Appendix A.
' Runoff/Infiltration/Groundwater:
' Approximately half of the 81 -inches (as adjusted from 56 -inches above using the WWHM
precipitation factor of 1.44) (Scott?) of annual precipitation that falls on the site is currently lost
to the combined effects of evaporation and transpiration, and nearly all of the remainder
t infiltrates to groundwater (Subsurface Group 2008). Only seasonal temporary surface water
conditions have been observed onsite (Bender 2008). Infiltration of precipitation and surface
water seepage account for the primary sources of aquifer recharge.
' 3.2 Proposed Developed Conditions
' This section describes the stormwater management proposal for the Master Plan Resort. Table
3.2.1 shows the approximate developed -condition impervious area. Final site design will occur
at the time of each phased development application, and will identify smaller sub -basins
' including offsite areas, if necessary. The calculations included in this report were based on
developed land cover over till soils for conservative runoff results to estimate the impacts of
development on storm drainage runoff.
' 3.2.1 Preferred Alternative
' The building densities and area of open space are important in determining the amount of
impervious and pervious surfaces, both of which are significant inputs to stormwater drainage
models.
1
3-5
The Preferred Alternative would result in approximately 85 percent of the site being open space
in the form of natural areas, buffers, and golf course.
Pervious areas would be a mixture of native undisturbed areas, replanted vegetation areas, and
golf course grasses. Natural forest areas remaining and replanted native vegetation would
provide open space to maximize the benefit to the hydrologic cycle.
In the final design, where development patterns and topography allow, more numerous local
small drainage facilities would be designed rather than the larger facilities with larger
conveyance systems described in this analysis. To the extent possible runoff from roof areas
would be infiltrated near the structures producing the runoff. This approach to stormwater
management would be used to more closely mimic the pre -developed hydrology of the site.
3.2.2 No Action Alternative
Under the No Action Alternative, it is assumed that the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
site would remain as a commercial campground, and would not require stormwater
management facilities. The existing pervious and impervious surfaces, including buildings,
paved and unpaved roads, and paved and unpaved campsites, unless changed would continue
the current runoff regime. The natural depressions and vegetation results in nearly all of the
onsite precipitation infiltrating, evaporating, or being transpired by existing vegetation.
3-6
' Table 3.2.1. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort projected impervious
cover in Preferred Alternative.
BASIN
Area
(in acres)
Proposed Impervious
Surfaces
(in acres)
1
2.02
1.35
2
3.85
0.90
3
3.40
0.14
4
6.42
1.56
5
6.30
0.07
6
11.29
1.47
7
6.60
0.00
8
14.63
0.31
9
21.05
3.00
10
35.78
0.00
11
1.95
0.00
12
10.13
2.52
13
55.52
12.91
14
4.66
0.00
15
12.86
2.26
16
3.42
0.00
17
1.29
0.95
18
1.25
0.72
19
2.50
0.89
20
0.99
0.35
21
2.06
0.56
22
14.33
2.40
TOTAL
222.3
32.36
Source: Site Plans, Appendix A.
3-7
' 3.3 Stormwater Management Standards
' The SWMMWW includes the latest technology and sciences. However, Jefferson County has
required a more stringent restriction than the SWMMWW by mandating that no runoff from the
golf course development is to enter Hood Canal regardless of the size or frequency of the runoff
' event. This requirement is understood to restrict direct runoff to Hood Canal from specifically the
golf course fairways within the Master Planned Resort. Runoff from areas other than the
fairways that discharge to adjoining properties would be permitted to leave the site following
' control and treatment following SWMMWW requirements. Examples of these areas of the
development include the marina village, parking facility fronting Black Point Road, treatment
plant, and treated fairway discharge to wetland "D" along the east property line. However,
SWMMWW addresses control of runoff up to the 50 -year event and not less frequently occurring
events such as those that could have a return frequency of 500 years or longer. Estimates of
these runoff rates and volumes from these events have not been prepared. By extrapolating
' rainfall data for the single event from isopluvial maps or from data used to develop the WWHM
continuous model, higher rates of rainfall can be developed to project this runoff. However, if
the runoff direction has been changed to prevent direct discharge to Hood Canal from the golf
' course, the runoff rate and volume may be immaterial. Runoff rates computed using the SBUH
single event model and WWHM continuous event model have been compared for the 100 -year
event and were found to be approximately equal (see Appendix B). In the final design of the
stormwater facilities, increases in retention, detention, and infiltration facilities would be
' incorporated if required by Jefferson County.
The stormwater management techniques of Low Impact Development differ from traditional
' development in that they are applied at a smaller scale and are designed to more closely
replicate pre -development hydrology by managing stormwater closer to its source in small
drainage areas, rather than creating large stormwater facilities for larger drainage basins.
' Techniques that retain or replace natural land cover, minimize impervious surfaces, and
maximize infiltration of stormwater should be used as much as possible to enhance aquifer
recharge that currently occurs on the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort site.
Representative methods for stormwater quality treatment are described below in Subsection
3.5.
' 3.3.1 Stormwater Quantity Control
The goal of stormwater quantity control is to protect downstream areas from erosion and
' flooding due to increases in the rate and peak frequency of runoff from developed areas. As
presented earlier in the report, the proposal site contains many closed basins with no offsite
downstream discharge. The Maritime village area discharges directly to Hood Canal therefore
' prevention of channel erosion due to increases in runoff rate and frequency would be required.
SWMMWW requires that runoff rates from developed areas must not exceed pre -developed
rates ranging from 50 percent of the 2 -year peak flow up to 50 -year peak flow. Traditional
' methods of stormwater quantity control typically include a series of storm drain pipes or surface
structures to convey runoff from the project site to large retention/detention ponds or infiltration
ponds at the low end of the site drainage basin.
7
3-8
1
1
Flow control standards of SMMWW are used to determine if a proposed stormwater facility
would provide a sufficient level of mitigation for the additional runoff from developed areas of the
proposal. Two flow control standards in the SWMMWW - "Flow Control" and "Wetlands
Protection" - specify flow frequency and flow duration ranges for which post -development runoff
cannot exceed pre -development runoff. Wetland Protection requires that discharges to wetlands
must maintain the hydrologic conditions, hydrophytic vegetation, and substrate characteristics
necessary to support existing and designated beneficial uses.
The WWHM is a continuous runoff model, developed through funding by Ecology. This model is
used to size stormwater control facilities to mitigate the effects of changing land cover due to
development. The model is based on long-term rainfall data collected in the local area, and is
expected to produce a more accurate estimate of basin runoff than single -event models that
were used prior to the development of the WWHM. The Quilcene weather station is used by
WWHM to predict rainfall amounts and duration for the Black Point area using a multiplication
factor of 1.44 to model increased runoff quantities.
Drainage calculations using WWHM methodology have been completed for each of the
seventeen (17) basins described earlier in this chapter. For each basin, calculations were
performed to determine both the total stormwater runoff in the developed state and the facility
volume necessary to provide 100 -percent infiltration or to meet SWMMWW standards of
discharge. The results of these calculations are shown below in Tables 3.3.1 and 3.3.2.
Infiltration rates used in these calculations were based on the information provided in Figure
A.1. Large infiltration beds or retention ponds associated with the golf course will be used as
the primary means of stormwater management analysis; the volume required for these facilities
is presented in Table 3.3.4. During final design, sub -basins within these larger basins will result
in the number and actual size of facilities.
' 3.3.2 Stormwater Quality Treatment
Water quality treatment facilities are designed to remove pollutants contained in stormwater
' runoff. The pollutants of concern include sand, silt, and other suspended solids; metals such as
copper, lead, and zinc; nutrients, bacteria, viruses, organics, and pesticides. The size of the
required water quality treatment facilities have been determined by the volume of runoff
' predicted during the 6 -month, 24-hour storm using the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph (SBUH)
method. The facilities may be sized to contain the runoff volume from the 91St percentile, 24-
hour runoff volume resulting from the WWHM continuous runoff model.
' Results from calculations using the SBUH method are contained in Table 3.3.3 (and in Appendix
B) and identify minimum water quality volumes. The volumes presented in the table are from
' total runoff volume for each basin area runoff in the developed condition. Runoff from most roof
surface materials is not currently required by SWMMWW to received treatment. During final
design, these volumes and others not required to have treatment would be deducted from the
' total shown in the table. Single facility sizes are presented for each basin, but during final
design, to the extent possible, multiple smaller facilities would be used within the drainage
basins.
3-9
ITable 3.3.1. Estimated Stormwater Runoff Rate
BASIN
Area
(in acres)
Stormwater Runoff Rate
100 -Year Event (cfs)'
1
2.02
2.41
2
3.85
4.47
3
3.40
3.74
4
6.42
7.40
5
6.30
4.72
6
11.29
12.38
7
6.60
7.25
8
14.63
15.56
9
21.05
15.74
10
35.78
39.3
11
1.95
1.33
12
10.13
11.77
13
55.52
64.06
14
4.66
5.12
15
12.86
10.40
16
3.42
3.76
17
1.29
1.67
18
1.25
1.31
19
2.50
2.27
20
0.99
0.89
21
2.06
1.78
22
14.33
11.64
TOTAL
222.3
See Appendix B for detailed calculation output.
3-10
1 Table 3.3.2. Estimated Required Volume for Infiltration Facilities
BASIN
Total Area
(in acres)
Infiltration
Rate
(in/hr)
Calculated WWHM Volume for
Infiltration Facilities (acre-feet)'
1
2.02
10
0.464
2
3.85
10
0.762
3
3.40
10
0.571
4
6.42
10
1.499
5
6.30
10
1.551
6
11.29
10
2.477
7
6.60
3
4.301
8
14.63
10
4.743
9
21.05
15
2.564
10
35.78
15
2.564
11
1.95
1
0.991
12
10.13
15
0.764
13
55.52
22
3.309
14
4.66
5
1.604
15
12.86
3
7.050
16
3.42
4
1.357
17
1.29
10
0.123
18
1.25
N/A
N/A
19
2.50
N/A
N/A
20
0.99
N/A
N/A
21
2.06
N/A
N/A
22
14.33
N/A
N/A
TOTAL
222.3
' ' See Appendix B for detailed calculation output
3-11
Table 3.3.3. Estimated Required Volume for Water Quality Treatment - Wet Pond
Facilities.
BASIN
Total Basin
Area (in
acres)
Estimated Required Volume for water quality
treatment - wet pond facilities
(in acre-feet)
1
2.02
0.3739
2
3.85
0.5806
3
3.40
0.4468
4
6.42
0.9681
5
6.30
0.8279
6
11.29
1.6561
7
6.60
0.8201
8
14.63
1.8740
9
21.05
2.8221
10
35.78
4.7022
11
1.95
0.2563
12
10.13
1.5276
13
55.52
8.3724
14
4.66
0.6124
15
12.86
1.8535
16
3.42
0.4494
17
1.29
0.2528
18
1.25
0.2248
19
2.50
0.3943
20
0.99
0.1561
21
2.06
0.3106
22
14.33
2.0654
TOTAL
222.3
1 See Appendix B for detailed calculation output
3.4 Project Impacts
Stormwater impacts from the proposal include increases in the rates and volumes of runoff from
the developed surfaces as predicted by WWHM. These increases vary in each basin depending
on the changes in character of the impervious surface, pervious surface type, and topographic
changes. Basins 1 and 17 are examples of larger percentages of change because of
significantly higher percentages of impervious surface being constructed. The increase in runoff
rates are 59 percent in Basin 1 and 73 percent in Basin 17. Basins 10 and 16 are examples of
lower percentage of change because of changes from forested to more open golf course
surface. The increase in runoff rate is 47 percent in both Basins 10 and 16. There would be no
3-12
alteration of stormwater runoff, infiltration, evaporation or transpiration if no development activity
took place under the No Action Alternative.
Beginning in 2006 and continuing into Spring of 2008, Subsurface Group, LLC conducted field
investigations and a groundwater modeling program to assess potential impacts to the aquifer
that could result from stormwater and possible reclaimed water infiltration within the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort development. Preliminary results from those studies indicate
that development will increase groundwater recharge by approximately 10 percent given the
removal of vegetation that currently allows some stormwater to evaporate and additional
stormwater to be transpired by the existing vegetation.
Potential Construction Impacts
Construction stormwater impacts associated with site development would be largely related to
the potential for wind and water erosion of disturbed and exposed soils during earthwork
activities that are described in detail in Chapter 2 of this report. During construction, stormwater
management measures described in Section 3.5, should be implemented to limit or reduce
potential impacts for sediment laden water and wind blown particles to leave the site.
It is not anticipated that sediment -laden water from exposed soils located within the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort development could enter Hood Canal directly or leave the
project site, provided that proper protective measures are taken. Hood Canal and Wetland "D"
could receive possible sediment -laden water if proper protective measures are not taken;
however, final design of the proposal would include erosion/sedimentation control best
management practices (BMPs) to protect these areas.
Other areas of the proposed development would direct runoff to existing or newly -created
depression areas that either infiltrate water into the ground, or detain surface runoff for
treatment and release to either an onsite area better suited for infiltration or release to adjacent
downslope properties. The infiltrated water would likely be relatively clean given the distance
infiltrated surface water would take to reach the aquifer.
Along the perimeter of the proposed development, it is possible that sediment -laden water from
' either existing areas or newly -graded areas could cross the property line onto adjacent land
parcels if proper mitigation measures were not installed. Grading activities (described in Chapter
2) would alter the size of the existing drainage basins. If altered, stormwater drainage
' characteristics would change by directing runoff from an existing basin to another location within
a different basin. Areas within the proposal site containing soils with higher rates of permeability
would receive runoff from areas with soils with lower rates of permeability. Detailed final designs
' would redirect runoff into a different basin with better permeability so that runoff is retained on-
site. Redirection of stormwater in this manner could have impacts to existing wetlands and the
aquifer.
l
3-13
1
F_
L
Potential Operational Impacts
Operational Impacts associated with stormwater can be characterized as changes in the
function of the existing drainage systems as the site changes over time. Forest areas, local
closed depressions or kettles, and wetlands that currently detain and treat stormwater runoff
would be altered. Changes to stormwater quantity and quality would occur with development.
Stormwater Quantity Changes:
The amount of rain that falls onto the site would be no different from the existing condition. The
differences occur in the amount of runoff that occurs when stormwater comes into contact with
the ground or vegetation. On the project site in its current developed state as a commercial
campground with a low percentage of impervious surfaces compared to areas of vegetation,
rain that falls on the site might not infiltrate to the aquifer. Instead, the runoff could pond in areas
with low permeability soils or remain on tree branches and evaporate into the air. Vegetation will
also use water in shallow soils to survive, transpiring the water back into the atmosphere.
Findings of groundwater and transpiration studies indicate that the proposed development would
increase the stormwater recharge into the groundwater by approximately 10 percent as a result
of removing existing vegetation (Subsurface Group 2008).
Section 3.2 describes proposed developed conditions of the site as existing impervious surfaces
' and vegetation is replaced with new impervious surfaces and less permeable surfaces on the
golf course and landscape areas (Table 3.2.1). By removing existing vegetation and replacing it
with impermeable surfaces and landscape areas and golf course surfaces with less transpiration
' characteristics than existing vegetation, the impact would be an increase in total runoff that
enters the drainage facilities of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort.
' Stormwater Quality Changes:
The project site in its currently developed condition contains pollutant -generating impervious
' surfaces; therefore, the quality of stormwater runoff that infiltrates into the ground could be
expected to contain pollutants. New pollutant -generating imperious surface roads and parking
lots and pervious surfaces of the golf course would introduce additional quantities pollutants to
' the site during construction, and long term in the form of oils, gasoline, other mechanical fluids
used to operate motorized equipment, and materials used to maintain the golf course
vegetation. These pollutants would have the potential to degrade the quality of water being
' infiltrated into the ground if not properly treated.
Operational impacts from stormwater development would also constitute post -construction
' impacts, in the form of dealing with permanent water quantity and water quality control facilities
and their associated maintenance requirements. Stormwater management facilities within
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort would be owned by the owner/developer and the Home
' Owners Association (HOA) (?) after construction is complete and buildings are individually or
collectively owned. The Jefferson County would only own and maintain stormwater management
facilities that serve the public right-of-way for Black Point Road.
' Each stormwater management facility would need to be periodically observed and maintained to
ensure design performance. A procedure for this observation and maintenance would be
created during final design and approval process.
1
3-14
1
' 3.5 Mitigation Measures
' It must be shown that proposed development and associated construction activities would not
adversely affect aquifer recharge, would comply with local, State and Federal source protection
requirements, and would meet the water quality requirements of SWMMWW.
' This proposed development would mitigate the impacts identified in Section 3.4 above as
outlined within applicable laws. Permanent and temporary erosion/sedimentation control
' facilities would be designed during final design and installed during the construction process.
Probable treatment methods used in the final design to accomplish this goal are described in
this section.
' Erosion/sedimentation control (ESC) measures are both proposed and required to minimize
these effects. ESC measures would minimize soil erosion once the natural vegetative cover has
' been removed, and would minimize the occurrence of sediment from those same areas
migrating into wetlands, streams, or Hood Canal. Within the limits of Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, water bodies to protect include delineated wetlands that will remain, the
' created wetland, streams, Hood Canal, and the aquifer.
Applicable Regulations and Commitments
' At the time of this writing, applicable stormwater management regulations include the Ecology
Ecology 2005 SWMMWW. The SWMMWW would be the current governing document;
therefore, all stormwater management facilities for the site, both during construction and in the
' developed condition would be designed and maintained in accordance with this guidance.
The Stormwater Management Plan to be developed during the final design phase for this
' development will comply with the current SWMMWW. The Plan also commits to implementing
new technologies Jefferson County will adopt over time as this development is constructed, as
well as the use of sustainable design techniques.
Prior to any construction activity on site, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Construction Stormwater Permit will be obtained. This permit will notify the appropriate
authorities of construction activities that have the potential to discharge sediment -laden water to
waters of the State, so that regulatory agencies can observe such activities to make certain that
no such discharge occurs, and work with the contractor to implement more appropriate in-place
ESC measures, if necessary.
Also before construction is permitted, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan will be prepared that provides
guidance to the contractor on how to deal with varying degrees and types of runoff problems to
prevent sediment -laden water and wind-blown particles from leaving the site, as well as how to
manage spills and accidents in the event that a spill occurs. The target area would not be the
entire Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort site, but rather the smaller more specific area
under construction at any given time. Multiple SWPPPs and SCPPs will be prepared over time
as the site is developed. The SWPPP and SPCC should address protection of abutting
properties (developed sites, wetlands, steep slopes, drainage systems, etc.) from areas
undergoing development, or areas being used to support construction, including but not limited
to gravel processing areas, vehicle staging areas, stockpile areas, etc.
3-15
' The intent of the SPCC Plan is to ensure that contractors are capable of containing spills, even
toxic spills as soon as possible before harmful substances could enter surface or groundwater
' systems. The SPCC would not guarantee that spills would not leave the site; however, they
function to prevent such occurrences to the extent practicable.
' To the extent that ESC, SWPPP and SPCC Plans are properly and effectively prepared, made
available and implemented during design and construction, the potential for water quality
degradation downstream, within groundwater areas, and the aquifer is expected to be
tminimized.
During development of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort site, drainage basins will be
' segregated into multiple sub -basins to provide both water quality and quantity control as close to
the point of origin as possible, or as needed to get stormwater to those areas best suited for
infiltration. The goal of 100 -percent dispersion will be attained with multiple infiltration facilities
' intermixed within the development, to capture and infiltrate smaller portions of stormwater runoff
near the point of origin. Ecology has established BMPs that include schedules of activities,
prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, managerial practices, and structural features
' to prevent or reduce adverse impacts to waters of the State. BMPs for long-term management
of stormwater at developed sites can be divided into three main categories:
♦ Practices to address the amount and timing of stormwater flows
' ♦ Practices to address prevention of pollution from potential sources
' ♦ Practices to address treatment of runoff to remove sediment and other pollutants.
The first and third categories are addressed in detail in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 of this report.
' The second category of BMPs typically involves guidance on day-to-day activities, as they apply
to different land uses, and therefore, is not applicable to long-range planning. The section below
further expands on the third category: treatment of runoff to remove sediment and other
' pollutants in order to provide an overview of design alternatives.
A step-by-step selection process for stormwater quality treatment facilities has been developed
' by Ecology and serves as a guide to determine the level of treatment necessary based on land
cover and land use prior to infiltration. Due to the diversity of uses in a sustainable -developed
Master Planned Resort, different combinations of methods for runoff treatment may be used
' during final design of the stormwater management system, including:
Wetpools:
Wetpools provide runoff treatment by allowing settling of particulates during quiescent conditions
' (sedimentation), by biological uptake, and by vegetative filtration.
Specific BMPs such as Wetponds, Wet Vaults and Stormwater Treatment Wetlands may be
' used for small drainage areas such as parking lots or small sections of residential areas. This
type of treatment option may be considered for areas with poorly draining soils that would not
support infiltration facilities.
3-16
' Biofiltration:
Biofiltration uses vegetation in conjunction with slow and shallow -depth flow for runoff treatment.
As runoff passes through the vegetation, pollutants are removed through the combined effects of
filtration, infiltration, and settling.
' Specific BMPs such as Basic Biofiltration Swales, Wet Biofiltration Swales, Basic Filter Strips
and Narrow Area Filter Strips would be used in the final design as treatment components for all
proposed land uses on the site.
' Oil/Water Separation:
Oil/water separators remove petroleum product residues floating on top of stormwater. There
' are currently two general types of separators — the American Petroleum Institute (API)
separators, and coalescing plate separators. Both use gravity to remove floating and dispersed
oil.
' Oil/water separation BMPs could be used in final design for parking lots or in areas of high
volumes of vehicle traffic.
' Infiltration:
Infiltration refers to the use of the filtration, adsorption, and the biological decomposition
' properties of soils to remove pollutants. Infiltration can provide multiple benefits including
pollutant removal, peak flow control, groundwater recharge, and flood control.
Specific BMPs such as Infiltration Basins, Infiltration Trenches and Bio -infiltration Swales would
be used during final design in all areas in the project, with treatment provided if necessary.
Infiltration in some form would be the primary means of aquifer recharge for the Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort development. Multiple facilities with small drainage areas would be the
' preferred alternative during the final design process. Infiltration trenches located beneath
roadway margins to treat roadway runoff and within fairways with soils having higher
permeability to infiltrate large volumes of project runoff are one probable options in this project.
' Filtration:
Various media such as sand, perlite, zeolite, and carbon can be used to remove low levels of
' total suspended solids from stormwater. Specific BMPs such as Filtration could be used during
final design in areas of the project such as the marina village where limited area for use of other
BMPs are available. Treatment vaults containing these media could be used prior to discharge
' to Hood Canal.
Emerging Technologies:
These are new technologies that have not yet been evaluated using approved protocols, but for
' which preliminary data indicate that they may provide a desirable level of stormwater pollutant
removal.
' Some of the emerging technologies may turn out to be excellent options for the Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort project. Catch basin inserts and manufactured storm drain structures
' continue to undergo testing. Both provide stormwater treatment options that maximize limited
useable space. Permeable pavement is also a treatment option that could be used during the
development of this project. Pavement is a major contributor to developed -condition runoff.
Significant reductions in runoff can be realized with the use of porous asphalt and concrete,
3-17
J
aggregate pavers, and plastic grid systems. Roadways, driveways, parking lots and sidewalks
could all be constructed with permeable pavement systems.
Bioretention areas, also called "rain gardens," are shallow landscaped depressions that can be
integrated into parking lots, along roadways or other areas of commercial or residential use as a
landscape amenity. Stormwater treatment occurs in rain gardens through the chemical,
biological and physical properties of plants, microbes and soil filtering stormwater pollutants.
The dual benefit of stormwater treatment and landscape area make this form of treatment an
efficient and sustainable option for many small drainage area settings.
Other Recommended Mitigation Measures
Possible mitigation measures to be considered include:
Stormwater Infiltration
There are some areas within the site that have low to moderate rates of infiltration. Until the
actual allowable rate of infiltration of the soil at each facility can be determined, the facilities may
need to be sized to retain water to allow for a slower release.
I
Wetlands
F
L
The stormwater design team will work closely with the wetlands biologist to develop a
stormwater management system that would minimize hydrologic alterations to existing wetlands.
Stormwater Pumping
In drainage Basins 8 and 9 where runoff has a high potential to enter Hood Canal, construction
of large embankments that change the direction of surface flow would direct runoff away from
Hood Canal and into detention ponds that would be sized during final design to collect and hold
the runoff. This runoff would be conveyed to Basin 10 by a combination of pumps and gravity
flow pipe systems. This concept is illustrated in Appendix B, Figure B.3. Surface ponding area
and subsurface infiltration beds designed into the golf course fairways would be constructed
using soils processed on the site with suitable rates of permeability to treat and infiltrate
stormwater to the aquifer. Pumps equipped with emergency power supply for use during power
outages would eliminate direct discharge to Hood Canal from these basins.
Rainwater Harvesting
Measures such as rainwater harvesting (i.e., collecting and storing stormwater for beneficial
use, such as irrigation, fire flow, etc.), and drought -tolerant landscaping could minimize potable
water supply requirements for irrigation. Although rainwater harvesting may not be economical
on a large scale, it is a measure that could be implemented on case-by-case basis. It is worth
noting that rainwater harvesting could trigger water rights issues that would need to be
considered.
3-18
IReduce the Quantity of Stormwater to be Infiltrated
' Measures to reduce the amount of stormwater to be infiltrated could include increasing
evaporation and transpiration by introducing vegetation that requires significant quantities of
water to survive, and/or reducing the amount of new impervious surface proposed. Certain
' areas of the site not planned for development could be reserved for maintaining or adding
vegetation to maximize evapotranspiration. Reduction of roadway width to the minimum
acceptable to Jefferson County and the local fire district would reduce runoff quantities.
' 3.6 Phased Development
' As described in Section 1.3 of this report, the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort would be
developed in phases over approximately 10 years. The planning and approval process for the
Master Planned Resort will allow a creative approach to designing stormwater management
' systems that will be sustainable, efficient, and consistent with emerging technology. Treating
stormwater in small facilities close to the source could simplify phased development of the site.
Small onsite stormwater management facilities, as well as larger facilities can be built as
' development occurs. Areas with poor soils and low infiltration rates have been identified and
incorporated into planning for stormwater management facilities.
' Stormwater runoff that will be infiltrated in the Phase 1 development area located in the central
and southeast portion of the site has the potential to impact the aquifer. Phase 1 development
will include clearing and mass grading of the large kettle, southeast embankment area, and
construction of the Terrace 1 building. The Subsurface Group report will identify the impacts of
' infiltrated stormwater from this phase of the development on the aquifer. Design of the
stormwater management system will rely on this information to mitigate adverse impacts using
methods similar to those described above in Section 3.5.
Each phase of the project will have stormwater management facilities designed for that area of
the site. However, there may be opportunities to create larger regional facilities to better utilize
' site characteristics that would increase infiltration into the aquifer. Design and construction of
larger regional facilities with the capacity to handle runoff from future phases of the development
may optimize resource use by increasing aquifer recharge.
3-19
4.0 References
Esvelt. [date]. [enter complete report title, etc.]
GeoEngineers. 2006. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Wetland Delineation, Jefferson
County, Washington
GeoEngineers. 2008a. Wetland and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, Brinnon Master Planned
Resort
Geo Engineers. 2008b. Habitat Management Plan, Brinnon Master Planned Resort, Jefferson
County, Washington
Puget Sound Action Team, January 2005. Low Impact Development, Technical Guidance
Manual for Puget Sound. Publication No. PSAT. 05-03.
Subsurface Group. 2008. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort — Water Supply and
Groundwater Impact Analysis. Statesman Corporation
Washington State Department of Ecology, Criteria for Sewage Works Design (Orange Book),
Revised November 2007. Author(s), Water Quality Program. Olympia, WA.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2005. Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington (SMMWW).
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2007. (Ecology) and Washington Department of
Health (DOH). 1997. State Water Reclamation and Reuse Standards. Olympia, WA.
4-1
W
0
W
CL
CL
Q
J
_ s _
SASI
--�--r ,/-` - %y�,f i`� f� ,/• ; / t�S f3-203
13 201
k.A •
J^ J r I •f�,.l� r, r fl
BASIN,21 _
J
B A5I 1f
- y {'a TP 5
1 i( irTn-6
E;3
BASIN- ; 8
11
9ASIN-1 j -_.--1 IN
�.
O
i
S
nn lit
L•
,
BASIN -20
�_. 4, f
I
Op
i. .
�7 }
TP -35
,
�/[elYalerq ka'.;i T.W
,3A 7F1 U-101 TP1tY ;j lt//J
r.ATP 33- ! T it.g )`� SIT
TF 1d'%......... . f rP se
.. �iO3
TP•T /
r8-105
Tr J
MIi b
A
iE-rP 25 YY
TP 3a
Ja
........... r3
Y. ilkia 10
,T TP -.6':
;, nwJr �- ZTF 50
� :1
'.P-5 TP -21, �TP.3? •,•� Amer CGWeIR1
Kettle COP -19
p)-06
a_ /
■:
...........
•t;. ...:
IT-,� ' rng'an
T b5
•'lj'i . 1...... ..... F -
4T
T_ I -d6
91 TP -92
iMTPS1
Figure A-1
SOIL INFILTRATION RATES
Feet
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
Datum: NAVD88
Contour Interval is 20 ft.
SOIL INFILTRATION MAP
1=1111 111W11111111111 III III IIIII
111
o m
U) cr)
LLLz
�K
CK
Cr
O
J
W
Z
0
LU
o tr-
LL
O
CL
O Z
U ¢
Q
2
N�
W O
F m
Q W
u~i s
W
H �
d
0
�Y q
Legend
Explorations
Bori ng
"S+
Monitoring Well
m
Infiltration Test
Test Pit
AL
Existi ng Well
Excavation Summary
Cut
Fill
Uncut
Infiltration Rates
Low (I to 5;n / hr)
Medium (5 to 15 in / hr)
High (15 to 30 in / hr)
i. .
�7 }
TP -35
,
�/[elYalerq ka'.;i T.W
,3A 7F1 U-101 TP1tY ;j lt//J
r.ATP 33- ! T it.g )`� SIT
TF 1d'%......... . f rP se
.. �iO3
TP•T /
r8-105
Tr J
MIi b
A
iE-rP 25 YY
TP 3a
Ja
........... r3
Y. ilkia 10
,T TP -.6':
;, nwJr �- ZTF 50
� :1
'.P-5 TP -21, �TP.3? •,•� Amer CGWeIR1
Kettle COP -19
p)-06
a_ /
■:
...........
•t;. ...:
IT-,� ' rng'an
T b5
•'lj'i . 1...... ..... F -
4T
T_ I -d6
91 TP -92
iMTPS1
Figure A-1
SOIL INFILTRATION RATES
Feet
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
Datum: NAVD88
Contour Interval is 20 ft.
SOIL INFILTRATION MAP
1=1111 111W11111111111 III III IIIII
111
o m
U) cr)
LLLz
�K
CK
Cr
O
J
W
Z
0
LU
o tr-
LL
O
CL
O Z
U ¢
Q
2
N�
W O
F m
Q W
u~i s
W
H �
d
0
�Y q
i SII/ ' '!"� `," _jI J \�\ 1 t \Ku!'i%'/y//r,f yr• \♦♦\ 51)1jJJ l j! /� t/J/" �„•t , !tJ / �� 1„1 1
/ ) ! 1 J/�(, \ Kul, , // i ,\ t t 1 fII II 1\� I / /'r
l \ I1111.1;1 / r \ I
�! �\i/J 'ri� •-. \\� , j J 11{11!11 lllllll115)` r-...•\ !/ t j//J r't 1( t\ J'i'11j. ! It11lIJJJr - f 5
,./1 , \ ! \ r// /// 1! 11 / // / r//,lIll ! r\ �•/�
+ � rrr\\.,, • � \\ \\ ) r �- :_ \ \ . ) (� r/ ) ( l//1 I 1111111 \ � // / 1 .� t t)(J"--' /J // t \ .� . / \/ �/ „ \\l`/I ) �
�/r
11 /
-,.'��\
�
!)/il)\ 11 / / I If51 ., �' / J!/1 \ (\\�J/ J�\\l1(�� Y 1 .. � ttl IJI} 1111,, �• ,_ r \\ /, ` J 1 -- / J // /i
1
11 (� /-` // +(1 )!/ /1/1 / 11 ��/ � � \1� lsi / / /l \I 1 \ / `wr } Il/ % / � l ♦/•.,� '�._. r/ \Il � / j/
//'\.-;��^ r i --'I /1 1 , � I Jtll \ � If f \�\ �`\\ ( \1 ;��r /��r r^1111 ! _, JII /! \ 1 /•' , I
lllly
J,/ Jli r !( \l\ // Ill (I / � C -� t ♦ 1
J r 1 1 / 1 1(r J( 1 5 I I y / //J I ,� \\1 1/ t / 1) 1/// �"_�/ i jj'/rr �,.� \ tll��'�,\1 (, 1 \ ♦♦ (r 1 / I% j /i%rte /J„tom
f `' % ♦ J) ( l/ I 1 i
I1 I 1 )111(1 1 \ , �%/�/%-���`-� (/1////_� :��\. !!/////�/ /! ItC♦( r_�, 5 )5 / \ I � \\ \ 1 J JI l/ // i/ \�
\� -� \ (f f ! IJ y yr � 11 I/1 // / �s=4” ! . �\ l !/ i 1t \ <� \ I \'� ((_ 1 1 I ,♦\�-. 1 I r /
)1 \ I / I I 1 \ ) \ J f / /�s 1/5�( f/ir. ♦� , 1( Ir lr( !! ) 1\ ♦\\ J\ , ^ \ 1 ll I l \ , 1 \� -/ / r / // r -� /
qH i�1Y I !1///� ,Il JJ ♦ Y //1//�///, i�'� 1 IJ it \\1 \ J!_r�,i/J/ 1111! I \ \\ v � \ \\ \ \ I t I 1 J , r Jjl J/ _ f
II I+
! I \ 1 1/ f % � //1 f t + 1\ h // �'• riq// /^ Y } \\ IIl ) \ n { 1 \\ ♦\ \, \ l`\ 1 J i / { � i /�' i' L 1 %
i 51\ ( lt/ (�'/ ///„ f 1 \ f) II l -, ��r / tilt// fj/�-\\ 1 155 }I f t1 ! \\ \�♦ \ r / J 1 J
_\�_'\� % f 4 /I h y/111 �I1 Il ��� . 115!41!///11111 / + ll \ !1 II y � �_/ r//�„fir /j!/ \ t( ! 111\ 111 }{ 1 1 �\\ \ ,\ ` 1 / / / Q•
1111-...( /!h 111111 5 1 � / \ /i '/l//r/ J/i,,-.(\�.. I1 ll) � 1 J!\�\`�� \�\\ \\��� l /1r ) 1 r I ( / (J //
/ \/ II // 1111 I 11+! t J 11 //l1 i(I .j/j /f'i / �I \\\�J !1 l\ 11 /�/ \` \ \\ tl ,- \,� J y `N
/, /I 1 �I! 511 1 1( (l ! II I /N/ 1 ! I r^' \l\ \1 `\�' \\\ II C `) �`\ ' rr
ti/1 I f tll I�(!t-\ �Jljll�Ij I1j5Ul �I� JI1lt I) \ \\.. \ti \\�\\11�� ` '.:
�1) J4 ,\\ 11 \� l ) ) \ c / •.
\ \ __ . 1 ! 11 f \ 11 111 -•�,\ Ir III(' 1 Ir \, ! j1 Ir l �\ rr r%ice=; ��\\ \ 1 Ih /i \_ \} \\ \ \ %� / r 1
1
1 ! t)+\ I YY \ l \ 1 J! Y5 \�` �l �ii.'�_��\.\\ \ pts _-��, 1�� Il t♦\\ ., l ,\\ _ 1 r1yrJ1. �FULTON LAKE!
f f / I ) I1 l 1 I 1\ 11! // ! //'^ - � \ t \ � \ , \ C l:. `l I \ \ 1 r '
)
1 )
I I
�� ���.___--�J---�' r /J / r J 1 //J J////r/J /(1 -) ��Ilt lel J /(” (\ \ tl 1t ♦ I ,�.N�q/�/A�, //!Jy/�1 � \ \\\ 1 \Y \ � %! \ � L )
-=- _.•�-- �-_,- i 1\I / \ / \\ l ,/ \ \ \ � \\\ \) / _ J �\1 \ �;\ ♦\ \ 1 , / J J 1 1I� 1111\� �.
-, - tri. // /// 1 Jif 111 )\ )!f i-, , l\ !Vii /rrr/ll Iiftll />>J1 \l5\l\ 1111 1.-_� \\ �\ 1 \\♦ 1 ) � //i!) I \� is
\ 1 :-„� .� ��%y� )/ 4/ J l 111 1 I JI! ffJ I r( ♦\'�� Il IY Jt \{(I /y5��\ \\ \ �' ��,rJi% /i/ 11 \\\\ �� �.JI 1 11 1\ tt1 1J `� t\\�� \`l � r /1 1 \ \y
( / III \ / J J I � t f \ U t\\ \ _Jr/ / �/r \�\\\\\ .� f ( 1 ! '• � \ \ 1 \ !!
�, � \ i? %� ri/i/ i t t I I I +' JI rJl + 1 JlJ! 1(1(111 "�"'�\� rll.l. � 5\ � /Jtl ll )I\t` % � r J/iil `\,���\O r/ t\` \l♦\\� \\ YII J ,- \ 1 % % tt\)� ! , � J �iil 1rJl 1 � � � ` �..._..�:
=`\ \��.,_��^ /// JI II /1/l/ 11111/JI r'�^�\�♦ l \ \\\�� // 151 J,,rri,�/ / /Jirr"',\ `\�\ \ 1 1 \ t \\ f -- r� ��.^ \
=; \ \ ♦\ter^ I ,r t ) 15 1111 // I 1 // / 1111 /1 11 )(_ \\\\ II , \\ � / II 1{ \\ // rift//ir i'�/r /i/'1\ \\5��\\t5 \\\5 111 I 1 ^\ I1/ ! \~\,\\\S 1/ jii' �^�� r"��`.
\\\ )\ l�1 1 ) \1111 I/ \ / 1 ^� /ttl1111 tll lI "�`\`�\ t!I 1 \, \\\\�� it It �/, J/j/r i���i'//ri_\�\♦\, \('Ittl \l\\ �11 I II( •\
/il// r=�.� \ ��I 1 Hlii�l�l�1 t / y1111%% I(1 \111J��� ♦\ I ♦ �\\��1 %1 1/� /1���� /iiii'-��♦^�\`\\ \il\\\ \\ � ! i1�� \l 1\j )1111(!1 fr' r ♦`_ ^a\ ♦��
\ \ I J 1_r _
=� �?•�� � \\ Y f / !(! !1 -, ♦ J I 111 / \ ♦ � /i / / rr r ri/ r ,\\ \ )l \��\ r"� \�"--\ 1\\ I J/J 11 I l\ �_, ,1 /
� r ..,, A l5 t l i I / \ J 1 I( 1111 \5N }�(��\\ ♦ \ 1 11 -. � �J/ / J f�Jir /r/i rrrr^.. l\ \ \\\ a \) \ %_ \\ tr/J (/i1// 1� \\ r 7 1 �
1 \ \\ \\\ I I \I \( / � // //,,,/ rijr�i /�^` \, l�\\\\\♦� �;\\ c \\ ////I{ (/! \ ,\`� l
111 }l \� \ \\. \ 1 /l /, ///,,,r /i /�i,// ) \1 �,\\\\♦\1 Y) 1 t \\ 1 1 1 \ �� ) 1 )
Ili!
---r�",�� _\\\I 111111 )I 1111 \I\�\�� ( 1 1 I \\\ I! \ lll}I1111 Ill \�\ \\\♦�-.. \� \ ..`-\1\ \ \\J! Ill!/�IJOJ//r'i/ / ) //I Ul J II tY �l\\ /ri I1 \ ♦ _ .., �
I j'111 I \c \ ` _> 1- J\� ���� "�\ i t +\\ 1111 1/111 �l1IU/////%/! r ��-'�" %� i%rJ1 (/ I JJ! 5 \\�♦�iii%/ \ t� ♦ y
'i' \ \� � � } )11 IInl51 +IJI ♦ 511 J.� J / \ \\" 1 11 1 { �'.�\\ / ,� \\� 11}1 //%!�!/111/fl/ / //f /iii�tirij, //! 1 (,JII\ ///rii _.� J 5 1 ( / .. \
\ -. `♦ \11111\ll +111 ll\1 I IJ J II \\ /11 1111}11+1 f \\ 111 1111 / J /r( I/I\ //, 1i/irk-_/iJ//J/i/ J// 1111 \\♦�Jltttl ,_,/ ,Il i l II, r
1_ \�I I p 11 Ill l 1♦ / /( ! 1 /l\\ \\ 111111 \l)%i/1111( ) lI II If/lJ/(Ili ill{Ifl I} Jr�ri/Ji%Ji /ihji%// t/fl-.�
�1 11 ll/!/ Yl! UII t <-. �/i h/ I
1 l / / I C ♦ 1
\ \ 1� \♦t 11\ it \1j1 1 1\ 5 J .' /1 I ( /r 1 \111 t \�//, / (1 \ .i (1 /l1 tll Ifll ! 111 \I{ ) 1 �, � riiir/J� /r"' -/!1J i/1 \ rte\ \\\ Y}5l t //� ,/ / 1 I �r�\., f
1 1 \ / // !fl/I II II iri moi/ i If///'/// r/ r( `l\\\\\�_ \\1)�r� �!' - \ /1\♦
I (O
11\\
(�
\ \1\\ C \ / \/ \) / J r 5 \�` ,\ JJ i J� c<\\l\�=___- 'r /J /!4/ _ t /� =�„ r,Jr J l(' S1 l ♦�
Vii\ \\\\�♦\`\ 1 !) I 1 J ll♦ • � )\ / ,- (,--��\�: --`.: -�-♦ 1 i ���' ��l \\ /� 1 / t J! l \ \ � \
` \\`\ �/ , ! , 11 I 1 \�� \ \ / •� �� -� / � iir , / / ri/ // (�. \ 1 �
ROBINSON RD
u r —► ) ! \ _—• l r—' i \ r� t t \ (t l — /
1 -q �,� ����\ ,�� � Ql\ � 111 ..11 r/ ri�•.Jri// _� \ � s � \1 , �l( r J �` J \ \ \ 1\ \
\ ` ��`\��`�'- 11\ \ ♦(.•� l "fJ Jr r` \\ _ ( \,r" f 1yi'/ /) J 1111 t 1 r f 55\ - ,�
\. '4'. �� _\II l ,r_ � ��_ lr-,,\l \` ) ,/ 1`r"♦ r.. _��i`,yl (1 \ \\ _,•r 1
7 j ��- � �` ���\\ `�.\\ � .-, f'/� r- )ll-` \ \ r/ / / rr)„1 \� 5,r ( \ '►'_.�/ �, %i.� "=i�/ � 5 \ J \ `\\`J` ��J
'� -�/ \ �\�` �/ \\ / r \ `�t 1 J // ' /%/ r1-•'� `Y�\� \\5\( 1(/:� \\\( C ` 151 l`\/ -
\ '('_=� rte-, I ♦ \
`\ \�� \\1 ♦ ll , i r/ � �i ,,r -` =`^_ \, \\\5 5 , �, \\`-\ate t\L IJI r,\ l\I\ t� Y ) \",.
�__ \ `` \`��Z��`�\``�� !, 1111 , _ 1111/ ( ,yip ` 1/(� J/// i� �� 1 Il \l` ! I 1 ��♦���J� `�l\\ 1 \� �\ -
\ l��
_ `��� ���-\�\ \ \\ � \ //r( Ir•r9/r�.� lJl (/1 `j J1 \ °\ \ "J/%%J(~1`\ �/ �� `� \\ \\ �`•`�� _�
`- ��` I 1 \, 1\ \ � � \1 111 /,. //,/ ^\ I , \�\ \ 151\ ,.----., -_ \`•,. \\_ J ! /
�1 0 � \ 111 / /i/ / / �� — •" //
)lJlf)�II)f///�r�� yr 11 ,51.
f t Ili)1 -1��\
��,• \ /, llf 1, 11 111)1\\\\\\\\\\ llllyl/I !11/ l \ \\\�J 1 \ \\r \\\
.. •�• �. -1111( �,�^ =,�� \\\� �\�IJ !1 ♦ 1%" i%.- .;.� � �S�\ll\ \`/i �..'\ \� `y,
\ 1• . 1111 l\ \ / ^r -s -.."fir. .-`` '. if//J/!J! / •+lt t/! rr ,.^ --�� /='''\\tl\\�..- ••" :. —...� �� �\ r /
� ♦ \ � ^��.. i \ �r,w ////NJi 1/1J /J/l /!J/ '� `.x,��1" 11\ �,__ r� �, ,_:� r\, .. �
if
!//
!/J
/ \ � \ \ 1511111 I Ul 11 ��_ -:._� � / Itrifl / ` ii/r ( >{r //r J ` � \ �I 5\t•..-�_
\
\ ♦♦\�\\ \s,1111111 \ IAll, 1 \' ♦_rte`
III
\t/I
\ ♦ \\ \ 1111\; ` 11111 \ \^///'ri�� /iir/ � % 1 \ 1 rl/r / } J J//,,i, 1/ \
`\ �l U\\\� \\���\5r15), 1 \-.!/s'i' Jr•^ \ t (�
GRAPHIC SCALE \5515 \ )15 IIID ,-�;��-,r„_, ,l \ 1 lilt
\ \ \\1 \l II 1 /i/ \ \ t
DUCKABUSH r 1111 t\ /. _.,. 5 1\ 1 r (
400 0' zoo 400 soo 1600 OYSTER TRACTS J \t\tt 11 \ \` l' �r�J/� r'%_-•;_^J�•`\ ` l
\ \ ,,,/ ^, 111 Jl \)IJI i/ r �/ \\\ \ \ \\\ \�=\♦ i/J/ ! ) S 1 r'� I I
l\l \l�llt d. ll\,lt t\Y li', ♦jlj/1 )11 (I/f \��/ J jJ/i�i'�i ^ \\ �` `\\`�=_\\-r J r\
\\ 1111 \ 1 lJJ_^f %/JI (I� 1115 !/ ♦�1J'/'i /i � r'1 \ , III � -'`)J/ l/ t l ( ) j ,,J
-til\\\\\l�\\I'
I Illi{ `r^ 11 \
IN FEETIV
5\\I\\15\Il\�i-i
1 11--�\I \ \ \\ rrr, /j' //\lam, fy \ \ \ ( J \ 1 > t I !' \ • / /
1 inch = 400 ft.
,�'\\\\\\�..�.�-�.fJJ��J%� r �'• Y (tel\`\����__��/�\ l "`��-' //
l\\\\ r\\(
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT J ' "l”
\\ \\ ♦ -.`a.♦ .. viii \__.� , , 1 1 \ ��,\`_ ��-•�...�� 1 �...�.r �� 1
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M. \\--_ zz
Figure B 1 \` �� _= , _-. - _,� , l I l 1\- __`�_��.==_,, ,1 _ ;_`�,;{ ,{t 1
EXISTING DRAINAGE BASINS
BASIN -17
56,235 Sq Ft
1.29 Ac.
RUN OFF -1
23 501 Sq Ft
d.54 Ac.
RUN ON -4
24,464 Sq Ft
0.56 Ac.
RUN ON -3
11,168 Sq F
0.26 Ac. I
RUN OFF -2
4,766 Sq Ft
0.11 Rc.
BA8 9Nq t BASIN -
2.02 Ac.
147,890 Sq Ft
BASIN -2 .40 A
167,815 Sq t
3.85 Ac.
BASIN -4
BASIN -6 279,840 Sq Ft
465,067 Sq Ft 6.42 Ac.
10.68 Ac.
Q- �b
,�bb,
3.50 Ac.
RUN ON -5
15,654 Sq Ft
0.36 Ac.
RUN ON -6
44,885 Sq F
1.03 Ac.
GRAPHIC SCALE
400 0 200 400 800
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 ft.
BASIN -5
274,261 Sq Ft
6.30 Ac.
BASIN -7
6.24 Ac.
271,727 Sq Ft
BASIN -14
202,853 Sq Ft
4.66 Ac.
,800
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
Figure B.2
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASINS - GOLF RESORT
BASIN -13
2,418,599 Sq Ft
55.52 Ac.
BASIN -15
559,975 Sq Ft
12.86 Ac.
BASIN -12
441,427 Sq Ft
10.13 Ac.
Br85,90
-11
35 E
5 Ac
BASIN -10
1,558,562 Sq Ft
Ft 35.78 Ac.
BASIN -9
852,714 Sq Ft
19.58 Ac.
BASIN -8
621,143 Sq Ft
14.26 Ac.
RUN ON -1
64,256 Sq Ft
1.48 Ac.
RUN ON -2
16,021 Sq Ft
0.37 Ac.
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
i
BASIN -22
624,082 Sq Ft
14.33 Ac.
l
i�
BASIN -21
89,625 Sq Ft
2.06 Ac.
BASIN -19 I r.
108,781 Sq Ft
2.50 Ac. BASIN -20
43,091 Sq Ft GRAPHIC SCALE
BASIN -180.99 Ac.
,W o 200,W 8w 1800
54,292 Sq Ft
1.25 Ac.
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 ft.
Figure B.3
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASINS - MARITIME VILLAGE
BASIN -17
BA�IN-1 g3�BASIN-
BASIN -2
BASIN -6
B�
8,4`�I N = 4
BASIN -5
i� X65
(BASIN -7'
og1
BASIN 4
14
I
GRAPHIC SCALE
400 0 200 400 800
1800
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 400 tt.
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SECTIONS 15 & 22, TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 2W., W.M.
Figure BA
INFILTRATION FACILITY
CONCEPTS
BASIN -12
BASIN -13
BA -11
J
� BASIN 15
y g15 r,
FES
BASIN -9
BASIN -10
Table 13.1
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Drainage Basin Characteristics
WWHM3 Input
September 1, 2008
Run-on
Total
Total
Imperv.
Imperv.
Perv.
Perv.
Basin
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Imp Bldg
Imp Bldg
Imp Pav
Imp Pav
Imp Dry
Imp Dry
No.sjsf
acre
(sf)sf�facre
sf�facre
sf�facre
sof
acre
Lsfl
acre
ss_
acre
1
87,839
2.02
87,839
2.02
58,882
1.35
28,957
0.66
8,522
0.20
50,360
1.16
-
2
167,815
3.85
167,815
3.85
39,071
0.90
128,744
2.96
8,128
0.19
30,193
0.69
750
0.02
3
147,890
3.40
147,890
3.40
6,085
0.14
141,805
3.26
5,335
0.12
-
750
0.02
4
279,840
6.42
279,840
6.42
68,054
1.56
211,786
4.86
31,871
0.73
36,183
0.83
-
5
274,261
6.30
274,261
6.30
2,930
0.07
271,331
6.23
2,680
0.06
-
250
0.01
6
456,067
10.47
35,632
491,699
11.29
63,835
1.47
427,864
9.82
35,358
0.81
28,477
0.65
-
7
271,727
6.24
15,654
287,381
6.60
-
-
287,381
6.60
-
-
-
8
621,143
14.26
16,021
637,164
14.63
13,660
0.31
623,504
14.31
1,160
0.03
4,430
0.10
8,070
0.19
9
852,714
19.58
64,256
916,970
21.05
130,875
3.00
786,095
18.05
82,525
1.89
46,100
1.06
2,250
0.05
10
1,558,582
35.78
1,558,582
35.78
-
-
1,558,582
35.78
-
-
-
11
85,035
1.95
85,035
1.95
-
-
85,035
1.95
-
-
12
441,427
10.13
441,427
10.13
109,901
2.52
331,526
7.61
29,100
0.67
80,801
1.85
-
13
2,418,599
55.52
2,418,599
55.52
562,250
12.91
1,856,349
42.62
307,500
7.06
225,000
5.17
29,750
0.68
Pond
395,181
9.07
395,181
9.07
395,181
9.07
-
-
-
-
-
14
202,853
4.66
202,853
4.66
-
-
202,853
4.66
-
-
-
15
559,975
12.86
559,975
12.86
98,230
2.26
461,745
10.60
80,800
1.85
13,750
0.32
3,680
0.08
16
148,874
3.42
148,874
3.42
-
148,874
3.42
-
-
-
17
56,235
1.29
56,235
1.29
41,486
0.95
14,749
0.34
-
41,486
0.95
-
Total
9,026,057
207.21
131,563
9,157,620
210.23
1,590,440
36.51
7,567,180
173.72
592,979
13.61
556,780
12.78
45,500
1.04
18
54,292
1.25
54,292
1.25
31,400
0.72
22,892
0.53
4,000
0.09
27,400
0.63
19
108,781
2.50
108,781
2.50
38,720
0.89
70,061
1.61
11,900
0.27
26,820
0.62
20
43,091
0.99
43,091
0.99
15,100
0.35
27,991
0.64
8,600
0.20
6,500
0.15
21
89,625
2.06
89,625
2.06
24,250
0.56
65,375
1.50
8,250
0.19
16,000
0.37
22
624,082
14.33
624,082
14.33
104,543.00
2.40
519,539
11.93
53,578
1.23
50,965.00
1.17
Total
919,871
21.12
919,871
21.12
214,013
4.91
705,858
16.20
86,328
1.98
86,330
2.93
September 1, 2008
Table 13.2
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Drainage Basin Characteristics
StormShedTM Input
September 1, 2008
Run-on
Run-on Total
Total
Imperv.
Imperv.
Perv.
Perv.
Basin
Area
Area
Area
Area Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Area
Imperv.
Perv.
Comp.
No.
(ssf)
facre
jsfl
la9121 joflacre
sof
acre
sf�f
faml
CN
CN
CN
1
87,839
2.02
87,839
2.02
58,882
1.35
28,957
0.66
98
86
94
2
167,815
3.85
167,815
3.85
39,071
0.90
128,744
2.96
98
86
89
3
147,890
3.40
147,890
3.40
6,085
0.14
141,805
3.26
98
86
86
4
279,840
6.42
- 279,840
6.42
68,054
1.56
211,786
4.86
98
86
89
5
274,261
6.30
- 274,261
6.30
2,930
0.07
271,331
6.23
98
86
86
6
456,067
10.47
35,632
0.82 491,699
11.29
63,835
1.47
427,864
9.82
98
86
88
7
271,727
6.24
15,654
0.36 287,381
6.60
-
-
287,381
6.60
98
86
86
8
621,143
14.26
16,021
0.37 637,164
14.63
13,660
0.31
623,504
14.31
98
86
86
9
852,714
19.58
64,256
1.48 916,970
21.05
130,875
3.00
786,095
18.05
98
86
88
10
1,558,582
35.78
- 1,558,582
35.78
-
-
1,558,582
35.78
98
86
86
11
85,035
1.95
- 85,035
1.95
-
-
85,035
1.95
98
86
86
12
441,427
10.13
- 441,427
10.13
109,901
2.52
331,526
7.61
98
86
89
13
2,418,599
55.52
- 2,418,599
55.52
562,250
12.91
1,856,349
42.62
98
86
89
Pond
395,181
9.07
- 395,181
9.07
395,181
9.07
-
-
100
100
14
202,853
4.66
- 202,853
4.66
-
-
202,853
4.66
98
86
86
15
559,975
12.86
- 559,975
12.86
98,230
2.26
461,745
10.60
98
86
88
16
148,874
3.42
- 148,874
3.42
-
-
148,874
3.42
98
86
86
17
56,235
1.29
- 56,235
1.29
41,486
0.95
14,749
0.34
98
86
95
Total
9,026,057
207.21
131,563
3.02 9,157,620
210.23
1,590,440
36.51
7,567,180
173.72
18
54,292
1.25
54,292
1.25
31,400
0.72
22,892
0.53
98
86
93
19
108,781
2.50
108,781
2.50
38,720
0.89
70,061
1.61
98
86
90
20
43,091
0.99
43,091
0.99
15,100
0.35
27,991
0.64
98
86
90
21
89,625
2.06
89,625
2.06
24,250
0.56
65,375
1.50
98
86
89
22
624,082
14.33
624,082
14.33
104,543
2.40
519,539
11.93
98
86
88
Total
919,871
21.12
919,871
21.12
214,013
4.91
705,858
16.20
September 1, 2008
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
SBUH Runoff Calculation Output
Basin Hydrographs
Precipitation Data
6 month -24 hour
2 year -24 hour
10 year -24 hour
100 year -24 hour
BASIN DATA
PH#1 Event Summary:
BasinlD
Peak Q
-------
(cfs)
PH#1
1.21
PH#1
2.43
Drainage
Area: PH#1
Hyd Method:
SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor:
484.00
Storm Dur:
24.00 hrs
1.3095 2.02
Area
Pervious
2.0200 ac
Impervious
0.0000 ac
Total
2.0200 ac
Supporting
Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 1
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type:
Description:
Sheet
Basin 1 surface
PH#2 Event
Summary:
BasinlD
Peak Q
-------
(cfs)
PH#2
1.94
PH#2
4.32
Drainage
Area: PH#2
Hyd Method:
SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor:
484.00
Storm Dur:
24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious
3.8500 ac
Impervious
0.0000 ac
2.9 inches
4.5 inches
6.2 inches
8.5 inches
Peak T
Peak Vol Area
Method
Raintype
Event
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
8.17
0.6422 2.02
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
2 yr
8.17
1.3095 2.02
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
100 yr
Loss Method:
SCS CN Number
SCS Abs:
0.20
Intv:
10.00 min
CN
TC
94.00
0.74 hrs
0.00
0.00 hrs
94.00
2.0200 ac
Length: Slope: Coeff:
Travel
Time
300.00 ft 2.00% 0.4100
65.11 min
Peak T
Peak Vol Area
Method
Raintype
Event
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
8.17
1.0572 3.85
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
2 yr
8.17
2.3029 3.85
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
CN TC
89.00 0.74 hrs
0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 3.8500 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 2
89.00
3.8500 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Length:
Slope: Coeff:
Travel Time
Sheet Basin 2 surface
300.00 ft
2.00% 0.4100
44.48 min
PH#3 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
Peak Vol Area
Method
Raintype Event
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
PH#3 1.51
8.17
0.8509 3.40
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
PH#3 3.61
8.17
1.9314 3.40
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Drainage Area: PH#3
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Loss Method:
SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00
SCS Abs:
0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Intv:
10.00 min
Area
CN
TC
Pervious 3.4000 ac
86.00
0.74 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
0.00 hrs
Total 3.4000 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 3
86.00
3.4000 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Length:
Slope: Coeff:
Travel Time
Sheet Basin surface
300.00 ft
2.00% 0.4100
44.48 min
PH#4 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
Peak Vol Area
Method
Raintype Event
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
PH#4 3.23
8.17
1.7629 6.42
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
PH#4 7.21
8.17
3.8401 6.42
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Drainage Area: PH#4
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Loss Method:
SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00
SCS Abs:
0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Intv:
10.00 min
Area
CN
TC
Pervious 6.4200 ac
89.00
0.74 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
0.00 hrs
Total 6.4200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 4
89.00
6.4200 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Length:
Slope: Coeff:
Travel Time
Sheet Basin surface
300.00 ft
2.00% 0.4100
44.48 min
PH#5 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
Peak Vol Area Method
Raintype Event
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
PH#5 2.81
8.17
1.5767 6.30
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
PH#5 6.69
8.17
3.5788 6.30
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Drainage Area: PH#5
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 6.3000 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 6.3000 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 6
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#6 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
------- (cfs)
PH#6 5.56
PH#6 12.67
Drainage Area: PH#6
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 11.4900 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 11.4900 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 6
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#7 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
------- (cfs)
PH#7 2.78
PH#7 6.62
Drainage Area: PH#7
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor. 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 6.2400 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 6.2400 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 7
Pervious TC Data:
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
Intv:
CN
TC
CN
86.00
0.74 hrs
0.00
0.00 hrs
86.00
6.3000 ac
0.00 hrs
Length: Slope: Coeff:
Travel Time
11.4900 ac
300.00 ft 2.00% 0.4100
44.48 min
Peak T
Peak Vol Area Method
Raintype Event
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac /Loss
300.00 ft
8.17
3.0603 11.49 SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
8.17
6.7575 11.49 SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
CN TC
86.00 0.74 hrs
0.00 0.00 hrs
86.00 6.2400 ac
SCS Abs:
0.20
Intv:
10.00 min
CN
TC
88.00
0.74 hrs
0.00
0.00 hrs
88.00
11.4900 ac
Length:
Slope: Coeff:
Travel Time
300.00 ft
2.00% 0.4100
44.48 min
Peak T
Peak Vol Area Method
Raintype Event
(hrs)
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
8.17
1.5617 6.24
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
8.17
3.5448 6.24
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
CN TC
86.00 0.74 hrs
0.00 0.00 hrs
86.00 6.2400 ac
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Sheet Basin surface 300.00 ft 2.00% 0.4100 44.48 min
PH#8 Event Summary:
Area
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#8 5.93
8.17
PH#8 14.21
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#8
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 14.2600 ac
86.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 14.2600 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 8
86.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
Shallow Rough
PH#9 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------ (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#9 9.16
8.17
PH#9 20.91
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#9
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs,
Area
CN
Pervious 19.5800 ac
88.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 19.5800 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 9
88.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
Shallow Rough Flow
PH#10 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#10 15.94
8.17
PH#10 37.98
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#10
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
3.5688
14.26
8.1007
14.26
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.87 hrs
0.00 hrs
14.2600 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 2.00%
900.00 ft 3.30%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
5.2151
19.58
11.5155
19.58
Coeff: Travel Time
0.4100 44.48 min
11.0000 7.51 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.80 hrs
0.00 hrs
19.5800 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 2.00%
400.00 ft 12.50%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
8.9546
35.78
20.3256
35.78
Coeff: Travel Time
0.4100 44.48 min
5.0000 3.77 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00
Area
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Length: Slope:
Area
CN
Pervious 35.7800 ac
86.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 35.7800 ac
Raintype Event
Supporting Data:
/Loss
Pervious CN Data:
0.4880 1.95
Basin 10
86.00
Pervious TC Data:
SBUH/SCS
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#11 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#11 0.98
8.17
PH#11 2.32
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#11
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 1.9500 ac
86.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 1.9500 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 11
86.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#12 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#12 5.10
8.17
PH#12 11.37
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#12
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 10.1300 ac
89.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 10.1300 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 12
89.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.74 hrs
0.00 hrs
35.7800 ac
Area
(ac -ft)
Length: Slope:
Coeff:
Travel Time
300.00 ft 2.00%
0.4100
44.48 min
Peak Vol Area
Method
Raintype Event
(ac -ft) ac
/Loss
0.4880 1.95
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 2 yr
1.1077 1.95
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.54 hrs
0.00 hrs
1.9500 ac
Length: Slope:
200.00 ft 2.00%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
2.7816
10.13
6.0593
10.13
Coeff: Travel Time
0.4100 32.16 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.74 hrs
0.00 hrs
10.1300 ac
Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
300.00 ft 2.00% 0.4100 44.48 min
PH#13 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#13 27.96
8.17
PH#13 62.31
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#13
33.2094
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 55.5200 ac
89.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 55.5200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 13
89.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#14 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#14 2.08
8.17
PH#14 4.95
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#14
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 4.6600 ac
86.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 4.6600 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 14
86.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Basin surface
PH#15 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#15 6.16
8.17
PH#15 14.04
8.17
Drainage Area: PH#15
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 12.8600 ac
88.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Peak Vol
Area
Method Raintype Event
(ac -ft)
ac
/Loss
15.2453
55.52
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
33.2094
55.52
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.74 hrs
0.00 hrs
55.5200 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 2.00%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
1.1662
4.66
2.6472
4.66
Coeff: Travel Time
0.4100 44.48 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.74 hrs
0.00 hrs
4.6600 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 2.00%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
3.4252
12.86
7.5633
12.86
Coeff: Travel Time
0.4100 44.48 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.76 hrs
0.00 hrs
Total 12.8600 ac
Area
Supporting Data:
ac
Pervious CN Data:
3.42
Basin 15
88.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Surface
Shallow Shallow
Channel Steep
PH#16 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#16 2.36
8.00
PH#16 5.52
8.00
Drainage Area: PH#16
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 3.4200 ac
86.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 3.4200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 16
86.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Sheet Steep Fairway
PH#17 Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q
Peak T
------- (cfs)
(hrs)
PH#17 1.20
8.00
PH#17 2.37
8.00
Drainage Area: PH#17
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Area
CN
Pervious 1.2900 ac
95.00
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
Total 1.2900 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 17
95.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Fixed Parking Lot
12.8600 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 2.00%
100.00 ft 10.00%
200.00 ft 30.00%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
0.8559
3.42
1.9428
3.42
Coeff:
Travel Time
0.4100
44.48 min
9.0000
0.59 min
10.0000
0.61 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.17 hrs
0.00 hrs
3.4200 ac
Length: Slope:
300.00 ft 10.00%
Peak Vol
Area
(ac -ft)
ac
0.4219
1.29
0.8492
1.29
Coeff: Travel Time
0.1500 10.45 min
Method Raintype Event
/Loss
SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100 yr
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
SCS Abs: 0.20
Intv: 10.00 min
TC
0.17 hrs
0.00 hrs
1.2900 ac
Length: Slope:
0.00 ft 0.00%
Coeff: Travel Time
10.0000 10.00 min
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARIES FOR 2 AND 100 YEAR, 24-HOUR
EVENTS
Hydrograph ID: PH#1 - 2 yr
Area: 2.0200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.2051 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.6422 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#1 - 100 yr
Area: 2.0200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.4340 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.3095 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#2 - 2 yr
Area: 3.8500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.9387 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.0572 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#2 - 100 yr
Area: 3.8500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow.
Peak Flow: 4.3209 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
2.3029 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#3 - 2 yr
Area: 3.4000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.5148 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.8509 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#3 - 100 yr
Area: 3.4000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 3.6093 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.9314 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#4 - 2 yr
Area: 6.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 3.2328 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.7629 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#4 - 100 yr
Area: 6.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 7.2052 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.8401 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#5 - 2 yr
Area: 6.3000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.8069 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.5767 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#5 - 100 yr
Area: 6.3000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 6.6878 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.5788 acft
Hydrograph ID: PHN - 2 yr
Area: 11.4900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 5.5630 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.0603 acft
Hydrograph ID: PHN - 100 yr
Area: 11.4900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 12.6709 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
6.7575 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#7 - 2 yr
Area: 6.2400 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.7802 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.5617 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#7 - 100 yr
Area: 6.2400 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 6.6242 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.5448 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#8 - 2 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 5.9284 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.5688 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#8 - 100 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 14.2071 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
8.1007 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#9 - 2 yr
Area: 19.5800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 9.1590 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
5.2151 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#9 - 100 yr
Area: 19.5800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 20.9146 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
11.5155 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#10 - 2 yr
Area: 35.7800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 15.9414 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
8.9546 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#10 - 100 yr
Area: 35.7800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 37.9827 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
20.3256 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#11 - 2 yr
Area: 1.9500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.9843 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.4880 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#11 - 100 yr
Area: 1.9500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.3213 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.1077 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#12 - 2 yr
Area: 10.1300 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 5.1009 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
2.7816 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#12 - 100 yr
Area: 10.1300 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 11.3690 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
6.0593 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#13 - 2 yr
Area: 55.5200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 27.9570 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
15.2453 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#13 - 100 yr
Area: 55.5200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 62.3104 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
33.2094 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#14 - 2 yr
Area: 4.6600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.0762 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.1662 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#14 - 100 yr
Area: 4.6600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 4.9469 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
2.6472 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#15 - 2 yr
Area: 12.8600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 6.1579 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.4252 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#15 - 100 yr
Area: 12.8600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 14.0374 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
7.5633 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#16 - 2 yr
Area: 3.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.3600 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.8559 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#16 - 100 yr
Area: 3.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 5.5218 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.9428 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#17 - 2 yr
Area: 1.2900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.2010 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.4219 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#17 - 100 yr
Area: 1.2900 ac Hyd Int: 10.00 min Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.3700 cfs Peak Time: 8.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.8492 acft
CLEARHIS
Hydrograph ID: PH#18 - 2 yr
Area: 1.2500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.7053 cfs Peak Time:
Peak Flow: 1.1059 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.3862 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#18 - 100 yr
Area: 3.8500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Area: 1.2500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Hydrograph ID: PH#3 - 0.5 yr
Peak Flow: 2.2529 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.7978 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#19 - 2 yr
Area: 2.5000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.0158 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.7074 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#19 - 100 yr
Area: 2.5000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow. 4.3390 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.5204 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#20 - 2 yr
Area: 0.9900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.7983 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.2801 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#20 - 100 yr
Area: 0.9900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.7182 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.6021 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#21 - 2 yr
Area: 2.0600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.6046 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.5656 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#21 - 100 yr
Area: 2.0600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 3.5230 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.2322 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#22 - 2 yr
Area: 14.3300 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 10.7660 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.8167 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#22 - 100 yr
Area: 14.3300 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 24.1247 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
8.4277 acft
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY FOR WATER QUALITY FACILITIES, 6 -
MONTH, 24-HOUR EVENTS
Hydrograph ID: PH#1 - 0.5 yr
Area: 2.0200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.7053 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol: 0.3793 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#2 - 0.5 yr
Area: 3.8500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.0068 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol: 0.5806 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#3 - 0.5 yr
Area: 3.4000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.7267 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.4468 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#4 - 0.5 yr
Area: 6.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.6790 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.9681 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#5 - 0.5 yr
Area: 6.3000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow.
Peak Flow: 1.3466 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.8279 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#6 - 0.5 yr
Area: 11.4900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow.-
low:Peak
PeakFlow: 2.8160 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.6561 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#7 - 0.5 yr
Area: 6.2400 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.3338 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.8201 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#8 - 0.5 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.8262 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.8740 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#9 - 0.5 yr
Area: 19.5800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 4.6237 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
2.8221 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#10 - 0.5 yr
Area: 35.7800 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 7.6478 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
4.7022 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#11 - 0.5 yr
Area: 1.9500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.4777 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.2563 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#12 - 0.5 yr
Area: 10.1300 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.6492 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.5276 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#13 - 0.5 yr
Area: 55.5200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 14.5195 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
8.3724 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#14 - 0.5 yr
Area: 4.6600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.9961 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.6124 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#15 - 0.5 yr
Area: 12.8600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 3.1145 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.8535 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#16 - 0.5 yr
Area: 3.4200 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.1546 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.4494 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#17 - 0.5 yr
Area: 1.2900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.7241 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.2528 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#18 - 0.5 yr
Area: 1.2500 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.6395 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.2248 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#19 - 0.5 yr
Area: 2.5000 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 1.0893 cfs Peak Time:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.3943 acft
Hydrograph ID: PH#20 - 0.5 yr
Area: 0.9900 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 0.4314 cfs Peak Time
Hydrograph ID: PH#21 - 0.5 yr
Area: 2.0600 ac Hyd Int:
Peak Flow: 0.8468 cfs Peak Time
Hydrograph ID: PH#22 - 0.5 yr
Area: 14.3300 ac Hyd Int:
Peak Flow: 5.5453 cfs Peak Time
Storm Pump Station — Basin 8
8.00 hrs Hyd Vol
10.00 min
Base Flow:
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
10.00 min
Base Flow.
8.00 hrs
Hyd Vol:
0.1561 acft
0.3106 acft
2.0654 acft
'
RLPCOMPUTE [RLP8C] SUMMARY
6 mon
Match Q=Peak Q= 2.8203 cfs Peak Out Q:
1.1100 cfs - Peak Stg: 142.56 ft - Active Vol:0.3663 acft
[2 yr] 4.50 in
2 yr
Match Q=Peak Q= 5.9171 cfs Peak Out Q:
3.3400 cfs - Peak Stg: 143.74 ft - Active Vol: 0.6064 acft
'
100 yr
Match Q=Peak Q= 14.1824 cfs Peak Out Q:
5.5700 cfs - Peak Stg: 148.03 ft - Active Vol: 1.9556 acft
500 yr
Match Q=Peak Q= 18.9636 cfs Peak Out Q.
5.5700 cfs - Peak Stg: 150.48 ft - Active Vol: 3.3340 acft
I
Summary Report of all RI -Pool Data
Project Precips
'
[6 mon] 2.90 in
[2 yr] 4.50 in
[10 yr] 6.20 in
[25 yr] 7.00 in
'
[100 yr] 8.50 in
[500 yr] 10.80 in
'
Hydrographs
Hydro ID
Peak Q
Peak T
Peak Vol
Cont Area
-------
(cfs)
(hrs)
(ac -ft)
(ac)
B8 - 6 mon
2.82
8.17
1.8740
14.2600
'
B8 - 2 yr
5.92
8.17
3.5688
14.2600
B8 - 100 yr
14.18
8.17
8.1007
14.2600
B8 - 500 yr
18.96
8.17
10.7728
14.2600
B8 - 6 mon
2.82
8.17
1.8740
14.2600
B8 - 2 yr
5.92
8.17
3.5688
14.2600
'
B8 - 100 yr
14.18
8.17
8.1007
14.2600
B8 - 500 yr
18.96
8.17
10.7728
14.2600
6 mon-Low-OutHyd
1.11
7.83
1.8739
14.2600
2 yr-Low-OutHyd
1.11
6.33
2.3092
9.2276
'
100 yr-Low-OutHyd
1.11
3.83
2.5714
4.5267
500 yr-Low-OutHyd
1.11
3.17
2.9090
3.8508
6 mon-Mid-OutHyd
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
'
2 yr-Mid-OutHyd
100 yr-Mid-OutHyd
2.23
2.23
8.83
7.00
1.2594
3.4402
5.0324
6.0562
500 yr-Mid-OutHyd
2.23
6.17
4.2388
5.6112
6 mon-High Pump-OutHyd
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
2 yr -High Pump-OutHyd
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
100 yr -High Pump-OutHyd
2.23
8.17
2.0887
3.6770
'
500 yr -High Pump-OutHyd
2.23
7.67
3.6245
4.7980
'
Node ID: Pond 8
Desc: Stage Storage
Start EI: 140.0000 ft
Max EI:
152.0000 ft
Stage Area
Volume
Volume
140.00 3908.00
0.00 cf
0.0000 acft
142.00 7147.00
11055.00 cf
0.2538 acft
'
144.00 10486.00
28688.00 cf
0.6586 acft
146.00 13926.00
53100.00 cf
1.2190 acft
148.00 17467.00
84493.00 cf
1.9397 acft
'
150.00 24402.00
126362.00 cf
2.9009 acft
152.00 53888.00
204652.00 cf
4.6982 acft
t
7
I
Control Structure ID: Combo - Combination Control Structure
Descrip: Combined Pumps
Start EI Max EI Increment
140.0000 ft 146.0000 ft 0.10
ID List: Low Mid High Pump
Control Structure ID: Low - Pump rating curve
Control Structure ID: High Pump - Pump rating curve
Descrip:
Descrip:
Lowest Pump
Max EI Increment
145.0000 ft
146.0000 ft 0.10
Low Depth:
Start EI
Max EI
Increment
High Depth:
3.00 ft High Rate: 2.23 cfs
'
140.0000 ft
142.5000 ft
0.10
B8
5.92
8.17
Low Depth:
0.00 ft
SBUH/SCS
Low Rate:
1.11 cfs
'
Mid Depth:
High Depth:
1.50 ft
2.50 ft
5.4660
Mid Rate:
High Rate:
1.11 cfs
1.11 cfs
TYPEIA
10 yr
B8
11.06
8.17
6.3762
14.26
Control Structure ID: Mid - Pump rating curve
TYPEIA
'
Descrip:
Middle Pump
8.17
8.1007
14.26
SBUH/SCS
Start EI
Max EI
Increment
18.96
8.17
10.7728
143.1000 ft
144.0000 ft
0.10
500 yr
Low Depth:
0.00 ft
Low Rate:
2.23 cfs
'
Mid Depth:
1.00 ft
Mid Rate:
2.23 cfs
High Depth:
2.00 ft
High Rate:
2.23 cfs
Control Structure ID: High Pump - Pump rating curve
Descrip:
High Pump
Start EI
Max EI Increment
145.0000 ft
146.0000 ft 0.10
Low Depth:
0.00 ft Low Rate: 2.23 cfs
Mid Depth:
1.00 ft Mid Rate: 2.23 cfs
High Depth:
3.00 ft High Rate: 2.23 cfs
138 Event Summary:
BasinlD
-------
Peak Q
(cfs)
Peak T
(hrs)
Peak Vol
(ac -ft)
Area
ac
Method
/Loss
Raintype
Event
B8
2.82
8.17
1.8740
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
6 mon
B8
5.92
8.17
3.5688
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
2 yr
B8
9.40
8.17
5.4660
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
10 yr
B8
11.06
8.17
6.3762
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
25 yr
B8
14.18
8.17
8.1007
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
100 yr
B8
18.96
8.17
10.7728
14.26
SBUH/SCS
TYPEIA
500 yr
Drainage Area: 68
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd
Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00
SCS Abs:
0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs
Intv:
10.00 min
Area
CN
TC
Pervious 14.2600 ac
86.00
0.87 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac
0.00
0.00 hrs
Total 14.2600 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Basin 8
86.00
14.2600 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description:
Length:
Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed From B8
0.00 ft
0.00% 52.2000 52.20 min
Hydrograph ID: B8 - 6 mon
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 2.8203 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
1.8740 acft
Hydrograph ID: B8 - 2 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 5.9171 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
3.5688 acft
Hydrograph ID: B8 - 10 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 9.3988 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
5.4660 acft
Hydrograph ID: B8 - 25 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 11.0594 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
6.3762 acft
Hydrograph ID: B8 -100 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 14.1824 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
8.1007 acft
Hydrograph ID: B8 - 500 yr
Area: 14.2600 ac Hyd Int:
10.00 min
Base Flow:
Peak Flow: 18.9636 cfs Peak Time:
8.17 hrs
Hyd Vol:
10.7728 acft
W1NHM3 OUTPUT
' Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
' Western Washington Hydrology Model
PROJECT REPORT
I SEE SEPARATELY BOUND VOLUME FOR OUTPUT DATA
�1