HomeMy WebLinkAboutGEO2016-00066 Review Checklist - BLD Engineering / Geo-tech Reports - 1/10/2017 GEO Zh 1(0- 000410
Mason County Review Checklist C�
for a Geotechnical Report
Instructions:
This checklist is intended to assist Staff in the review of a Geotechnical Report. The Geotechnical Report is reviewed
for completeness with respect to the Resource Ordinance. If an item is found to be not applicable, the Report should
explain the basis for the conclusion. The Report is also reviewed for clarity and consistency. If the drawings,
discussion, or recommendations are not understandable, they should be clarified. If they do not appear internally
consistent or consistent with the application or observations on site, this needs to be corrected or explained. If
resolution is not achieved with the author, staff should refer the case to the Planning Manager or Director.
Applicant's Name: 6*eyeM llkwY—im�
Permit#: Parcel#: 3?Z34 -5a-Ddo38
Date(s) of the Docu ent(s) reviewed: o
1. (a) A discuss' n of general geologic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development,
OK? Comment:
(b) A discussion of specific soil types
OK?y_Comment:
(c) A discussion of ground water conditions
OK? V Comment:
(d) A discuccinn of the upslope geomorphology
OK? ✓ Comment: Mfg`l_ C_r ',c,c,\ S1noe- 'A-V/o IVto
(e) A discussion of the location of uplap
L)
swat rbodies and wetlands
OK? ✓ _Comment: �,i a4r�g )vriui.'}I Ais - Dro0 osO P SCPT%e/Ipml n i t L C.) i S
�TL.-oc tiTT r7 0Pi el/0C/O \M A
(f) A discuss on of history of landslide activity in the vicinity, as available in the referenced maps and records
OK? _Comment:
2. A site plan that identifies the important development and geologic features.
OK? V _Comment:
3. Locations and logs of exploratory holes or probes.
OK? ✓ Comment:
4. The area of the proposed development, the boundaries of the hazard, and associated buffers and setbacks shall
be delineated (top, both sides, and toe) on a geologic map of the site.
OK?V Comment:
5. A minimum of one cross section at a scale which adequately depicts the subsurface profile, and which
incorporates the details of proposed grade changes.
OK? Comment:
6. A description and results of slope stability analyses performed for both static and seismic loading conditions.
Analysis should examine worst case failures. The analysis 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 ccoeffients should be a value of 0.15.
OK? V Comment: \) \M(_Lt2k 1�IE. 4c.�e far eJ �OrS��hle h130VE cti/ cr �'CA Slop
nod � f �rolPCt 6 tt_
7. (a) Appropriate restrictions on placement of drainage features
OK? ✓ Comment:
(b) Appropriate restrictions on placement of septic drain fields
OK?�_Comment:
(c) Appropriate restrictions on plac ent of compacted fills and footings.
OK? Comment:
Page 1 of 2 Form Effective June 2008
i�
(d) Recommended buffers from the landslide hazard areas shoreline bluffs and the tops of other slopes. \
OK? y"" Comment: �n 0✓er -qo%� �•��� `p�r'11J
W ��Gh�b Q�«�►sh� Y� o�
(e) Recomme ded setbacks from a Ian slide azar areas sh a in b u sand the tops of other slopes.
OK? Comment: 'U -uv�'1"Dc.1N11;u a�; ova bE i►.i Cs CM ill t�NT W/fL--(5,8)n.V'
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. a DCTYk1L-V►_!-1 0_Lc�Z-1fUG G2P47►ni�AG �I s .�loT[.��'►rzak,�►r�r� ,
OK? \✓ Comment: �aT C.'Es Q07- Tb Rove.V66 ove,-rz. yo/,
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.
OK? ✓ Comment:
10. An analysis of both on-site and off-site impacts of the proposed development.
OK? ✓ Comment:
11. Specifications of final development conditions such as, vegetative management, drainage, erosion control, and
buffer widths.
OK? ✓ Comment:
12. Recommendations for the preparation of structural mitigation or details of other proposed mitigation.
OK?�/ Comment: i
13. A site map drawn to scales owing the property boundaries, scale, north arrow, and the location and nature of
existing and proposed development on the site.
OK? -✓ Comment:
Are the Documents signed and stamped? ✓ By whom? moaOsd LLA
License#: 3(D S License type: ,EC-CIS-f
FIRST REVIEW iApproved ❑ Need more info.
/X11If not approved, what is the next action/recommendation for further action?
Reviewed by are sso, W on l -7 Time spent in review.-
SECOND REVIEW/UPDATE ❑ Approved ❑ Need more info.
Reviewed by , on . Time spent in second review:
THIRD REVIEW/ UPDATE ❑ Approved ❑ Need more info.
Reviewed by on . Time spent in third review:
Disclaimer: Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geotechnical Report.
Page 2 of 2 Form Effective June 2008