HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR95-0011 Cancelled Excavation for Garage - SHR Permit / Conditions - 11/9/1994 sTA7' o�
o > tau
�.n_
� x
�y� IAtl9 a�Y
J U N 19 1995
STATE Of WASHINGTON
PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY MASON CO. G DEPIT.
^O Box 47775 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 • (206)407-6300
June 15, 1995 -
Mr. Maurice Conklin
444 129th Place NE
Bellevue, WA 98005
Dear Mr. Conklin:
Re: Mason County Permit #SHR95-0011
Maurice Conklin - Applicant
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit #1995-SW-00190
The subject Shoreline Management Substantial Development permit has been filed
with this office by Mason County on June 9, 1995.
The development authorized by the subject permit may NOT begin until the end of the
appeal period July 10, 1995. You will be notified in writing if this permit is appealed.
Other federal, state, and local permits may be required in addition to the subject
permit.
If this permit is NOT appealed, this letter constitutes the Department of Ecology's
final notification of action on this permit.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 360 407-6520.
Sincerely,
Kim Van Zwalenburg
Shoreline Specialist
Shorelands and Water
Resources Program
KVZ:cl
RECSDP.WP
Enclosure
cc: Gary Yando, Mason County
I
Gordon E. Adams
Geologist
SE 220 Sells Drive
Shelton, WA 98584
206-426-4070
Date: October 4, 1994
To: Jason Manassee
From: Gordon E. Adams
RE: Shoreline Conditional Permit -Excavation for Garage
10041 State Route 106
I made an on-site inspection on October 4, 1994 of the property located at 10041 State
Route 106 for the purpose of establishing whether the development lies within a landslide
hazard area. The conditions encountered are as follows:
N 1. The project area is within an area identified on the landslide hazard map as a
potential landslide hazard. Examination of the site indicates there is a relatively small 30 -
50 foot steep bank located 21 feet back from the state highway. No evidence of a landslide
activity exists.
N 2. The project area shows some evidence of soil creep which is normal for slopes
of this type. Previous excavation for the adjacent garage doesn't appear to have greatly
affected soil creep. Excavation of the lower part of the slope will create some problem as
to soil creep and cause an oversteepening of the bank which will eventually undercut the
soil layer and slough off. This could be offset by a retaining wall. The removal of
vegetation could accelerate soil creep.
N 3. The project area does not have artificially oversteepened or unengineered
slopes. The steep bank has been formed by glacial action and appears to have become
stable.
N 4. The project area does not contain slopes with soft or potentially liquefiable
soils. The underlying sediment consists of glacial till which has become quite compact.
N 5. The project area does not contain any areas that are unstable as a result of
recent stream incision, recent stream bank erosion or recent undercutting by wave action.
N 6. The project area does contain slopes greater than 15 percent over a very small
area. However the surface does not intersect geologic contacts of a relative permeable
sediment overlaying a relative impermeable sediment or bedrock and there are no apparent
springs or ground water seepage. No evidence of a landslide activity exists.
ANALY I
ALTHOUGH THERE IS A RELATIVELY STEEP BANK OF
APPROXIMATELY 30 - 50 FEET IN HEIGHT OVER A VERY SMALL AREA, I
FIND THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO CLASSIFY THE LAND AS LYING
WITHIN A LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA BECAUSE THERE IS NO VISABLE
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT LANDSLIDE ACTIVITY.
Pordon . Adams
SMADA 10/04/94