COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

333 Broadalbin Street SW, PO Box 490, Albany, Oregon 97321-0144 | BUILDING 541-917-7553 | PLANNING 541-917-7550

cd.cityofalbany.net

Staff Report Floodplain Development Review

FP-02-19 August 8, 2019

Summary This staff report evaluates an application to construct a pedestrian bridge within the floodplain over Burkhart Creek along Knox Butte Road. This project is a required component for development of the 137-unit Timber Ridge Apartment Complex under Site Plan Review planning file SP-09-18.

Based on the effective Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Linn County, Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel No. 4101370218G, the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) is contained within the channel banks and a regulatory floodway has not been defined for the area.

A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer (Multi/Tech Engineering) shows that the proposed pedestrian bridge will cause no increase in water surface elevations for the base flood elevation (BFE) and will cause only minor increases in flood velocities (Attachment E).

The proposed project includes alterations to a watercourse and modifications within a regulated floodplain and floodway. The City of Albany Development Code (ADC) allows development if Floodplain Development Review criteria ADC6.100, 6.101 and 6.111 are met; these criteria addressed in this report and must be satisfied to grant approval for this application.

Application Information Proposal: Floodplain Review for a Pedestrian Crossing over Burkhart Creek

Review Body: Staff (Type I-L review)

Property Owner/Applicant: I & E Construction, Inc. 9550 SE Clackamas Road, Clackamas, OR 97015

Engineer: Mark Grenz, Multi/Tech Engineering 1155 SE 13th Street, Salem, OR 97308

Representative: Brandie Dalton, Multi/Tech Engineering 1155 SE 13th Street, Salem, OR 97308

Address/Location 150 Timber Ridge Street NE

Map/Tax Lot: Linn County Assessor’s Map No. 11S-03W-03B; Tax Lot 101

Zoning: OS-Open Space with Riparian Corridor Overlay (/RC) and Significant Wetland Overlay (/SW)

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 2 of 7

Comprehensive Plan Open Space Designation:

Existing Land Use: Vacant and Public Right-of-Way

Neighborhood: East

Surrounding Zoning: North: OS – Open Space South: RS-5 - Residential Single Family and OS East: OS West: OS

Surrounding Uses: North: Vacant, Wetlands & Burkhart Creek South: Knox Butte Road & Burkhart Creek East: Vacant, Wetlands and Multi-family development West: Vacant and Single-family homes

Prior History: File SP-09-18: Site Plan Review to construct a 137-unit apartment complex.

Public Notice A public Notice of Filing was mailed to surrounding property owners within 100 feet of the subject property on June 7, 2019. At the time the comment period ended on June 21, 2019, the Albany Planning Division had not received any written comments regarding the proposed project. In addition, notice was provided to Linn County, the Natural Hazards Program of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, and the Oregon Department of State Lands at least 30 days prior to issuance of a decision on this project

Analysis of Development Code Criteria The Albany Development Code (ADC) includes the following review criteria, which must be met for this application to be approved. Code criteria are written in bold followed by findings, conclusions, and conditions of approval where conditions are necessary to meet the review criteria.

Floodway Restrictions (ADC 6.100) No development is allowed in any floodway except when the review body finds that the development will not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the 100-year flood. The finding shall be based upon applicant-supplied evidence prepared in accordance with standard engineering methodology approved by FEMA and certified by a registered professional engineer and upon documentation that one of the following criteria has been met: (1) The development does not involve the construction of permanent or habitable structures

(including fences). (2) The development is a public or private park or recreational use or municipal utility use. (3) The development is a water-dependent structure such as a dock, pier, bridge, or floating

marina. For temporary storage of materials or equipment: (4) The temporary storage or processing of materials will not become buoyant, flammable,

hazardous explosive or otherwise potentially injurious to human, animal or plant life in times of flooding.

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 3 of 7

(5) The temporary storage of material or equipment is not subject to major damage by floods and is firmly anchored to prevent flotation or is readily removable from the area within the time available after flood warning.

If a floodway boundary is not designated on an official FEMA map available to the City, the floodway boundary can be estimated from available data and new studies. Proposed development along the estimated floodway boundary shall not result in an increase of the base flood level greater than one foot as certified by a registered professional engineer.

Findings of Fact 1.1 The proposal is to construct a pedestrian bridge within the floodplain over Burkhart Creek along Knox

Butte Road. This project is a required component for development of the 137-unit Timber Ridge Apartment Complex under Site Plan Review planning file SP-09-18. Because this bridge is within the public right-of-way, it will be dedicated and owned by the City of Albany, future inspections and maintenance will be conducted by the City.

1.2 Based on the effective FEMA FIS for Linn County, FIRM Panel No. 4101370218G, the proposed project is located within the SFHA. The FIRM shows the SFHA is contained within the channel banks and a regulatory floodway has not been defined for the area.

1.3 A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer (Multi/Tech Engineering) shows that the proposed pedestrian bridge will cause no increase in water surface elevations for the base flood elevation (BFE) (Attachment E).

1.4 The City requested a review of this hydraulic analysis from Ken Puhn, PE, CFM, of WEST Consultants, Inc., who found the application material adequately addresses ADC 6.100(1) (Attachment B).

Alteration of a Watercourse (ADC 6.101) A Watercourse is considered altered when any changes occur within its banks, including installation of new culverts and bridges, or size modifications to existing culverts and bridges.

Criterion 1 No development shall diminish the flood-carrying capacity of a watercourse. FINDINGS OF FACT 1.1 The proposal is to construct a pedestrian bridge within the floodplain over Burkhart Creek along Knox

Butte Road, which is considered alteration of a watercourse per ADC 6.101.

1.2 A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer, Multi/Tech Engineering, details the development of an HEC-RAS hydraulic model for the Burkhart Creek (Attachment E). The report shows that the proposed pedestrian bridge will cause no increase in water surface elevations for the base flood and will not diminish the flood-carrying capacity of Burkhart Creek.

1.3 The City requested a review of this hydraulic analysis from Ken Puhn, PE, CFM, of WEST Consultants, Inc., who found the application material adequately addresses ADC 6.101(1) (Attachment B); therefore, the project will not diminish the flood-carrying capacity of a watercourse.

Criterion 2

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 4 of 7

Subject to the foregoing regulation, no person shall alter or relocate a watercourse without necessary approval from the Floodplain Administrator. FINDINGS OF FACT 2.1 Through this floodplain development review, the Floodplain Administrator grants the necessary

approval for the proposed development.

Criterion 3 Prior to approval, the applicant shall provide a 30-day written notice to the City, any adjacent community, the Natural Hazards Program of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, and the DSL. FINDINGS OF FACT 3.1 Written notice has been provided to the necessary communities and agencies at least 30 days prior to

issuing a decision for the proposed development.

Criterion 4 The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring necessary maintenance of the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood-carrying capacity is not diminished. FINDINGS OF FACT 4.1 The proposed pedestrian bridge will be dedicated to and owned by the City of Albany. Future

inspections and maintenance will be conducted by the City, which will ensure the flood-carrying capacity of the watercourse is not diminished.

Grading, Fill, Excavation and Paving in the Floodplain (ADC 6.111) Criterion 1 Provisions have been made to maintain adequate flood-carrying capacity of existing watercourses, including future maintenance of that capacity. FINDINGS OF FACT 1.1 The proposal is to construct a pedestrian bridge within the floodplain over Burkhart Creek along Knox

Butte Road.

1.2 Based on the effective FEMA FIS for Linn County, FIRM Panel No. 4101370218G, the proposed project is located within the SFHA. The FIRM shows the SFHA is contained within the channel banks and a regulatory floodway has not been defined for the area.

1.3 A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer, Multi/Tech Engineering, details the development of an HEC-RAS hydraulic model for the bypass channel (Attachment E). The model results show that the proposed improvements will maintain adequate flood-carrying capacity of existing watercourses.

1.4 The City requested a review of this hydraulic analysis from Ken Puhn, PE, CFM, of WEST Consultants, Inc., who found the application material adequately addresses ADC 6.111(1) (Attachment B).

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 5 of 7

1.5 The proposed pedestrian bridge will be dedicated and owned by the City of Albany. Future inspections and maintenance will be conducted by the City, which will ensure the flood-carrying capacity of the watercourse is maintained.

1.6 At the conclusion of grading and filling the project area, documentation is necessary to verify implementation is consistent with the plans as proposed.

1.7 This review criterion can be met with the following condition of approval.

CONDITION Condition 1 At the conclusion of the proposed project, the following documentation shall be submitted to

the Community Development Department:

a) As-built drawings with elevations provided; and

b) Letter from the Engineer of Record who is licensed in the state of Oregon, stating that the fill was placed in accordance with the signed plans.

Criterion 2

The proposal will be approved only where adequate provisions for stormwater runoff have been made that are consistent with the Public Works Engineering standards, or are otherwise approved by the City Engineer. FINDINGS OF FACT 2.1 City utility maps show an 18-inch public storm drainage main along the north side of Knox Butte

Road, east of Burkhart Creek, and a 12-inch main in Timber Ridge Street.

2.2 Burkhart Creek is the main drainage feature in this area. Storm water runoff from development in this area will ultimately be discharged to Burkhart Creek. Any storm water runoff from the proposed pedestrian bridge over Burkhart Creek will be directed to the Creek. The applicant is proposing to provide on-site detention and storm water quality facilities to treat runoff from the proposed development on the site. The runoff will be directed to Burkhart Creek after flowing through the on-site drainage facilities.

2.3 The City’s Engineering staff has reviewed the stormwater plans and has determined that they are acceptable, and that the development has made adequate provisions for storm water runoff.

Criterion 3 The proposal will not increase the existing velocity of flood flows so as to exceed the erosive velocity limits of soils in the flood area. FINDINGS OF FACT 3.1 A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer (Multi/Tech Engineering) details the

development of an HEC-RAS hydraulic model for the proposed project (Attachment E). The model results indicate that the proposed development will not increase flood velocities.

3.2 The City requested a review of this hydraulic analysis from Ken Puhn, PE, CFM, of WEST Consultants, Inc., who found the application material adequately addresses ADC 6.111(3) (Attachment B).

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 6 of 7

3.3 The proposal will not increase the existing velocity of flood flows to exceed the erosive velocity limits of soils in the flood area.

Criterion 4

No grading, fill, excavation, or paving will be permitted over an existing public storm drain, sanitary sewer, or water line unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving will not be detrimental to the anticipated service life, operation and maintenance of the existing utility.

FINDINGS OF FACT 4.1 The bridge has been reviewed by the City’s Public Works Department as part of a Site Improvement

Permit. The proposed plans show there will be no adverse impacts to existing public utilities.

4.2 The proposed project will not be detrimental to the anticipated service life, operation and maintenance of the existing utilities.

Criterion 5 In areas where no floodway has been designated on the applicable FIRM, grading will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated by the applicant that the cumulative effect of the proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving when combined with all other existing and planned development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than a maximum of one foot (cumulative) at any point within the community. FINDINGS OF FACT 5.1 Based on the effective FEMA FIS for Linn County, FIRM Panel No. 4101370218G, the SFHA is

contained within the channel banks and a regulatory floodway has not been defined for the area.

5.2 A hydraulics report provided by the applicant’s engineer, Multi/Tech Engineering, details the development of an HEC-RAS hydraulic model for the bypass channel (Attachment E). The report shows that the proposed bridge will cause no increase in water surface elevations for the BFE.

5.3 The City requested a review of this hydraulic analysis from Ken Puhn, PE, CFM, of WEST Consultants, Inc., who found the application material adequately addresses ADC 6.111(5) (Attachment B); therefore, the cumulative effect of the project and all other existing and planned development will not increase the base flood elevation more than one foot.

Criterion 6

The applicant shall notify the City of Albany, any adjacent community, and the Natural Hazards Mitigation Office of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development of any proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving activity that will result in alteration or relocation of a watercourse (See Section 6.101).

FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSION 6.1 Written notice has been provided to the necessary communities and agencies at least 30 days prior to

issuing a decision for the proposed development, in accordance with ADC 6.101.

Criterion 7

FP-02-19 Staff Report August 8, 2019 Page 7 of 7

All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry waters to the nearest practicable watercourse approved by the designee as a safe place to deposit such waters. Erosion of ground in the area of discharge shall be prevented by installation of non-erosive down spouts and diffusers or other devices. FINDINGS OF FACT 7.1 The proposed piped storm drain system will carry waters to the Burkhart Creek.

7.2 An Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control (EPSC) permit has been reviewed and approved for the proposed project, which will prevent ground erosion in the area.

Criterion 8

Building pads shall have a drainage gradient of two percent toward approved drainage facilities, unless waived by the Building Official or designee. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSION

8.1 No building pads are proposed to be constructed with this project; therefore, this criterion is not applicable.

Overall Conclusion As proposed and conditioned, the application for Floodplain Development Review to construct a Pedestrian Crossing over Burkhart Creek along Knox Butte Road satisfies all applicable review criteria as outlined in this report.

Condition of Approval Condition 1 At the conclusion of the project, the following documentation shall be submitted to the

Community Development Department:

a) As-built drawings with elevations provided; and

b) Letter from the Engineer of Record who is licensed in the state of Oregon, stating that the fill was placed in accordance with the signed plans.

Attachments A. Location Map B. Floodplain Review by Ken Puhn, WEST Consultants (dated May 29, 2019) C. Applicant’s Findings D. Applicant’s Memo E. No-Rise HEC-RAS Analysis, Pedestrian Bridge (dated May 13, 2019) F. Plan Sheet 201 G. Plan Sheet 401 H. Plan Sheet 402

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

RS-5

RS-6.5

MUC

RM OS

Timbe

r Ridg

e St.

Bree

zy W

ay

Storm

y St.

Windy Ave.

Somerset Dr.

Alameda Ave.

Casti

ng St

.

Rosehill Ave.

Derby

St.

Bentley Dr.

Gusty Ave.

Edgewater Dr.

Spring Ave.

Whi rlw

indDr

.

Thoroughbred Ave.

Cante

rbury

St.Dunlap Ave.

Churc

hill D

owns

St.

Dunlap Ave

Pitt S

t.

Twist

er St

.

Bentl

ey C

t.

Somerset Dr.

Location: Linn Co. Assessor’s Map 11S-03W-03B Tax Lot 101The City of Albany's Infrastructure records, drawings, and other documentshave been gathered over many decades, using differing standards forquality control, documentation, and verification. All of the data providedrepresents current information in a readily available format. While the dataprovided is generally believed to be accurate, occasionally it proves to beincorrect; thus its accuracy is not warranted. Prior to making any propertypurchases or other investments based in full or in part upon the materialprovided, it is specifically advised that you independently field verify the ¯ Date: July 27, 2018

Planning DivisionCity of Albany - 333 Broadalbin St. SW, Albany, Oregon 97321 (541) 917- 7550

0 190 380 570 76095Feet

Subject Property

Attachment A

Attachment B.1

   

APPENDIX A – Floodplain Review Checklist

Attachment B.2

City of Albany, Oregon Floodplain Permit Review Checklist

Permit Reference No: FP-02-19 Project: Knox Butte Road Pedestrian Bridge Stream: Burkhart Creek Projection Description: Construction of a pedestrian bridge over Burkhart Creek Reviewed By: Ken Puhn, P.E., CFM

6.100 Floodway Restrictions.

☐ FEMA Designated Floodway

☐ Development is outside the designated floodway

☐ Development within floodway does not result in any increase in 100-year flood levels

☐ Finding based upon applicant-supplied evidence

☐ Certified by a registered professional engineer

☐ Allowed Floodway Development

☐ 6.100(1) Does not involve the construction of permanent or habitable structures (including fences)

☐ 6.100(2) A public or private park or recreational use or municipal utility use

☐ 6.100(3) A water-dependent structure such as a dock, pier, bridge, or floating marina.

☐ 6.100(4) The temporary storage or processing of materials will not become buoyant, flammable, hazardous explosive or otherwise potentially injurious to human, animal or plant life in times of flooding.

☐ 6.100(5) The temporary storage of material or equipment are not subject to major damage by floods and is firmly anchored to prevent flotation or is readily removable from the area within the time available after flood warning.

☐ Regulated Floodplain (Non designated FEMA Floodway)

☐ Development along estimated floodway boundary shall not result in an increase of the base flood level greater than 1-foot

☐ Finding based upon applicant-supplied evidence

☐ Certified by a registered professional engineer

Attachment B.3

6.101 Alteration of a Watercourse

☒ Watercourse altered

☒ changes occur within its banks

☒ installation of new culverts and/or bridges

☐ size modifications to existing culverts and bridges

☒ 6.101(1) Development does not diminish the flood-carrying capacity of a watercourse. Finding based upon applicant-supplied evidence.

☒ 6.101(4) The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring necessary maintenance of the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished.

6.111 Grading, Fill, Excavation, and Paving

☐ FEMA Designated Floodway

☐ Grading is outside the floodway.

☐ Grading is inside the floodway and does not result in any increase in flood levels within the floodway during the occurrence of the 100-year flood.

☐ Finding based upon applicant-supplied evidence

☐ Certified by a registered professional engineer

☒ Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year floodplain)

☒ 6.111(1) Provisions have been made to maintain adequate flood-carrying capacity of existing watercourses, including future maintenance of that capacity.

☒ 6.111(3) Proposal will not increase the existing velocity of flood flows so as to exceed the erosive velocity limits of soils in the flood area.

☒ Regulated Floodplain (Non designated FEMA Floodway)

☒ 6.111(5) Demonstrate the cumulative effect of the proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving when combined with all other existing and planned development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than a maximum of one foot (cumulative) at any point within the community.

Attachment B.4

Floodplain Development Permit Timber Ridge Apartments

February 6, 2019

Floodplain

Burkhart Creek runs through the southwestern corner of the subject property. The subject property also has an area located in the 100-year floodplain. The floodplain area on the property has been adequately considered. The applicant has submitted a flood plain development permit and a High-Rise Analysis with the application materials.

ADC 6.100: As shown on the site plan, there is development proposed within the floodway. Therefore, this criteria has been met. ADC 6.101: Public utilities and facilities will be underground and constructed to ADC and other standards, which will insulate them from flood waters and any potential damage there from. The storm drainage system will comply with Albany Development Code Standards and will provide drainage for the street and the adjacent lots thereby reducing, if not eliminating, exposure to flood damage. The Flood base line is identified on the site plan. The Flood base will not be affected since there will be no development within the area. At the time of building permit review, the buildings will be reviewed for Floodplain standard compliance as outlined in the code. The development will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood. A registered Engineer will design the buildings to meet Code and the required standards

ADC 6.111:

(1) Provisions have been made to maintain adequate flood-carrying capacity of existing watercourses, including future maintenance of that capacity.

There is no FEMA designated floodway or floodplain on the subject property. It has been determined that our development will not create an increase in capacity. Therefore, flood-carrying capacity is not affected. This criteria has been met. (2) The proposal will be approved only where adequate provisions for stormwater runoff have been made that are consistent with the Public Works Engineering standards, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.

Attachment C.1

Stormwater detention will be provided with the development of the apartments consistent with Public Works Standards. The detention will match the 5, 10, and 25-year storm runoff from the development to the pre-developed runoff for each storm event.

Therefore, this criteria has been met.

(3) The proposal will not increase the existing velocity of flood flows so as to exceed the erosive velocity limits of soils in the flood area.

No fill is proposed to be placed within the floodplain. Therefore, there is no change in velocity and will not cause erosion problems.

Therefore, this criteria has been met.

(4) No grading, fill, excavation, or paving will be permitted over an existing public storm drain, sanitary sewer, or water line unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving will not be detrimental to the anticipated service life, operation and maintenance of the existing utility.

There are no existing public storm drain, sanitary sewer, or water lines on the property. Therefore, no grading, fill, excavation or paving will be done over existing public storm drain, sanitary sewer, or water line as shown on the grading plans.

This criterion has been met.

(5) In areas where no floodway has been designated on the applicable FIRM, grading will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated by the applicant that the cumulative effect of the proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving when combined with all other existing and planned development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than a maximum of one foot (cumulative) at any point within the community.

There is no FEMA designated floodway or floodplain on the subject property. Grading plans were submitted and approved as part of the original site plan approval, SP-09-18.

This criteria has been met.

(6) The applicant shall notify the City of Albany, any adjacent community, and the Natural Hazards Mitigation Office of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development of any proposed grading, fill, excavation, or paving activity that will result in alteration or relocation of a watercourse (See Section 6.101).

Prior to development, all agencies will be notified of our proposal. Furthermore, all required State, Local, and Federal permits will be obtained as required.

This criterion will be met.

(7) All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry waters to the nearest practicable watercourse approved by the designee as a safe place to deposit such waters. Erosion of ground in the area of discharge shall be prevented by installation of non-erosive down spouts and diffusers or other devices.

Attachment C.2

All drainage facilities will be designed as required. A drainage report was submitted and approved with the original site plan approval, SP-09-18.

Therefore, these criteria will be met.

(8) Building pads shall have a drainage gradient of two percent toward approved drainage facilities, unless waived by the Building Official or designee.

This criterion will be met at the time of building permit review.

Attachment C.3

MEMO {3u,,, t,,,,

RE:

ENGTNEERTNG SERVICES, INC.

Date: February L5,2OL9

To: Building DepartmentCity of Albany

From: Mark D. Grenz,

Timber Ridge ApartmentsFloodplain Review lor Creek Crossing

Our office received comments on February 6,2019 regarding application materials needed in order tosubmit the No-Rise Analysis prepared for the proposed pedestrian bridge as a part of the Timber Ridge

Apartment Complex. This memo is to address these comments from the City of Albany.

6.100 Floodwav Restrictions

As a part of the requirements for the construction of the pedestrian bridge, a no-rise hydraulic analysis(HEC-RAS) was performed by our office. This analysis showed that there was no increase in the watersurface elevation either upstream or downstream of the proposed pedestrian bridge. ln addition, thisproposal complies with section 6.100 because it is a public pedestrian bridge, complying with criteria (2)

of section 6.L00.

This section of Burkhart Creek does not include any mapped or FEMA designated flood hazard areas (no

designated floodplain or floodway). Data for the hydraulic analysis was gathered from a previously

adopted hydraulic analysis completed by WRG.

5.101 Alteration of a Watercourse

The hydraulic analysis for the proposed pedestrian bridge was completed to ensure there was no

diminished capacity of the watercourse. The analysis was done with a flowrate of 506 cfs. The output

0-2010

Multi/tech Engineering Services, lnc.1155 13th Street SE

Salem OR 97302

(503) 363-9227 PHONE(so3) 364-1250 FAX

off ice@ mtensineeri ng. net

Attachment D.1

table for the proposed conditions shows that this flowrate is achieved through the length of the modeledcreek for the proposed conditions. ln addition, the comparison of the water surface elevation shows thereis actually a small decrease (0.01feet) when comparing the pre to post development conditions. This islikely from a decrease in the roughness along that section of creek from the installation of the pedestrian

bridge.

No alterations are being made to the location of the waterway.

5.111 Grading, Filling, Pavins in the Floodplain

Because there is no designated FEMA flood hazard in this area, criteria (5) has been addressed throughthe preparation of the hydraulic analysis. This analysis has shown that there is no increase in the watersurface elevation. A closer look at the output tables for the pre to post development conditions showsthere is no noticeable increase in the velocity of the water through the creek (0.01 feet per second on twosections).

The hydraulic analysis addresses this criterion.

Floodplain and Floodwav Boundaries shown on the plans

This area does not contain a mapped floodplain or floodway. While other studies have been done andaccepted by the City of Albany, base flood elevations have not been formally adopted. The hydraulicanalysis performed (as required) is not for the purpose of establishing a floodplain or floodway, but rather,an analysis to show that there is no increase in the water surface elevation.

For these reasons, we will not be showing any floodplain or floodway boundaries on the plan.

Replanting olan

I have had previous discussions with Ron lrish regarding the replanting plan for the pedestrian bridge. Myunderstanding from those conversations was that we would not be required to do any replanting to theareas impacted that are located within the public rights of way. Our designs do NOT impact any riparianareas outside of the right of way, other than that impacted as part of the site development.

With this information, I believe the application giteria have been addressed. Please contact my officeshould any further information be needed.

Multi/Tech Engineering Services, Inc.1155 13th Street SE

Salem OR 97302

(s03) 363-9227 PHONE(s03) 364-1260 FAX

off ice@ mtengineeri ne. net

Attachment D.2

1155 13th Street SE

Salem OR 97302www.mtenRineering. net

No-Rrsr H EC-RAS AwRlYsls

FOR

Timber Ridge ApartmentsNo-Rise HEC-RAS Analysis

Albany, Oregon

May 73,2079

lenew date: b.d().Ulq

ENG I N EER'ruG SERVICES, I NC.

PHONE

FAX:

EMAIL:

(s031363-s227(s03) 364-1260

mgrenz@ mtengineering.net

W%MUL@WW

Tt Ilrecu

Attachment E.1

INTRODUCTION

The construction of pedestrian bridge along the north side of Knox Butte Road is required as part of the

Timber Ridge Apartment project. The placement of the bridge across Burkhart Creek requires a HEC-

RAS analysis to ensure that the placement of the bridge does not cause any change to the water surface

elevation of Burkhart Creek. This report provides the no-rise analysis to ensure the placement of the

bridge will not affect the Burkhart Creek water surface.

The Burkhard Creek run from the south to the north, turning after it passes under Know Butte to the

northwest. The aerial photo below shows the area of interest for this study. The study looked at some

areas south of the existing pedestrian bridge and Know Butte bridge, to an area north of the proposed

pedestrian bridge a few hundred feet.

ANALYSIS

In order to establish that the placement of the proposed pedestrian path will result in a no-rise scenario

for the pedestrian bridge, two HEC-RAS analyses were performed. An existing conditions analysis was

done to determine the water surface elevation along this stretch of Burkhart Creek. A proposed

conditions analysis was then performed to confirm that the proposed design would not change the

water surface elevation.

Attachment E.2

There are two main components to a HEC-RAS analysis: topographic data and flow information.

Topography

Reliable topographic information is needed to ensure the cross sections entered into the model

accurately represent the actual channel.

Topographic data was obtained by the Multi/Tech survey department. A plan showing the topographic

map used for the analysis can be seen in Appendix A. The existing topographic data included both the

terrain of the waterway, but also topographic information for the Know Butte bridge and the existing

south pedestrian bridge. This information was combined with design details for the proposed north

pedestrian bridge for the proposed conditions analysis.

Cross section locations were selected by the engineer to represent locations where flow/topography

changed. In order to keep the flow running perpendicular to the cross section, a few of the cross

sections were “dog-legged”. This was done to ensure the average flow was perpendicular to the cross

section. A screen shot of the proposed geometry can be seen below:

Attachment E.3

The following Manning’s n coefficients were used for the cross sections:

Manning's n

Flood Plains: Pasture no brush, High grass 0.035

Streams: clean, straight, full, no rifts or deep pools 0.030

Streams: clean, straight, full, no rifts or deep pools, with stones and weeds

0.035

Flood Plains: Brush, light brush, heavy weeds 0.050

Flood Plains: Brush, scattered brush, heavy weeds 0.050

These Manning’s values were manually entered for the cross sections in an effort to more accurately

reflect the change in roughness present within the channel. These values were taken from the HEC-RAS

Hydraulics Reference Manual. The exact values and stations used for each cross section can be seen in

the cross section screenshots, found in Appendices B (existing conditions) and C (proposed conditions),

as well as one the output cross sections in Appendix E for the existing conditions and Appendix F for the

proposed conditions.

The cross section geometry was also altered to account for passive storage areas versus active flow area

by adding ineffective flow areas. The ineffective flow areas allow the model to more accurately reflect

the flow pattern of the creek. These ineffective flow areas can be seen on the cross section geometry

shown in Appendix B and C.

Flow Data

A previous study was done on this area as a part of a previous development and the construction of the

Know Butte Road bridge and the pedestrian bridge. This study was done by WRG (dated February 9,

2004) for the purposes of Brookstone Estates. As a part of this study, a SWMM model was run to

determine the amount of water that flows past this site and how much is diverted to Truax Creek. This

report states (on page 14):

During the 100-year event, of the 1003 cfs, 497 cfs were directed through Truax,

while the remaining 506 cfs continues through the site.

This report was reviewed and accepted by the City of Ablany. For this reason, the flowrate used for the

HEC-RAS analysis was 506 cfs.

The screen shot below shows the flow data input for the model:

Attachment E.4

Boundary conditions were also set for the flow data. Because a previously adopted HEC-RAS study has

been conducted for this area, the known water surface elevation from that project was used as a

boundary condition. A downstream boundary condition was set at 224.29 (from page 47 of Brookstone

Estates Drainage Report at station 5397).

Crossing Geometry

A pedestrian bridge is to be installed directly downstream of the existing Know Butte Road bridge. The

bridge design information was input into the existing conditions geometry to ensure that there was no

change in the water surface elevation when compared to the existing conditions.

The bridge geometry and deck information can be seen on the following page:

Attachment E.5

Attachment E.6

The downstream cross section for the proposed pedestrian bridge is located 78 feet downstream. The

obstructions are not very wide, with the abutments not extending into the effective flow areas. Because

of this, the expansion reach won’t be long and the downstream distance of 78 will be sufficient.

There are three bridges almost immediately parallel to each other in this area. The existing Knox Butte

bridge runs across the creek immediately downstream of the existing pedestrian bridge. The proposed

pedestrian bridge is located just downstream of the Knox Butte bridge. Expansion and contraction

coefficients were added for the bounding cross sections for each of the bridges.

RESULTS

The table below shows the water surface elevation for both the existing conditions as well as the

proposed conditions.

Existing Proposed ΔWS Existing Proposed ΔV

399.6 224.69 224.69 0.00 2.66 2.66 0

365.6 224.68 224.68 0.00 2.62 2.62 0

355.0 224.67 224.67 0.00 2.65 2.65 0

341.5 224.64 224.64 0.00 2.89 2.89 0

334.5 224.66 224.66 0.00 2.51 2.51 0

293.3 224.55 224.55 0.00 2.89 2.89 0

278.0 224.53 224.53 0.00 3.07 3.07 0

200.0 224.29 224.29 0.00 4.75 4.75 0

StationVelocity (ft/s)Water Surface Elevation

This data illustrates there is a no-rise result after the installation of the culvert modeled. Complete

output tables can be seen in Appendix D (existing conditions results) and E (proposed conditions

results).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed culvert and crossing do not impact the water surface elevation upstream or downstream

of the structure for the 100-year storm event. The analysis demonstrates a “no-rise” scenario is met.

CONTACT

If there are any further questions or concerns regarding this analysis, please contact Natalie Janney by

phone (503-363-9227) or e-mail (NJanney@mtengineering.net).

Attachment E.7

Attachment E.8

Attachment E.9

APPENDIX A: TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS

Attachment E.10

Attachment E.11

Attachment E.12

APPENDIX B: EXISTING CONDITIONS GEOMETRY

Attachment E.13

Attachment E.14

Attachment E.15

Attachment E.16

Attachment E.17

APPENDIX C: PROPOSED CONDITIONS GEOMETRY

Attachment E.18

Attachment E.19

Attachment E.20

Attachment E.21

Attachment E.22

Attachment E.23

Attachment E.24

Attachment E.25

APPENDIX D: EXISTING CONDITIONS RESULTS

Attachment E.26

HEC

-RAS Plan: ExistR

ev River: Burkhart C

reek Reach: Ped Bridge Profile: PF 1

Reach

River Sta

ProfileQ

TotalM

in Ch El

W.S. Elev

Crit W

.S.E.G

. ElevE.G

. SlopeVel C

hnlFlow

AreaTop W

idthFroude # C

hl(cfs)

(ft)(ft)

(ft)(ft)

(ft/ft)(ft/s)

(sq ft)(ft)

Ped Bridge399.6

PF 1506.00

219.00224.69

221.62224.80

0.0003942.66

196.3170.50

0.22Ped Bridge

365.6 PF 1

506.00219.00

224.68221.36

224.780.000360

2.62201.83

82.830.21

Ped Bridge355

PF 1506.00

218.00224.67

220.66224.78

0.0002932.65

205.0383.22

0.19Ped Bridge

352.3 Bridge

Ped Bridge341.5

PF 1506.00

218.00224.64

224.770.000373

2.89204.53

54.000.21

Ped Bridge334.5

PF 1506.00

218.00224.66

220.68224.75

0.0002752.51

235.3862.10

0.19Ped Bridge

334.1 Bridge

Ped Bridge293.3

PF 1506.00

218.00224.55

220.60224.68

0.0003592.89

177.3833.74

0.21Ped Bridge

278 PF 1

506.00217.00

224.53220.35

224.670.000370

3.07177.09

48.090.22

Ped Bridge200

PF 1506.00

217.88224.29

222.35224.60

0.0014564.75

132.30135.40

0.39

Attachment E.27

050

100150

200250

216

218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No R

ISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019

Main C

hannel Distance (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Leg

en

d

WS PF 1

Ground

Burkhart Creek Ped Bridge

Attachment E.28

399.6

365.6 355

341.5

334.5

293.3

278

200

Pedestrian Bridge No R

ISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019

Leg

en

d

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

Attachment E.29

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 200

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.30

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 399.6

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.31

0 20 40 60 80 100219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 365.6

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.32

0 20 40 60 80 100218

220

222

224

226

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 355

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.33

0 20 40 60 80 100218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 352.3 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.34

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 352.3 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.35

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 341.5

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.36

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 334.5

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.37

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 334.1 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.38

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 334.1 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.39

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 293.3

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.40

0 10 20 30 40 50216

218

220

222

224

226

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019 RS = 278

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.41

APPENDIX E: PROPOSED CONDITIONS RESULTS

Attachment E.42

HEC

-RAS Plan: PropR

ev River: Burkhart C

reek Reach: Ped Bridge Profile: PF 1

Reach

River Sta

ProfileQ

TotalM

in Ch El

W.S. Elev

Crit W

.S.E.G

. ElevE.G

. SlopeVel C

hnlFlow

AreaTop W

idthFroude # C

hl(cfs)

(ft)(ft)

(ft)(ft)

(ft/ft)(ft/s)

(sq ft)(ft)

Ped Bridge399.6

PF 1506.00

219.00224.69

221.62224.80

0.0003942.66

196.3270.50

0.22Ped Bridge

365.6 PF 1

506.00219.00

224.68221.36

224.780.000360

2.62201.83

82.830.21

Ped Bridge355

PF 1506.00

218.00224.67

220.66224.78

0.0002932.65

205.0383.22

0.19Ped Bridge

352.3 Bridge

Ped Bridge341.5

PF 1506.00

218.00224.64

224.770.000373

2.89204.53

54.000.21

Ped Bridge334.5

PF 1506.00

218.00224.66

220.68224.75

0.0002752.51

235.3862.10

0.19Ped Bridge

334.1 Bridge

Ped Bridge293.3

PF 1506.00

218.00224.55

220.60224.68

0.0003592.89

177.3933.74

0.21Ped Bridge

290 Bridge

Ped Bridge278

PF 1506.00

217.00224.53

220.35224.67

0.0003703.07

177.0948.09

0.22Ped Bridge

200 PF 1

506.00217.88

224.29222.35

224.600.001456

4.75132.30

91.000.39

Attachment E.43

050

100150

200250

216

218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No R

ISE Plan: ProposedREVISED

5/17/2019

Main C

hannel Distance (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Leg

en

d

WS PF 1

Ground

Burkhart Creek Ped Bridge

Attachment E.44

399.6

365.6 355

341.5

334.5

293.3

278

200

Pedestrian Bridge No R

ISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019

Leg

en

d

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

Attachment E.45

0 20 40 60 80 100217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 200

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.46

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 399.6

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.47

0 20 40 60 80 100219

220

221

222

223

224

225

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 365.6

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.48

0 20 40 60 80 100218

220

222

224

226

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 355

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.49

0 20 40 60 80 100218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 352.3 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.50

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 352.3 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.51

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 341.5

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.52

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 334.5

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.53

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 334.1 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.54

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 334.1 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.55

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40218

220

222

224

226

228

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 293.3

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.56

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 290 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.57

0 10 20 30 40 50216

218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 290 BR

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.58

0 10 20 30 40 50216

218

220

222

224

226

Pedestrian Bridge No RISE Plan: ProposedREVISED 5/17/2019 RS = 278

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

WS PF 1

Ground

Ineff

Bank Sta

.05 .03 .05

Attachment E.59

050

100150

200250

216

218

220

222

224

226

228

230

Pedestrian Bridge No R

ISE Plan: ExistingREV 5/17/2019

Main C

hannel Distance (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Leg

en

d

WS PF 1

Ground

Burkhart Creek Ped Bridge

Attachment E.60

Δ

M

T

E

N

G

I

N

E

E

R

I

N

G

.

N

E

T

0'1 IN

CH

20'

SCA

LE: 1" = 20'

JO

B #

Date:

Design:

Drawn:

Checked:

Scale:

PH. (503) 363 - 9227 FAX (503) 364-1260

www.mtengineering.net office@mtengineering.net

ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.

1155 13th ST. S.E. SALEM, OR. 97302

MULTI

TECH

NO CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS

OR REPRODUCTIONS TO BE

MADE TO THESE DRAWINGS

WITHOUT WRITTEN

AUTHORIZATION FROM THE

DESIGN ENGINEER.

DIMENSIONS & NOTES TAKE

PRECEDENCE OVER

GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION.

TIMBER RIDGE PLACE

APARTMENT COMPLEX

STREET IMPROVEMENTS

PLAN - KNOX BUTTE

6483

20

1

6483b C201-ST

M.D.G.

C.D.S.

B.M.G.

FEB. 2018

AS SHOWN

EX

PIR

ES

:06-30-2019

OR

EG

ON

M9

E

1

4,

U

L

Y

1

.

K

DG

R

R

A

J

N

Z

8

7

E

T

E

S

E

G

I

R

E

PR

F

R

O

NE

EG D

R

9 6

5

4

N

I

O

S

S

N

I

L

A

E

J:\6400-6499\6483-TimberRidgeApts\Dwg v18\6483b.dwg, C201-ST, 12/11/2018 2:38:36 PM, CSchreiner

Attachment F

OR

EG

ON

M9

E

1

4,

U

L

Y

1

.

K

DG

R

R

A

J

N

Z

8

7

E

T

E

S

E

G

I

R

E

PR

F

R

O

NE

EG D

R

9 6

5

4

N

I

O

S

S

N

I

L

A

E

Renew

date

Ju

ne

3

0, 2

01

9

1. REVISED PER REVIEW. D.G.G. 2019-04-23

N

2. REVISED PER REVIEW. D.G.G. 2019-05-15

SCALE: 1

/4" =

1'-0

"PED

ESTR

IAN B

RID

GE PLA

N

50'-0

" (O-O

)

9'-4"

8'-0" 8"8"

6'-0" 1'1'

1'-7

"1'-7

"

50'-0

" (O-O

)

9'-4"

10'-0

"10'-0

"10'-0

"10'-0

"10'-0

"

6'-1

0"

1'-7

"1'-7

"6'-1

0"

1'-7

"1'-7

"6'-1

0"

1'-7

"1'-7

"6'-1

0"

1'-7

"1'-7

"6'-1

0"

9'x1

0' PR

E-CAST

BRID

GE PA

NELS

.

W1

8x1

06

W1

8x1

06

EMBED

DED

WELD

PLATES

(2) EA

CH S

IDE 1

2" IN

FRO

MEN

D O

N PA

NEL (4

PERPA

NEL TO

TAL).

2'-7

"1'-0

"

HP 1

0x4

2 PILE

ELASTO

MER

IC EXPA

NSIO

NJO

INTS

(SEE JO

INT

SEA

LING

DETA

IL)

A A401A

401A

SCALE: 3

/4" =

1'-0

"PR

ECAST B

RID

GE PA

NEL

A401A

1'-6

"

A401A

9'-4

"

8'-0

"

6'-0

"1'-6

"

9'-4

"

1'-2"

6"8"

14"x1

4"x1

/2" EM

BED

DED

WELD

PLATES

.

W1

8x1

06

GRAD

E 50

STEEL S

UPPO

RT B

EAM

S.

HP 1

0x4

2 PILES

.

#4 B

ARS 1

2" O

.C. EA

CH

WAY TO

P AND

BO

TTOM

.

#4 B

ARS C

ONTIN

UO

US.

3/8

"

SCALE: 3

/4" =

1'-0

"W

ING

WALLS

DES

IGN

9'-4

"

8'-0

"

3'-0

"

7"

8"

1'-9

"

1'-0" H = AS REQUIRED (UP TO 6'-0")

3'-0

"

1'-9

"8"

7"

#4 B

ARS 1

2" O

.C.

EAC

H W

AY.

#4 B

ARS 1

2" O

.C.

EAC

H W

AY.

SCALE: 1

/4" =

1'-0

"PILE C

AP A

ND

WIN

G W

ALL PLA

N

50'-0

" (O-O

)

50'-0

" (O-O

)

W1

8x1

06

GIR

DER

W1

8x1

06

GIR

DER

B401A

BO

TTOM

OF PILE C

AP

BO

TTOM

OF PILE C

AP

C401A

C401A

401AC

401AC

SCALE: 3

/4" =

1'-0

"PILE C

AP S

ECTIO

N

401A

1/2

" STEEL C

AP PLA

TE.

B

3/8

"

W1

8x1

06

SUPPO

RT B

EAM

.

HP 1

0x4

2 PILE.

1/2

" STEEL C

AP PLA

TE.

3'-0"

#4 R

EBAR H

OO

P.

#4 B

ARS C

ONT. A

S S

HO

WN.

PREC

AST B

RID

GE D

ECK

14

"x14

"x1/2

" EMBED

DED

WELD

PLATE.

7"

2'-0

" 2'-7

"7"

6"8"

WIN

G W

ALL

WIN

G W

ALL

WIN

G W

ALL

WIN

G W

ALL

HP 1

0x4

2 PILE.

PILE CAP

2'-0

"7"

2'-0

"7"

44'-1

0"

14

"x14

"x1/2

" EMBED

DED

WELD

PLATES

.

L = A

S G

RAD

E REQ

UIR

ESL =

AS G

RAD

E REQ

UIR

ES

1'-2

"1'-2

"47'-8

"

SCALE: 1

/4" =

1'-0

"PED

ESTR

IAN B

RID

GE ELEV

ATIO

N

50'-0

" (O-O

)

46'-1

0" (C

-C PILE C

APS

)

EXISTIN

G G

RO

UND

LINE

EXISTIN

G G

RO

UND

LINE

W1

8x1

06

GIR

DER

GRAD

E 50

STEEL

HP 1

0x4

2 PILE.

PILE CAP.

CO

NC. S

IDEW

ALK A

T 5.0

0%

SLO

PE MAX.

CO

NC. S

IDEW

ALK A

T 5.0

0%

SLO

PE MAX.

CO

NC

RETE W

ING

WALL.

CO

NC

RETE W

ING

WALL.

(12) S

PACES

AT 4

'-0" =

48'-0

"

(9) S

PACES

AT 4

'-0" =

36'-0

"(FIELD

VER

IFY LENG

TH)

1'-0

"1'-0

"

(9) S

PACES

AT 4

'-0" =

36'-0

"

(FIELD V

ERIFY LEN

GTH

)

PEDES

TRIA

N R

AIL.

(SEE S

HEET 4

02

)

BASE FLO

OD

22

4.3

2

SCALE: 1

-1/2

" = 1

'-0"

WELD

PLATE D

ETAIL

1'-2

"

1'-2"

1'-2

"1'-2

"

14

"x14

"x1/2

"STEEL PLA

TE.

10" 2"2"

10"

2"

2"

6" C

ONC

. CURB.

6" C

ONC

. CURB.

ALL R

EBAR 2

" CLEA

R O

FCO

NC

RETE ED

GES

MIN

IMUM

.

DIA

PHRAG

M S

TIFFENER

S

1'-6 3/4"

TOP B

RID

GE D

ECK

WES

T END

ELEV. 2

28

.50

BO

TTOM

GIR

DER

ELEV. 2

26

.28

(FIELD V

ERIFY).

TOP B

RID

GE D

ECK

EAST EN

DELEV

. 22

9.0

0

BO

TTOM

GIR

DER

ELEV. 2

26

.78

(FIELD V

ERIFY).

3" W

EEP HO

LESC

ENTER

ED O

N EA

.PA

NEL, TYP. EA

. SID

E

3" W

EEP HO

LESC

ENTER

ED O

N EA

.PA

NEL, TYP. EA

. SID

E

SCALE: 1

" = 1

'-0"

JOIN

T SEA

LING

DETA

IL

WALKW

AY PA

NELS

1/2

" FELT PAD

FULL W

IDTH

GRAD

E 50

STEEL

3"

#4 B

ARS

4"

1/4

"x10

"x4" S

TEEL PLATE

TYP.3

/16

" TYP.

1/4

"x10

"x4" S

TEEL PLATE

1/4

"x10

"x4" S

TEEL PLATE

#4 B

ARS

3/1

6"

11 1/4" 6" 1'-6 3/4"

2 1/2"

(3) #8

BARS C

ONT.

CUT-O

FF WALL B

ETWEEN

WIN

G W

ALLS

(SEE D

ETAIL O

N S

HEET 4

02

)

TOP O

F CUT-O

FF WALL

(SEE S

HEET 4

02

)

CUT-O

FF WALL FO

OTIN

G(S

EE SHEET 4

02

)

DIR

ECTIO

N O

F FLOW

3/8

"

NO

TE:C

ONTR

AC

TOR TO

PRO

VID

ETEM

PORARY S

UPPO

RT O

F BEA

MD

URIN

G PILE C

AP C

ONSTR

UC

TION.

2'-7

"1'-0

"

0'-8

"0'-8

"

ALL R

EBAR 2

" CLEA

R O

FCO

NC

RETE ED

GES

MIN

IMUM

.

ALL R

EBAR 2

" CLEA

R O

FC

ONC

RETE ED

GES

MIN

IMUM

.

0'-8

"0'-8

"

#4 B

ARS 1

2" O

.C.

EAC

H W

AY.

8"

2" 3 1/2" 2 1/2"

1 1

/2"

1 1

/2"

1 1

/2"

FILL JOIN

T WITH

NO

N-S

HRIN

K GRO

UT

J:\6400-6499\6483-TimberRidgeApts\Dwg v18\BRIDGE.dwg, 401-BRIDGE, 5/15/2019 9:10:56 AM, DGuile

Attachment G

OR

EG

ON

M9

E

1

4,

U

L

Y

1

.

K

DG

R

R

A

J

N

Z

8

7

E

T

E

S

E

G

I

R

E

PR

F

R

O

NE

EG D

R

9 6

5

4

N

I

O

S

S

N

I

L

A

E

Renew

date

Ju

ne

3

0, 2

01

9

1. REVISED PER REVIEW. D.G.G. 2019-04-23

2. REVISED PER REVIEW. D.G.G. 2019-05-15

5 1

/2"

SCALE: 6

" = 1

'-0"

RAILIN

G S

IDE M

OUNT D

ETAIL

1 1

/8"

1 1

/8"

5 1

/2"

2 1

/4"

2 1

/4"

1"

2"4"

1" 1"O

UTS

IDE FA

CE O

F DEC

K.C

UT FR

OM

L6x3

-1/2

x1/4

AS S

HO

WN.

TS 2

-1/2

x1x0

.12

ANC

HO

R PO

ST.

TS 2

-1/2

x1x0

.12

ANC

HO

R PO

ST.

3/4

" DIA

. x1-3

/4" A

30

7 G

ALV

. BO

LTS.

1"x2

" SLO

TTED H

OLE.

PLATE W

ASHER

.

CUT FR

OM

L6x3

-1/2

x1/4

AS S

HO

WN.

SCALE: 1

-1/2

" = 1

'-0"

RAILIN

G ELEV

ATIO

N

4'-0

" ANCHO

R PO

ST S

PACIN

G1'-0

1/2

"4'-0

" INTER

IOR S

PACIN

G

6" C

ONC

. CURB.

8" C

ONC

. BRID

GE D

ECK.

6"

3'-8"6"8"

4" 3'-4"

TS 2

-1/2

x1x0

.08

3 (O

R) TS

2-1

/2x1

x0.1

2 H

ORIZ. R

AILS

& TERM

INAL EN

D V

ERTIC

ALS

.TS

2-1

/2x1

x0.1

2IN

TERM

EDIA

TE VER

TICALS

.

TS 2

-1/2

x1x0

.12

ANC

HO

R PO

STS

.

SCALE: 3

" = 1

'-0"

CURB W

/ THREA

DED

INSER

T

6"

4"

8"

8"

CO

NC

RETE C

URB.

CO

NC

RETE D

ECK.

R = 5/8"

DAYTO

N/R

ICHM

OND

F-57

, 3/4

"NC

THREA

DED

INSER

TS (G

ALV

.),(2

) EAC

H PO

ST.

2"

3'-8"6"8"

4" 3'-4"4"

2 1

/2"

1"

CO

NC

RETE C

URB.

CO

NC

RETE D

ECK.

DAYTO

N/R

ICHM

OND

F-57

, 3/4

"NC

THREA

DED

INSER

TS (G

ALV

.),(2

) EAC

H PO

ST.

1/4

" THIC

K SPA

CER

BAR.

SCALE: 1

/2" =

1'-0

"BRID

GE G

IRD

ER ELEV

ATIO

N

47'-8

" (GIR

DER

LENG

TH)

SCALE: 1

-1/2

" = 1

'-0"

DIA

PHRAG

M S

TIFFENER

DETA

IL

9'-1

0"

14'-0

"14'-0

"9'-1

0"

W1

8x1

06

GIR

DER

1/2

"x5"x1

'-4 3

/4" PLA

TE STIFFEN

ER

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

"

6'-0

"

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

" (PIECE B

).

1/2

"x5"x1

'-4 3

/4" PLA

TE (PIECE A

),

W1

8x1

06

GIR

DER

S.

DIA

PHRAG

M S

TIFFENER

TYP. SEE

DETA

ILS TH

IS S

HEET.

D401B

D401B

D401B401BD

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

" (PIECE B

).

1/2

"x5"x1

'-4 3

/4" PLA

TE (PIECE A

),

PRE-C

AST B

RID

GE PA

NEL

SC

ALE: 3

" = 1

'-0"

PIECE A

SC

ALE: 3

" = 1

'-0"

PIECE B

1'-4 3/4"

2 1/4"1 3/8"

5"5

'-10 1

/2"

1/2

"x5" PLA

TE.

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

"

2 1

/2"

2 1

/2"

2"

2"

1 3/8" 2 1/4" 1 3/8"

3/1

6"

TYP.

3/1

6"

TYP.

5/8

" H.S

. BO

LTS(A

325), TYP.

3/4

" DIA

. HO

LES.

3/4

" DIA

. HO

LES.

WITH

2" C

AM

BER

#4 H

OO

K BARS (1

0"x1

0")

12

" O.C

. STA

GG

ERBETW

EEN O

THER

HO

OKS

SEE PR

ECAST B

RID

GE PA

NEL (4

01

A) FO

R A

DD

ITIONAL IN

FO.

SEE S

HEET 7

03

FOR O

DO

T STA

ND

ARD

DRAW

ING

BR2

46

FOR IN

FORM

ATIO

N O

NG

ENER

AL M

ATER

IAL & W

ELD R

EQUIR

EMEN

TS

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

" (PIECE B

).

3/1

6"

TYP.

2 1/4" 1 3/8"

5"

2 1

/2"

2 1

/2"

3/4

" DIA

. HO

LES.

GRAD

E 50

STEEL

C5

x9x5

'-10

1/2

"

CUT-O

FF WALL

PILE CAP

WIN

G W

ALL

WIN

G W

ALL

WIN

G W

ALL FO

OTIN

G

CUT-O

FF WALL

PLAN V

IEW D

ETAIL

SCALE: 1

/4" =

1'-0

"

CUT-O

FF WALL D

ETAIL

SCALE: 3

/4" =

1'-0

" 12"

6"

12"

12"

#4 B

ARS 1

2" O

.C.

EAC

H W

AY.

(2) #4

BARS C

ONT.

CUT-O

FF WALL FO

OTIN

G ELEV

. TOM

ATC

H W

ING

WALL FO

OTIN

G

WIN

G W

ALL FO

OTIN

G

H = AS REQUIREDUP TO 4'-0"

J:\6400-6499\6483-TimberRidgeApts\Dwg v18\BRIDGE.dwg, 402-BRIDGE, 5/15/2019 9:11:35 AM, DGuile

Attachment H