HomeMy WebLinkAboutCompliance Geotechnical Report - BLD Engineering / Geo-tech Reports (• Y,
'Al
s �
f
117 w
F j
h
v ��
(I2/16/2Q08)Grace Miller- Fw: Please define"Beyond"and "High water mark" Page 1
From: "Holten" <m kholten@comcast.net> o �, �,i{rtiH (0,
To: "Grace Miller"<Gbm@co.mason.wa.us> J
Date: 12/15/2008 6:17 AM .. /�,
Subject: Fw: Please define"Beyond"and "High water mark"
CC: "Michael Robinson" <michaelr@mc2-inc.com>
Hello Ms. Miller,
You may recall that our family met with you in July regarding a stair tower to the beach on Harstene Island.
We have been delayed in our project by the inability to find a contractor to install pilings in a beach with
shallow water and no access from the land side.
We are in the final stages of design with our engineer. Our plan has changed in that we are hoping to
install a concrete footing for the stair tower.
We are wondering if the stair tower footprint is within 10 feet of the high water mark, can the final run of
stairs jut further(about 5 feet)from the high water mark?
Your input is truly appreciated,
Mike and Kristin Holten
Judie Schaaf
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Robinson
To: 'Holten'
Sent:Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:27 PM
Subject: RE: Please define"Beyond"and "High water mark"
You were going to need to put in concrete footings for the structure anyway, there should be no problem
with the concrete pilasters going on top.
The.majority of the tower should be well within the 10 feet of the high water mark. Although, the final
stairs to beach will end approximately 5'-0"from the tower. This could put the final span slightly outside
the 10 foot mark. Unfortunately, I don't see an easy fix for this, considering the need for the braced
frames on each side of the towers.
You can remove the portion of the bluff that interferes with the ramp. This is called out on the Left Side
Elevation on sheet S1.0.
Let me know if you want me to revise the drawings to include the concrete pilasters.
Sincerely,
Michael Robinson, EIT
(V116/2008) Grace Miller- Fw: Please define"Beyond"and High water mark" Page 2
Engineer
MC Squared, Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: Holten [mailto:mkholten@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 6:50 AM
To: Michael Robinson
Cc: Mike Szramek
Subject: Re: Please define"Beyond"and "High water mark"
Michael,
Will the Dept of Fish and Wildlife and other agencies approve the pilaster and glu-lam design in the
marine environment?
Is everything still within 10 feet of the high water mark?
Do we need to show the detail of the final stairs to the beach so it can be calculated as part of the footprint
or does it fit within the current footprint?
Are we allowed to remove the bluff where it interferes with the ramp? I think this is detail 2 on page 1 of
the drawings. I think our geotech study puts the upper concrete anchor foundation 10 feet from the edge
of the bluff. The bluff slopes upward at the edge too-so it might reach without having to cut the bluff.
Kristin
a
I
1
I
i
i
i
i
k
i
3�+�ao�s�oogsy
MARTIG ENGINEERING
P.O. Box 11850
Olympia, WA 98508-1850 S�
(360) 754-9687
Fax (360) 705-0789
July 9, 2008
Mason County
Department of Community Development
Public Works
426 W. Cedar
P.O. Box 578
Shelton, WA 98584
Attn: Allen Borden, Planner
Re: Compliance Geotechnical Report for:
* Property Owner: Judith Schaaf (360) 482-5539
11502 126th Ave. Ct. E
Puyallup, WA 98374
* Contact/Representative: Mike & Kristin Holten (253) 446-1054
* Site Location: Hartstine Island
1030 E Sunset Hill Rd.
Shelton, WA 98584
(Take SR 3 from Shelton toward Bremerton; Turn Rt on Pickering
Rd; Cross bridge onto Hartstine Is; Turn Lft on North Is Dr; Turn
Lft on Sunset Hill Rd; Proceed west then south to 1030 E). See
the Attachment 1 Vicinity Map.
* Tax Parcel Nos.: 22134-12-90040;
* Mason County: Sec 34, Township 21 N, Range 02 W;
* County Permit Numbers: SWG2007-00609
* Proposal: Construct: (i) a new 4-Bedroom Single family residence with attached
garage; (ii) a Tower-Style Stairway adjacent to the Marine Bluff Bank
for beach access; & (iii) a 2-Bedroom auxiliary dwelling unit, on the
subject property (Phase 2).
Dear Mr. Borden:
I, Kenneth W. Martig, Jr., PE, of Martig Engineering have completed my engineering
investigations regarding the requested Geotechnical Report associated with the above
referenced property.
1
x
.r
PROPOSED ACTION
The Proposed Action at this site is to construct a new single family residence upon the
above referenced property, as shown on the Attachment 2 Property Layout Map, the
Attachment 3 Site Plan Map, and the Attachment 4 Stair Tower elevation view.
The access driveway into the property has been constructed and protected against
erosion by covering it with a layer of 3-inch minus fractured rock.
A 6-bedroom Septic System has been approved for construction, SWG2007-00609,
and the new Well construction is pending (at the location shown on the Site Plan).
The 4-bedroom residence and the stair system to the beach will be constructed as soon
as the County Permits are obtained.
The 2-bedroom auxiliary dwelling unit, ADU, will be constructed at a later time as
Phase 2.
SUMMARY
All site slopes greater than 15% are controlled by cemented Till, inherent at shallow
depths within the present Hartstine series soils. Therefore, existing undisturbed site
slopes are very stable with portions of the Marine Bluff Bank standing adverse or
vertical.
The newly constructed neighboring single family residence, on the adjacent property to
the south, was inspected for signs of induced slope instability and/or erosion of
disturbed surfaces. None were found.
As a result of our investigations, we can affirm that all potential Landslide Hazards can
be overcome in such a manner as to prevent harm to property and public health &
safety and that no significant Environmental Impacts will result if this Proposed Action
is permitted as outlined within this Geotechnical Report and its attachments.
The following discussion summarizes our: Site Investigations; Research of Site
Conditions; Analyses; and Conclusions, allowing this Geotechnical Report to be
completed for the above referenced site.
2
1
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
1. Geologic Conditions:
a. Topography-- An enlarged section of the USGS Mason Lake Quadrangle Map
shows the general topography of the site and its surrounds (see Attachment 5).
This map shows slopes vary up to 40%. It also shows that the subject property is
situated upon a small ridge/hogback, sloping primarily toward Pickering Passage
to the west, but also toward minor ravines located both north and south of the
property. Note that there is hardly any offsite tributary runoff area, since the
watershed ridgeline is located only 400-feet to the east.
The 6400t contours and the two elevation views on Attachment 3 show the
measured topography and critical slopes of the property in greater detail.
No evidence of surface water runoff was found on this property, even with the
heavy December 2007 rains that fell upon the constructed entrance driveway.
b. Soils Types-- The Mason County Soils Survey shows two classifications of soils
that influence this site (see Attachment 6):
(i) Hb, Hartstine gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30%-- a granular
unconsolidated well draining surface soil layer from 24" to 30" inches
thick, supported by a 2' to 6' deep weakly cemented Till that then
becomes strongly cemented, continuous to great depths. We found that
j the slopes dropping into the north and south ravines were greater than
the published 30%, almost 40%, and that the Marine Bluff Bank to the
west had an average slope of 0.5' Horizontal to 1.0' Vertical (200%). At
places where top of bank erosion has subsided, the exposed bare Till
bank stands stable with adverse and vertical faces.
The 4-bedroom &2-bedroom residences are located within this soil
i classification, on slopes of 18.6% to 22%.
(ii) Ha, Hartstine gravelly sandy loam, 5-15%-- This soils series has a
granular very-friable gravelly gritty sandy loam upper soil layer 24" to 30"
and underlying Till like Hb above. The difference is that the slopes are
not as steep.
The Septic System Drainfields are located within this soil classification.
Soils test pits were dug on the property to locate the Septic Drainfields and
confirm the above described Hartstine soils. The findings are shown on
Attachment 2.
i
1
I
i
i
i
i
3
R
1
it '7i 1 1 '� s.. S' , r• y
NAP
WWI
#1Typical of all soils test Holes/Pits #2 Excavated soils after being Rained-On
c. Ground Water Conditions-- No evidence of a soil layer containing ground water
could be found at the site, inspecting visible soil at elevations above low tide. No
signs of groundwater emerging from any of the site slopes, either natural or
man-excavated, could be found. When the Well is constructed, the deep
groundwater bearing formations will become identified.
During the winter wet season, a very shallow water table condition develops on
top of the Till layer at the base of the granular surface soil. This is a temporary
condition. Due to the sloping nature of the property, his water quickly migrates
laterally as Interflow thru the granular upper soils into the adjacent ravines or
dripping down the face of the Marine Bluff Bank onto the beach.
4 •,..�
K
� h
#3 Water perched upon Till 1/8/08 #4 Water gone 1/26/08
4
d. Related Upslope Conditions-- As shown on the Attachment 5 Topography Map,
upslope ground slopes are less than 15% and no surface or ground waters
reach the site. No surface water conditions exist either.
e. Surface Water Runoff-- No surface water runoff is tributary to the site and no
evidence of onsite surface water runoff was found..
All precipitation falling on the undeveloped site and constructed access driveway
infiltrates into the granular surface soil layer. Photographs #5 & # 6 show no
signs of surface erosion from overland flow, even after heavy December 2007
rains.
#5 Looking east, @ west end of #6 Looking west along bottom of
access driveway adjacent southerly Ravine
f. Noted Landslide Activity-- No signs of significant landslide activity were found
on or near the site, either on natural or manmade slopes.
Stereo Aerial Photographs were examined for signs of Landslide activity. None
were found. Photos taken 6/19/85 & 7/30/03 show no signs of earth/slope
movement as presented on Attachment 8. No clumps of trees are missing along
the shore line during the 18-year interval, nor are any along either ravine.
Only very minor, insignificant stuffing/wasting was found at isolated locations
along the Marine Bluff Bank. Three types exist:
(i) Freeze-Thaw with root wedging-- This wasting involves freezing of bank
face moisture, causing ice expansion between soil particles. The thawing
creates open space between the particles, which allows more moisture
storage. Tree and brush roots seek this stored moisture, entering into the
space between the expanded soil particles. As the roots grow, they act as
wedges, further expanding the space between the soil particles, creating
cracks that can receive more bank face moisture. Finally, a Freeze-Thaw
5
cycle causes chunks of bank face soil to fall as shown in photograph #7.
Photo #8 shows where these chunks fell from.
#7 Chunk bank face failure 0
8 Original position of chunks
Mechanical/Leverage-- This bank wasting involves top of bank failure
when large trees become situated at the edge of the top of bank. During
winter surface soil saturation, coupled normally with high winds and or
ice/snow loads, these large trees pry loose portions of the top of bank.
Photograph #9 shows such a large tree after such a bank failure. Photo
#10 shows the resulting localized slide that came down with the tree.
F
4y ,4
-a
, r
#9 A large tree that caused slide #10 The slide caused by tree
Interflow Release-- This bank wasting is caused by the concentrated
release of interflow water onto the bank face (when the temporary
perched shallow water table develops at the interface of the top of Till
with the bottom of the granular unconsolidated surface soil layer, during
6
the winter wet season). As the water flows onto the bank face, it erodes
the unconsolidated surface soil, causing portions of the top of bank to fail.
Only minor such wasting was found at this site, as interflow water was
observed flowing onto the bank face. Photograph #11 shows how small
amounts of surface soil have been eroded away, slowly carving a rounded
top edge of the underlying cemented Till. Photo #12 shows a pencil sized
stream of released interflow water falling into the post notch carved within
the Till bank face (white vertical line just left of post).
t
aR
Y
#11 Eroded surface soil, rounded Till #12 Interflow release onto bank
No undercutting type Marine Bluff Toe of Bank erosion occurs along the shore of
this property, since the beach is higher here. The higher beach is due to the
westerly extension of the east-west Till stabilized ridge, with ravines both north
and south of it. Photographs #13 and #14 show this higher beach.
Ks
f
.
#13 Looking north along shoreline #14 Looking south along higher shoreline
7
2. Site Plan:
a. Development Features-- Attachments 2 & 3 show the existing property with the
intended locations of the proposed elements, forming the desired new single
family residence. The elements include:
(i) the existing access driveway;
(ii) the Permitted Septic System;
(iii) the new water Well;
(iv) the new 4-bedroom house;
(v) the small retaining walls along the easterly edge of the parking pad
adjacent to the garage entrance;
(vi) the new stair tower providing beach access; and
(vii) the future (Phase 2) 2-bedroom auxiliary dwelling unit.
b. Geologic Features-- The existing stable geologic conditions will remain
unchanged by the construction of the proposed single family residence as shown
upon Attachments 2 & 3. The stabilizing geologic feature is the uniform
uninterrupted Hartstine series soil Till formation.
Since this property lies upon a small east-west ridge/hogback with no surface
water tributary to it, precipitation falling upon the property drains in three
directions (west, north & south) as interflow thru the granular surface soil layer.
All slopes greater than 15% remain stable since they are underlain by the
cemented Till, with no intervening unconsolidated lenses of granular water-
bearing soil at elevations above the low tide level.
The Marine Bluff Bank is stable, standing near vertical.
3. Soils Examination:
a. Exposed Soils-- The primary view, showing the site soils, is the 40-foot high
Marine Bluff Bank exposure that forms the westerly edge of the site. The
exposed bank face shows the uninterrupted Till soil, allowing the bank face itself
to stand near vertical. The following photographs show the exposed bank soil
features where minor slides have not obscured them.
8
MW`I �..
#15 Exposed face, low bank #16 Exposed face, high bank
Note in both photos, the stable near vertical dense consolidated cemented Till,
supporting a thin (24" to 30") unconsolidated granular porous surface soil layer.
The southerly site slope (north slope of the southerly ravine) is also exposed,
since it has been cleared and a pathway graded into it. The following photos
show these exposed soil features:
-f Yi
i 1 j x
Ile-
#17 Southerly site slope less than 40% #18 Cut showing thin surface soil
9
The northerly slope on this property is essentially a mirror image of the southerly
slope (as shown in Section B-B on Attachment 3), but not as exposed for
viewing.
b. Test Holes-- Soils test pits were dug on the property as discussed in Section 1
above. These test pits confirm the thin nature of the upper granular soil layer
and the underlying Till supporting it.
4. Potential Hazard Discussion:
The primary issue, being addressed within this Mason County required Geological
Report, is the POTENTIAL HAZARD posed by existing slopes steeper than 15%to
40% (up to 200% at this site).
The QUESTION BEING ANSWERED BY THIS REPORT is whether or not these
slopes do indeed pose a threat to the Proposed Action.
IN SUMMARY, they do not. They are existing steep slopes, maintained stable by
the strongly cemented Hartstine series soils Till. All slopes at or near the Proposed
Action have remained stable, as evidenced by the review of Stereo Aerial Photos,
the age of prior existing nearby stable improvements, examining the recently
completed residence constructed upon the property immediately south of the
subject property, and the soils investigations reported herein. Furthermore:
• No Disturbance of any kind will be made to the stable steep 200% Marine
Bluff Bank, located 123' west from the 4-bedroom house footings;
• No clearing or grading will occur within 98' from the Toe of the bank, only
the clearing of a path to the Stair Tower and the removal of the large trees
located at the top of bluff line to relive the threat of Mechanical/Leverage
erosion at the top of bank;
• No new steep slopes greater than 5-feet in height will be constructed, and
these will be protected by retaining walls;
• All constructed impervious surfaces will have a formal drainage system to
capture and convey runoff to an armored outfall at the beach;
• Given the upslope conditions, no new development upslope can change
the stability of the existing steep slopes.
• No existing down-slope condition will change.
a. Location of Potential Hazard-- The worst case Potential Hazard is shown to be
the 200% Marine Bluff Bank, running the full length of the westerly edge of the
property.
Secondarily, slopes less than 40% but greater than 15% exist. The westerly
320-feet of the property (from the top of bank measured east, a distance of 320')
have this condition. Within this area, such slopes exist toward the west along the
10
r
ridge-line, and both north and south into ravines from the ridge-line.
b. Location of Proposed Action-- The Stair Tower will be constructed adjacent to
the toe of the 200% bank, at a location where the entire bank face is stable, from
top to bottom, and no large trees will exist at its top. The tower will be supported
by piles or a reinforced concrete footing, placed on the existing beach. A ramp,
approximately 30-feet long, will connect the top of the tower to an anchoring
platform constructed 10-feet east of the top of bank. This anchored ramptwalk
will be constructed to provide lateral support for the stair tower.
The 4-bedroom house will be constructed with its westerly footing located 123-
feet east from the toe of the 200% Marine Bluff Bank. A main floor deck will have
footings 115' east from the toe. The 2-bedroom ADU is located over 300' east.
All other elements of the proposed single family residence, Proposed Action, will
be east of the westerly 320-feet area, where slopes are less than 15%.
c. Buffer or Setback Requirements-- Given the conclusions from our investigations,
we find no reason to impose new buffers or setbacks at this site. The County
required setback of 113-feet from the high tide line to the west edge of the
4-bedroom house is plenty sufficient (it locates the house east of a 2:1 slope line
from the toe of bank).
5. Elevation Views:
Attachment 3 shows the measured Elevation Views (Sections A-A & B-B).
Attachment 4 shows the Elevation View of the Stair Tower.
These elevation views show the elements of the proposed action located within 300-
feet of slopes greater than 15%.
Since only two succinct layers of soil exist, within the area represented by these
elevation views, the layers were not plotted upon these views. The upper
unconsolidated granular porous soil layer is only 24"to 30"thick and is uniform
throughout the site The supporting underlying dense consolidated cemented Till is
continuous to depths below low tide and uniform throughout the site.
6. Slope Stability Analysis:
a. Existing Slopes-- All existing slopes greater than 15%, within at least 300-feet of
the Proposed Action, have been determined to be stable.
Attachment 7 shows the subject site superimposed upon the Coastal Zone Atlas
stability map for this area. It shows that the Marine Bluff Bank face is Unstable,
11
as discussed in Section 1 above. It also delineates the Hb soils as
Intermediately Stable and the Ha soils as Stable. Our investigations and
analyses have determined that the subject site is stable in both the Intermediate
and Stable delineated areas.
No slope instability or landslides were found when reviewing Stereo Aerial
Photos (6/19181 & 7/30/03). These Photos are presented on Attachment 8,
showing a blown-up view of the subject shoreline and property.
The primary technical quality governing the stability of these steep slopes, found
up to 200%, is the strongly cemented Till formation inherent with the Hartstine
series soils that is present in all of the subject slopes (either natural or man-
made excavations). This Till was confirmed present in all Potentially Hazardous
slopes, except for the upper 24" to 30"thick surface layer which is being held
stable, on-site, by good vegetation groundcover.
No fill slopes exist and no fill slopes are necessary to implement the Proposed
Action..
b. Disturbing Existing Slopes-- All of the Potentially Hazardous slopes occur on-
site. If the Proposed Action is approved, no disturbance of the 200% Bluff bank
will occur. In fact, we are recommending the removal of all large trees growing
on or immediately adjacent to the top of bank line. This will reduce the likelihood
of additional Mechanical/Leverage induced bank wasting, which produced the
largest of the small slides observed along the adjacent shoreline.
Construction of the elements of the Proposed Action, on or near the steep
slopes, will involve excavation thru the thin surface soil layer into the underlying
stable Till. All footings will be constructed on undisturbed Till.
The up-slope ground to the east is less than 15% in steepness, clear to and
beyond the drainage sub-basin Ridge line shown on Attachment 5.
c. Creating New Slopes-- No new steep slopes will be constructed. The finished
westerly end of the access driveway will required cut slopes that will be no
higher than 5-feet and will be protected by retaining walls with drains. The
daylight basement construction will have cuts protected by concrete walls with
drains.
d. Calculations-- Since the stability of the Potentially Hazardous steep slopes is
governed by the Hartstine series Till soil, no calculations were necessary to
support our finding: "that all Potentially Hazardous steep slopes are and have
been stable, and will remain stable if the Proposed Action is approved".
12
It is our professional opinion that the use of the "Simplified Bishop's Method of
Circles" is not productive with these soils. However, we can evaluate the degree
of protection that the 123-foot setback provides by comparing slopes.
The setback provides a potential new bank slope of 50% (when drawing a new
slope line from the existing toe of slope to the westerly house footing). The
existing bank slope is 200%. Therefore, a theoretical existing factor of safety
equaling 4.0 can be derived by comparing these two slopes.
In terms of Seismic Stability the subject property has remained stable after
experiencing over 20 quakes greater than 5.0 during the 42-year Period from
1928 thru 1970, including a 7.1 Olympia quake in 1949 and a 6.5 Tacoma quake
in 1965 where significant damages occurred around Puget Sound, such
damages worse than those of the 2001 6.8 Nisqually quake (Data from US
Earthquakes, USD of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey).
7. Proposed Action Development Placement:
a. Drainage-- A new Stormwater Drainage System is necessary, as shown on the
Attachment 9 Drainage and Erosion Control Map. It will discharge to an outfall
located at beach level with an energy dissipating outlet.
b. Septic System-- A new 6-bedroom Septic System design has been prepared
and approved for construction. It will accommodate the 4-bedroom house and
the 2-bedroom ADU.
c. Compacted Fills-- As discussed above, no new fills are necessary or proposed.
d. Foundations-- As discussed above, new footings and foundation pads are
necessary. All will be constructed upon undisturbed Till.
e. Buffers or Setbacks-- As discussed above, no special buffers or setbacks are
necessary or desirable, associated with this Proposed Action. All required
setbacks are noted on the Site Plan.
8. Clearing and Grading Recommendations:
a. Vegetation Removal-- The large trees located near the top of bank should be
removed to prevent Mechanical/Leverage bank failure, as discussed above.
Clearing of Canopy and Understory, easterly of the Silt Fence shown on
Attachment 9, is necessary to construct the 4-bedroom house and finish the
access driveway and parking pad.
b. Grading Cuts & Fills— Excavation is required easterly of the Silt Fence for the
daylight basement, footings, parking pad, driveway, and small retaining walls
13
•diYI�YBYX YIIIYIIrI ... ... -. IIYYIYI �rl�l�0
(shown on Attachment 3). No fills are proposed or necessary. The
disposal/spreading of excavated soils onsite is allowable, as long as the soil is
not placed upon organic piles of brush or tree limbs etc. or dumped loosely on
slopes greater than 15%.
c. Revegetation-- Minimal revegetation will be necessary since the areas cleared
and graded only encompass areas where the house, driveway and parking pad
will be constructed. All remaining Understory vegetation should be maintained.
9. Erosion Control Plan:
Since no runoff currently exists and no offsite runoff is tributary to the site, no
special erosion control plan is necessary.
a. Temporary, During Construction-- A silt fence should be placed, as shown on
Attachment 9, prior to the start of construction. It should be maintained until
construction is completed and the permanent erosion control measures are
established.
b. Permanent Erosion Control-- The driveway and parking pad will be covered
with several inches of crushed rock..
All ground surfaces, where large portions of bare earth remain (outside the
residence and driveway/parking areas), shall be covered with 3" to 4" of loose
straw/hay or coarse beauty-bark to prevent erosion.
The remaining Understory vegetation should remain undisturbed as much as
practical when installing the remaining Single Family Improvements.
The roof drain downspouts should be immediately connected to a tight-pipe,
armored outfall at the beach level. This drainage system is shown on the
Attachment#9 Drainage & Erosion Control Plan Map.
10.On-Site and Off-Site Impacts:
a. On-Site— A new single family residence, similar to the neighboring one, will be
constructed and maintained on the subject property as shown on the Site Plan.
No adverse environmental impact will occur.
b. Off-Site-- No adverse environmental impact will occur.
11.Final Proposed Action Development Conditions:
a. No disturbance of the 200% Bank steep slope will occur;
b. Large trees located near the top of bank line shall be removed;
c. The setbacks shown on the Site Plan must be maintained;
14
d. The existing Understory ground cover, outside the designated clearing and
grading areas, shall be maintained on all Potentially Hazardous steep slopes.
Trimming of brush and thinning out small starter, dead, unstable, or danger trees
is allowed, but no bare ground should become exposed. Any resulting bare
ground shall be covered with 3" to 4" of loose straw/hay until native vegetation
overruns these areas;
e. The provisions of this Geotechnical Report shall be followed, unless altered in
writing by a qualified professional and any said written alterations are approved
by Mason County.
12. Special Mitigation:
No special mitigation is necessary associated with this Proposed Action.
13. Final Site Plan Map for Proposed Action:
The Attachment 2 Property Layout Map, the Attachment 3 Site Plan, and Stair
Tower Elevation View adequately show the existing site and where all elements of
the Proposed Action will be located and constructed. Therefore, no additional "Final
Site Plan Map" is necessary.
Furthermore, Attachments 2, 3, & 4 are sufficient for Mason County to monitor the
above presented Final Development Conditions and know when occupancy
certificates can be granted.
14.Additional 35mm Photographs Showing Site Features:
"r
#19 Looking east @ southerly neighbor's #20 Shows no erosion after Dec 09 Rains
new House
15
a�
#21 Looking west @ Neighbor's stable steps, #22 Looking east @ stable next flight
z -
t
7. A
#23 Top of Bank large tree that should #24 Same situation as #23
be cut, leaving stump.
#25 Shows Interflow exiting & flowing down bank face
16
This concludes our Geotechnical Report for the above referenced property.
I, Kenneth W. Martig, Jr., PE, of Martig Engineering have completed the required
Geotechnical Report as documented within this letter Report and its attachments. I am
familiar with this site, having visited and inspected the site and its surrounds. As a result
of our investigations, we can affirm that all potential Landslide Hazards can be
overcome in such a manner as to prevent harm to property and public health &safety
and that no significant Environmental Impacts will result if this Proposed Action is
permitted as outlined within this Geotechnical Report and its attachments.
CTried by'
K eth W. YDpeyrty
Attachments: 1ax Parcel Map; '!'�o�W
2Map (1' = 100');
3- Site Plan Map & Elevation Views (1" = 30'); 170
4- Stair Tower Elevation View (1" = 20'); 0
5- Topographic Map (1" = 500')�; - °
6- Mason County Soils Map (1 - 500), oMAL
7- Coastal Zone Atlas Map (1" = 500');
8-Aerial Photo Comparison (1985 vs 2003), tXP ass 1-s- t
o
9- Drainage & Erosion Control Map (1" = 40')
17
ATTACHMENT 1
z+ 22 Limerick Vicinity Map, and �L .. I ae
W
i— ------� Tax Parcel Map _ u�g` ,.PA S "
„n A$cc
1 �+0 + �&
Cranberry ' + _
?J% �zs l 30 �"" 2eQ A� z ;i
Loke � -Way
t o — -
2=s4-
/
�- 32 •Imp 0� -- C.onlfe .ate F Spence �,rw 'N �Of C
1 t� tl71 A _7 35
ONias Rtl
PAR4LLE I Z ry nBlvd t +, D
ORTH 1
✓ah�s Gr Boy Shore' P� sw.imeoiey t� $ GrantJ,"
y Waa+e` 1 RQ 1 Man Oc 6 e p& Mott tn.
e G Pnr//ips Lake tianstene: wry Law Rd- t�
--t &ageRd
.: .eilftone Cnloe fa i'
,apP
+2
Lg
VC t—
Ooklond 3 6 i BertalsenRd I h !1� Eit
-ChoDma+ '-'t L4--
�
cove } oD Rd
Vicinity Map
SECTION 34
I .
1290020
SP 1530 1101 1101 1101 1101
129Ql40 12000lO 040 030 020 000 `Y1 1101010
i
_-- 1200060
`1 rGT G 1200
1200080 A)ioo t 000 291051 991052 891053 1 91054
1200070 S I30 or-1i
7�7-8 sf c,L. r
1883 d 527R +i `t192o I
,172 S 2066
BLA 93-97 1920 1920
1290100 t 290030 5- 03 04 1102030
1290150 1290160 1250170 192 2
524-112
t
St - 1290040 1102010
12so 130 sf:✓y_ S1 13741 290 1 20
——— 1102020
1290050 1290110 S 23/05
7690025 SPI 194Z S 14/W6 T SP 586
10/93 7590 7590 7590 7590
7690024 7690 9001 � Olt �_ 012 013
SP 1345 o1 c4 P2937
7690021y�/.y
o P1343 90016y S l6/179
7690022 7690 7690 17690
013 012 Oil 7590022
7690023 7590021 75 90024 c
r
N
\ 75 90023
1300000 \ of
1300011 S 12166 \�i
—-- 1300010 \ 7500030
S /t1794
a ®w s $
♦ .� .a r Q
dpo
cpk
� h
i . a
r
b.
Oi
\ w
1 \
S o ,
lh ,� XN
At
\ � V
c♦ �`� D
CL
CM
_ ',♦ �''
C �
O o
L`s•`� s•
Q
s '
yy V�
$✓�>s ter.
L.
u�.a
c .
O � m 00 c�
0 no
77
mul
3
d Q, �
t!! � 01; � � �. �_ 3 f1
-►
1p
- " \o I ' Q S r t � 3; \ � a ( � W 6
� W
e Q`
S,S < � s o N
LI
Cd
ADO
4. r4
� O
,14o q M O
s / Vv
�.
Ir
6
of :
•J
+
°r y
! i \ ci r
V+ ! n or I \ s
D N
1
o ES
� Q-o
•yi d i Q
'C ash 4
04 v L a o
I� Z
ATTACHMENT 4
Stair Tower
Elevation View
(1" = 20')
7o.,�etir TOP
�30�Lov5 Qa"nP�
TU
(� (,o ��acEc Curbiv.9
�y`�or Pt��OrYri
16" f4.•
40► 4115k o.5 � Rv�V�"cor� GoenC..
Tower , �`�
,C�
niJ�"
Bea-c)^
Towev' o
( S F•Q�� �„Oo�G.tti� �9YT-��
I
t Legend
1. Floor Laval Platform
2. Non-Load Bming Building Attachment
3• Support Column
4, _ 4. Exterior Guard Rail
-- S. Inwricw Guard Rail
�- 6. Horizontal Tuba
. tatermaliatc Plstfa=
8. Stringas
9. Non-Slip Aluminum Dock Plate
iQ.Nan-Slip Aluminum Tread
1L 11. Concrete Base
12. Column Attachment to Base
4
` ATTACHMENT 5
''R• Topography Map 4
'"' '��• USGS Mason Lake Quad.
�.: (1" = 500')
)af
' ;'1K `•ty Z
S 1� e
m e
2 i 1
t-
f:.
,
i�.
R 4 1
a�
.�, ■ si
.ti-. rs••' �..t
.* WT ..�,.
s4
i? ■
r: ATTACHMENT 6
Mason County Soils Map
�. ,. (1f, = 500')
Ha
k
1�
b
34
I b
� .
...........
1 i
m-wwfikv*w.
' ATTACHMENT 7
Coastal Zone Atlas �I
Bluff BankF'S�1tabilit}
F AI�^y 7 y (1 [f 5001)
i
!23/ AOL
�� � � s'i• 9ra1-� gpyt�,.�+r44.a.,•:na►
- - � it 'rsi1M#h-1fIR 1cMN:,K••►�11.==r7.'.!�
7 � _
'� � 1 t. N/rE+✓ art:..�..:..1
— �r•1:3�fi..
a �rt •
rt '
a i �
�} ',' {•�h „'r''� sir �-� �F
If
79
..t .. �Tir+iY� _ _ .. • ram• .�. �� _ j
AD, R
Jr l'
0
Q.
cc
it I
C)
Q— 02
UJ
0)
Ck
X,
Oil
o
(J
C) 0
-,Y
LL
C�
1�11
(�AL
"•� Mason County Department of Community Development
Submittal Checklist For a Geotechnical Resort
Instructions:
This checklist must be submitted with a.Geotechnical Report and completed,signed,and stamped by the
licensed professionals)who prepared the Geotechnical Report for review by Mason County pursuant to
the Mason County Resource Ordinance. If an item found to be not applicable,the report should explain
the basis for the conclusion.
Applicant(Owner ft '+t-1 5 C Parcel#_ 2 Z..)34 12— 4 O04-V
Site Address 10 3 D IF, SNhS t�- ai( I IZJ,.. .S"I 1* WA I >S$L4.
(1) (a)A discussion of generaLge6logic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development,
Located on page(s)_ Soc. I a
(b) A discussion of specific soil types
Located on page(s) 3r Soc. lip S A t*&-e- ..ts, & r fo (Sec-3 as%
(c) A discussion of ground water conditions P«So t
Located on page(s) 4 Stc 1--c-
(d)
A discussion of the upsio a geomorphology l s �,
Located on page(s) 5 S o< t.4. g A�s.�.�,,.a�...'!
(e) A discussion of the location of upland waterbodies and wetlands
Located on page(s) S' S lqc ld N!b'h e E -*
(f) A discussion of history of landslide activity in the activity in the vicinity, as available in the
referenced maps and records
Located on page(s) ,S_ !o .*.S.e�. 1 9 A44oLr + v-u4$ "7 E It
---� -.
(2) A site plan which identifies the"imporfant developmentand geologic features.
Located on Maps) A �
(3) Locations and logs of exploratory h les or probes.
Located on Map(s)�t ae L LAL 1ft k z- (5 ec 31, o h P43t 10
(4) The area of the proposed development, the boundaries of the hakard, and associated buffers and
setbacks shall be delineated top, bo th sidwes,and toe)on a geologic map"of site.
Located on Map(s) �.1�a c fir. Z C. 3 t, 5 *V% F&L t o
(5) A minimum of one cross section at a scale which adequately depicts the subsurface profile, and
which incorporates the details,of proposed grad changes.
Located on Maps) Aj4e.al ►y.44..�3 3 ;f,4- (,SeC o 1.. Iayt 1 1
(6) A description and'results of slope stability analyses perlbr ned;for both static and seismic loading
conditions.Analysis should examine worst case failures.The anafj Is should include the
Simplified Bishop's Method of Circles.The minimum static safety factor Is 1.5,the minimum
seismic safety factor is 1.1. and the quasi-static analysis coeffignts shoyjd be a value of 0.15.
Located on page(s) S« G o k �a1 t 5 ) 1 r lZ 4 13
t
(7) (a)Appropriate restrictions on placement of drainage features
Located on page(s) S o.c. -1 •4. ➢«wd 13 r k4'A o.(,%t,,,�,
(b) Appropriate restrictions on placement of septic d 'n fields 1
Located on pages) /t1.1-��c.L, -ah-�- Z, LIN r�v ea S�t�J�-1 c o c.�"plop
(c) Appropriate restrictions on placement of comp cted fiJJs and footings
Located on page(s) So C 7 d o k ��t 3 " A tr{o.a�.�w•. ,,�,� 3
Page 1 of 2 Form Effective June 2008
Disclaimer: Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geotechnical Report.
;4 (d) Recommended buffers from the landslide hazard areas shoreline Nuffs and the tops of other
slopes on the property.
Located on page(s) Sec- ?! e+, 'Pw&yt 13 A R4Gt tiv�s�•. 3
(e) Recommended setbacks from the landslide hazard areas shoreline bluffs and the tops of
other slopes on the property.
Located on page(s) Sec Z .ti. pi7t 1 3 A, V}a c,&v+a
(8) Recommendations for the preparation of a detailed clearing and grading plan which specifically
identifies vegetation to be removed,a schedule for vegetation removal and replanting, and the
method of vegetation removal.
Located on page(s) S*c. S « 10% 1?#—*es 13 c )4� ��}acla,,.s,..r�- 3 L 47
(9) Recommendations for the preparation of a detailed temporary erosion control plan which
identifies the specific mitigating measures to be implemented during construction to protect the
slope from erosion, landslides and harmful construction methods.
Located on page(s) S tc ') •r. 1'•%Zt 14-04 Qr 4 a c L,&-V
(10) An analysis of both on-site and off-site impacts 91 the proposed development.
Located on page(s) S ac 10 w r, rP65 a. 14.
(11) Specifications of final development conditions such as, vegetative management, drainage,
erosion control, and buffer widths.
Located on page(s). S Cc- 1 o h IP«'$eS
(12) Recommendations for the preparation of structural mitigation or details of other proposed
mitigation.
Located on page(s) I�a.5 G 1 yr
(13) A site map drawn to scale showing the property.boundaries,scale,.north arrow, and the location
,
and nature of existing and proposed develo ment on the site.
Located on Maps) A.t4-r^c L%h-&t-% Z , 3 °!
i, hereby certify under penalty of
perjury that 1 am a civil engineer licensed in the State of Washington with specialized knowledge of
geotechnicaUgeologicai engineering or a geologist or engineering geologis'.t licensed in the State of
Washington with special knowledge of the local conditions. I also certify that the Geotechnleal
Report,dated D ,and entitled Co&w d2 h ai;..c t
�!' 1i^d► t�'�. S c,�,.e�a, - meets all the requirements of the Mason
County Resource Ordinance, Landslide Hazard Section,is complete-and trye,that-thefassessment
demonstrates conclusively that the risks posed by the landslide hazard ca�Itlgated
be mitigated through the
included geotechnical design recommendations, and that allthazards are in1such-a-manner a
to prevent harm to property and public health and safety.(Signature=and'Stamp)
AO
a
SPIRES 1-4- 0 1
Page 2 of 2 Form Effective June 2008
Disclaimer: Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geotechnicai Report.
I
(8/13/2008 Grace Miller- Re:Thanks, Mar ie Pa e 1
From: "Schirato, Margie(DFW)"<schirmms@dfw.wa.gov>
To: <Gbm@co.mason.wa.us>
Date: 8/13/2008 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: Thanks, Margie
Sure that will help keep it clean
>>>Grace Miller 08/13/08 11:06 AM >>>
Thank you. I noticed we have this standard condition for building permits that
we can add and is it current?
I am wondering if we should be adding it?
"All new treated piling to be used for this project shall receive a post
treated vacuum of two hours at not less than 22 inches of mercury.Subsequent
to release of the vacuum,the piling shall be steamed for a two hour period,
followed by a second vacuum of four hours at 22 inches of mercury."
(8�13% 08 Grace Miller- Re: Pilin s Pa a 1 ;
From: "Margie Schirato"<schirmms@DFW.WA.GOV>
To: <Gbm@co.mason.wa.us>, <mkholten@comcast.net>
Date: 8/13/2008 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Pilings
Treated wood may be used as long as it is not creosote treated. I would
suggest a wood pile with a prefab concrete base similar to the types
used for upland decks to avoid contact with the water as much as
possible. Concrete will last longer than wood.
>>>"Holten"<mkholten@comcast.net>07/28/08 8:51 AM >>>
Hi Grace:
I hope you had a nice vacation.
I have some qustions about pilings for our stair tower. Costwise, it
looks
like we may have to go with our original four-pole tower configuration.
If
we go with wood poles buried in the beach, can they be treated? If so,
what
treament options are permitted?(I have seen reference to ACZA pilings.)
Thank you again for your assistance.
Mike Holten
(7/28/2008)Grace Miller Pilin s _ ��
. _ --� Page 1
From: "Holten"<mkholten@comcast.net>
To: "Grace Miller'<Gbm@co.mason.wa.us> 4vv p&-Oor
Date: 7/28/2008 7:56 AM
Subject: Pilings
Hi Grace:
I hope you had a nice vacation.
I have some qustions about pilings for our stair tower. Costwise, it looks
like we may have to go with our original four-pole tower configuration. If
we go with wood poles buried in the beach, can they be treated? If so,what
treament options are permitted? (I have seen reference to ACZA pilings.)
Thank you again for your assistance.
Mike Holten
lot, e7 - -
` �rt•rtiv�o� (fin•.�01 Wti.v f cN-�,..,,..._ �J-I-L.,,,,, �o � �
41, rtct >-(-A#
w
MASON COUNTY Shelton (360)427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Belfair (360) 275-4467
Mason county Bldg.i 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
TO: THE MASON COUNTY JOURNAL
FROM: MASON CO. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: ��(p Lp q
Please publish the attached1.
�n the following day(s)
t , o0 9 ad pq a-00 q
Please keep the Affidavit of Publication for the Department of Community
Development to pick up from your office and send_�copies to the following
Ar-
WA q$37y
Please charge j6 ,,,, dave- for the publication at:
Thank you,
Mason County Planning Staff
02/06/2009 17:38 FAX (a 001
x TX REPORT sus
TRANSMISSION OR
TX/RX NO 0447
CONNECTION TEL 94269399
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME 02/06 17:37
USAGE T 00'58
PGS. SENT 4
RESULT OR
i
MASON BOUNTY
( PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FAX.
Pirane:(360)4.27-9670 ext. 7U Fax:(36014-27-8426 +
TO t
COMPANY NAME: 1J 'L. r`
CONTACT NAME:
FAX NUMBER:
PHONE NUMBER:
..REGARDING: �
FEB-26-2009 THU 10:22 AM FAX NO. P. 02/02
FrnrE o�
o
JAN�
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
p0 Box 47775 • Olympia,Washing ton 98504-777.5 • (360)407-6300
February 26,2009
Ms.Grace Miller r Your address
Mason county is 1n.the
Department of community Development Kennedy-
Planning Division Goldsborough
PO Box 279 watershed
Shelton,WA 9SS84
Dear Ms. Miller:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the
Schaaf Stair Tower project(SEP2009-00003)located at 1030 East Sunset Hill Road in Shelton as
proposed by Judith Schaaf. The Department of Ecology(Ecology) reviewed the environmental checklist
and has the following comment(s):
SHOREtANDS&ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE: Kim Van Zwalenburg(360)407-6520
Stair towers are significant structures on the landscape and the cumulative effect of these along a
shoreline might-have substantial adverse effects on the shoreline environment. Like piers and
docks,opportunities should be explored for joint use of these sorts of beach access structures. In
addition,these sorts of structures should be considered sacrificial--In other words, bank
stabilization structures(in the future)to protect a stair tower would generally not be allowed.
Ecology's comments are based upon information provided by the lead agency. As such,they may not
constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal requirements
that must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action.
If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please contact the appropriate
reviewing staff listed above.
Department of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
(SM:09-0581)
cc: Kim Van Zwalenburg,SEA
Judith Schaaf(Proponent)
Kristin Holton(Contact)
i��1
FEB-26-2009 THU 10:22 AM FAX NO. P. 01/02
FAX NUM13ER QQ� -
FAX COVER SHEET
DATE: D :Lq TIME: # OF PAGES f 4-0w4-e""
FROM: �
REMARKS:
Washington Department Of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
300 Desmond Drive SE `
P.O. Box 47775 '
Olympia,WA 98504-7775
Phone: (360) 407-6300 "
FAX: (3,60) 407-6305,
THE SHORELINE PERMIT PROCESS— Page 5
LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
WITHIN 300 FEET OF YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES
FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIANCE
Addresses may be obtained from the Mason County Assessor's Office, Building 1, Second Floor.
GWL CORPORATION ? MYRON F H nTINGER 1 ZRAY&JANA HOCKER
P O BOX 1671 41 E SUNSET BEACH DR P O BOX 477
VISTA,CA 92085-1671 SHELTON,WA 98584-7070 FALL CITY,WA 98024-0477
NEIL&NANCY MCREYNOLDS GWEN THORSOS AN&NILSA THORSOS
14312 SE 45TH ST 860 E SUNSET HILL RD 854 CAVANAGH RD
BELLEVUE,WA 98006-2349 SHELTON,WA 98584-9443 GLENDALE,CA 91207-1502
KRIS&DEBORAH THORSOS q APRIL&DAVID HANSEN AUL DOBOSZ
LJ 313 BUTTE PL 961 E SUNSET HILL RD 1011 E SUNSET HILL RD
PACIFIC,WA 98047-1480 SHELTON,WA 98584-8476 SHELTON,WA 985844444
/y DAVID POTWIN KAREN HOLT Y&CANDACE WARKENnN
4337180TH IN SW 3032 SAPP RD SW 11209 SANDY GROVE AVE
ROCHESTER,WA 98579-9433 OLYWIA,WA 98512-6753 LAS VEGAS,NV 89134-1841
SCOTT HOWARD TED WAITERS AyR 1CAui":
C5� 7125 34TH AVE SW PO BOX 281 5CkaaF
SEATTLE,WA 98126-3301 ENTIAT,WA 98822-0281 i! as 1a&+-Ai/e CT 6
WA IS3 4
,1FF1.tCAkrl 45 i2&
,M�tC.(�+IG-t45nA3 Hz LTPN
}�w� WA 9 83?q