HomeMy WebLinkAboutGEO2017-00048 for FPA2017-00006 - GEO Geological Review - 5/18/2017 (2) �j60 000L46
Fin.. FPA a s 1-7 - 66000a
RECEIVED
AUG 0 7 2017
615 W. Xder Street
Geological Assessment
For
Tree Harvesting
Cady Tree Farm, LLC
XXX NE State Route 3
Parcel No's 1232941-00180, 12329-4"0000
Mason County, Washington
May 18, 2017
Project#1756
Prepared For:
Alan Cady
Cady Tree Farm, LLC
PO Box 2022 Pti F WA°hsr
Belfair, Washington 98528
Prepared By:
ft 7
Envirotech Engineering �'o1, '�Fc 3045�o
PO Box 984 �`kS/ONALENG`
Belfair, Washington 98528
Phone: 360-275-9374
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION».»..............................»................».................»»»..».....»........»...».......................I
1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION.....................................................................................................................1
1.2 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION AND SCOPE OF WORK.........................................................................1
2.0 SURFACE CONDITIONS.......»...»»...».....»..».........»...........»»».....»..»»....»...»......................»...»...3
2.1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS..................................................................................................................3
2.2 TOPOGRAPHY...............................................................................................................................
2.Z I Upslope Geomorphology............................................................................................................3
2.3 SURFACE DRAINAGE...........................................................................................................................3
2.3.1 Upland Water Bodies..................................................................................................................3
2.4 SLOPE AND EROSION OBSERVATIONS................................................................................................4
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION.».»...»»........»»»....»......».».»»»...»...»...»»............ ................5
3.1 FIELD METHODS,SAMPLING AND FIELD TESTING...........................................................................5
3.2 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS.....................................................................................................................5
3.3 SPECIFIC SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.................................................................................................7
3 3.1 Groundwater...............................................................................................................................8
4.0 ENGINEERING CONCLUSIONS.......».»....»»..».............».....»...................».....................»»»......»9
4.1 LANDSLIDE HAZARDS.....................................................................................................I...................9
4 L I Landslides and Slope MabM&Analysis...................................................................................10
4.L2 Swjace and Smb=rjace Drainage...........................................................................................10
4.2 EROSION HAZARDS...........................................................................................................................10
4.3 SEISMIC HAZARDS............................................................................................................................11
4.4 TIMBER HARVESTING RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................11
5.0 CLOSURE..........................».......»...»».»......»......».»..»......»..»....»...»....»..».....»...».....».».....»....»..12
Appendix A-Site Plan
Appendix B-Soil Information
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Envirotech Engineering (Envirotech) has completed this geological assessment for a property
located at XXX NE State Route 3, identified as parcel numbers 12329-41-00180, & 12329-44-
00000 in Mason County, Washington (Project). As presented herein, this assessment includes
information pertaining to the Project in this Introduction Section;observations of the property and
surrounding terrain in the Surface Conditions Section; field methods and soils descriptions in the
Subsurface Investigation Section; and, assessments for landslides, erosion, seismic hazards, and
other considerations in the Conclusions Section.
A geological assessment was prepared for this project in lieu of a geotechnical report. Per
17.01.100.E.2 of the Mason County Resource Ordinance (MCRO), the Director may waive the
requirement for the Geotechnical Report if there is adequate geological information available on
the area proposed for development to determine the impacts of the proposed development and
appropriate mitigating measures. �� W, �.�i lam,
During the evaluation and site visit by Envirotech, surface and subsurface conditions were
assessed in order to determine if further geotechnical studies are required.After completion of the
field work and applicable Project research,Envirotech prepared this geological assessment.
1.1 Project Information
Information pertaining to the Project was provided by the property owner's representative, and
observations from a field visit by Envirotech. The property is currently vacant with an un-
improved access road. The proposed site alterations are expected to consist of tree harvesting.
Approximate site features are illustrated in the Site Map in Appendix A.
1.2 Purpose of Investigation and Scope of Work
The purpose of this geological assessment was to evaluate the Project in order to confirm that the
proposed development is outside of any landslide hazard area and its associated buffers and
setbacks as determined in the MCRO. The investigation included characterizing the general
Project surface and subsurface conditions,and evaluating the suitability of the soils to support the
planned site development. In order to fulfill the purpose of investigation, the geological/
geotechnical program completed for the proposed improvements of the Project include:
Review project information provided by the Project owner's representative;
• Conduct a site visit to document the site conditions that may influence the construction
and performance of the proposed improvements;
• Define general subsurface conditions of the site by observing soils within test pit
excavations, review well logs from existing wells near the Project, and evaluate
geological maps depicting the site geology for the vicinity of the Project;
• Perform soils testing,such as visual classifications,to determine selected index properties
of the soils;
• Complete an engineering assessment supported by planned site alterations and the surface
and subsurface conditions that were identified by the field investigation, soil testing, and
applicable Project research;and,
• Establish engineering conclusions based on findings and anticipated Project.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page I Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
.0♦
r €.erua.s ♦�
1
- 'RYv�Y♦ ` � I
M�Ay�1/
Vicinity Map from Mason County Website
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 2 Parcels 1232941-00180, 1232944-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
2.0 SURFACE CONDITIONS
Information pertaining to the existing surface conditions for the Project was gathered on April 17,
2017, by Robert McNearny, staff engineer with Envirotech. During the site visit, site features
were documented that may influence construction or reveal potential geological hazards. This
Surface Conditions Section provides information on general observations, vegetation,
topography,drainage and slope/erosion conditions for the Project and surrounding areas.
2.1 General Observations
The Project is currently vacant land with few improvements as previously mentioned, and
surrounded by mixed development. State route 3 extends to the west of the project.Vegetation on
and near the property consists primarily of 2°d growth firs, alders, cedars, and other trees and
shrubbery common to this area of the Pacific Northwest. An aerial photo of the Project and
immediate vicinity is provided on the following page.
2.2 Topography
The topographic information provided in this section was extrapolated from a public lidar source,
and incorporated observations and field measurements. Where necessary, slope verification
included measuring slope lengths and inclinations with a cloth tape and inclinometer. See the Site
Map in Appendix A for an illustration of the general slope indicators with respect to the planned
development.
Average slope grades are approximately 26%with a total vertical relief spanning both parcels of
approximately 260 feet. Although field measurements were less, public lidar indicates isolated
areas of sloping grades of up to 50%with vertical reliefs of less than 40 feet.
2.2.1 Upslope Geomorphology
The upland area of the property is situated on hillsides and crests. Landforms are
primarily of glacial origin with centuries of weathering overburden. Additional
geomorphology that is pertinent to both upslope and downslope areas are provided in the
Subsurface Investigation Section of this report.
23 Surface Drainage
Sheet flow on much of the properties is apparent, and directed to multiple un-named streams
crossing both parcels. Significant scour, erosion and sediment transport was confined to the
stream convergences only.
23.1 Upland Water Bodies
Except for the above mentioned streams, there are no large water bodies or wetlands
located u slope f rom the planned development that significantly in
fluence the
Project.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 3 Parcels 1232941-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
2.4 Slope and Erosion Observations
The existing moderate slopes near the Project signal a potential landslide or erosion hazard area.
Some indicators that may suggest past slope movements include:
• Outwash of sediments near the bottom of the slope,
• Fissures, tension cracks or naturally stepped land masses on the face or top of the slope,
and parallel to the slope,
• Fine,saturated subsurface soils,
• Old landslide debris,
• Significant bowing or leaning trees,or,
• Slope sloughing or calving.
The above mentioned indicators, or other signs of significant mass wasting on the property or
within the general vicinity of the Project were not observed or discovered during research.
Indications of past landslides, current unstable slopes, deep-seated slope problems, or surficial
slope failures were not observed during the site visit.
� Q
3
r
Aerial Photo from Google Website
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 4 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
3.0 SUBSURFACE IIWESTIGATION
Information on subsurface conditions pertaining to the Project was gathered during research and a
site reconnaissance. The site visit was accomplished on April 17, 2017 by Robert McNearny,
staff engineer with Envirotech. Specific information on field methods, sampling, field testing,
subsurface conditions, and results from soil testing are presented in this section of the report.
Appendix B has pertinent information on subsurface conditions for the Project, including test pit
log(s) representative of the site soils, and water well report(s) originating from the subject
property and/or nearby properties.
3.1 Field Methods,Sampling and Field Testing
Information on subsurface conditions for the Project was accomplished by probing anticipated
foundation areas with hand tools, and observing soils within test pit excavations and/ or earth
cuts. Information on subsurface conditions also included reviewing geological maps within the
Project vicinity,and water well reports originating from nearby properties.No soil samples were
collected for this Project. Envirotech measured the relative density of the in-situ soils by gauging
the resistance of hand tools.
3.2 Geologic Conditions
In general, soils at the project are composed of materials from glacial advances. The geologic
conditions as presented in the "Geologic Map of Washington," compiled by J. Eric Schuster,
2002 indicates Quaternary sediments, Q8. Quaternary sediments are generally unconsolidated
deposits,and dominantly deposited from glacial drift,including alluvium deposits. This project is
located within the Puget Lowland. Typically, "lower tertiary sedimentary rocks unconformably
overlie the Crescent Formation"as revealed in the Geologic Map.Initial sedimentary rocks were
formed from shales, sandstones and coal deposits from rivers.During the Quaternary period,the
Puget Lowland was covered by numerous ice sheets,with the most recent being the Fraser glacier
with a peak of approximately 14,000 years ago. Upon the glacial retreat, the landscape was
formed by glacial erosion glacial drift deposits.
The "Geologic Map of the Belfair 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Mason, Kitsap and Pierce Counties,
Washington" by Michael Polen4 Katelin Alldritt, Nicholas J. Hehemann, Isablle Y. Sarikhan,
and Robert L. Logan,July 2009,provides the following caption(s)for the project area:
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 5 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
Ashon till—Unsorted. unstratified(but locally banded)mix of clay. silt.
sand. and gravel: typically supported by a sandy matrix. mostly gxay but
locally ranging to tan. light brown.or orange: typically unweathered:
lodgment till compact. with well-developed facies resembling concrete.
but near the surface commonly hhckly and (or) looser and covered by 1 to
6 ft of loose ablation till: deposited directly by glacial ice and commonly
includes clasts or clumps plucked from underlying units. Clasts are
commonly striated and faceted. with angular or rounded edges. Boulders
are generally sparse within the till but large(erratic)boulders of plutonic
or metamorphic rock are common on till surfaces. Some exposures include
interbands and lenses of sand and gravel. locally with shears and joints.
Till forms a locally patchy and seemingly randomly distributed cover up to
a several tens of feet thick. with a thickness of 5 to 20 8 most common. It
typically dominates. but is also locally discontinuous on.fluted surfaces.
with individual drumlins measuring 0.1 to 0.3 mi wide by 0.8 to 1.3 ruui
long and the long axis aligned with the direction of ice flow. Till typically
is in sharp. unconformable contact with underlying units. most comiuonly
advance outwash(unit Qga and subunit). Unit Qgt lies stratigiaphically
below twit Qgo. It may include unrecognized exposures of older till. A
map boundary mismatch between unit Qgt on this map and unit Qgos on
the Vaughn quadrangle to the south (Logan and Walsh. 200 f) may have
resulted from a map-production error in the northwest corner of the
Vaughn map(Josh Logan.Wash. Divii. of Geology and Earth Resources.
oral common.. 2009).
1'ashon adivnee outwash—Pebble to cobble gravel. sand. and lavers and
lenses of silt and clay: gray to tan: typically stratified. well rounded. well
sorted.and clean (<:S%silt or clay in matrix).except in less-sorted and
more angular ice-proximal deposits: compact(Fig. 4) and resistant to
erosion. except Where well sorted and well rounded: very thinly to very
thickly bedded. contains planar and graded beds,cut-and-fill structures.
trough and ripple cross-beds. and foresets: thickness not well constrained
by this mapping but ranges from a few feet to more than(^) 100 ft:
deposited as proglacial fluvial and deltaic sediment during Vashon glacial
advance and typically overlain by unit Qgt along a sharp. unconformable
contact. Locally divided into:
Qaf Allu,vlal fan--Silt. sand. gravel. and boulders: typically poorly soiled and
stratified: forms concentric lobes where streams emerge from confuting
-----1 valleys and reduced gradients cause sediment load to be deposited.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 6 Parcels 1232941-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
33 Specific Subsurface Conditions
The following subsurface conditions are estimated descriptions of the Project subgrade utilizing
information from the depth of penetration at all testing, sampling, observed and investigated
locations. Soils for this project were described utilizing the Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS). Using the USCS in conjunction with estimated relative densities and other anticipated
engineering properties of the soil, susceptibility for potential landslides, erosion and seismic
hazards may be assessed.
The Project is primarily composed of undisturbed, native soils,without indications of substantial
fill. Competent bearing soils were encountered at 12 inches below the existing native ground
surface in locations where the ground was probed. For engineering purposes, these native soils
consist of distinguishable layers,as presented below.
Soils within the upper 6 feet of natural ground were observed to be primarily moist, brown silty
sand with gravel (SM). Soils below the upper SM layer are expected to be an SM hardpan. The
hardpan is believed to extend to depths of at least 50 feet. This is based on nearby well reports,
site geology, and/ or knowledge of the general area. Expanded and specific subsurface
descriptions, other than what is provided in this section, are provided in the soil logs located in
Appendix B of this report.
According to the "Soil Survey of Mason County," by the United States Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS), the site soils are described as
Everett Very Gravelly Sandy Loam, Eh, 8% to 15% slopes,and Everett Very Gravelly Sandy
Loam, Ek, 15% to 30% slopes. See the soil map below and the applicable SCS soil profile in
Appendix B of this report.
g
Soil Survey From USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 7 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
3.3.1 Groundwater
From the water well report(s)and knowledge of the general area,permanent groundwater
is at least 50 feet directly below the property at the building pad location. Surface seepage
or perched groundwater at shallow depths was not observed on-site, nor indicated on the
well reports. However, some seasonal groundwater is expected to flow directly above the
hardpan on occasion.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph. 360-275-9374 page 8 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
4.0 ENGINEERING CONCLUSIONS
The following sections present engineering assessments and conclusions concerning the Project.
These conclusions have been made available based on the planned construction activities as
outlined in the Introduction Section of this report; general observations of drainage and
topography as summarized in the Surface Conditions Section; and, soil conditions that were
identified by the field investigation and soils testing as outlined in the Subsurface Investigation
Section. Conclusions for the Project that is provided herein, includes pertinent information for
landslide,erosion and seismic hazards.
4.1 Landslide Hazards
For the planned site alterations, as provided in the Introduction Section of this report, it is
Envirotech's opinion that these site alterations is not subjected to or cause adverse impacts to a
landslide hazard area or its associated buffer or setback as defined in the MCRO. This conclusion
is based on the contents provided in this report. However, future building development on the
property should be required to be evaluated by a geotechnical engineer.
According to the Washington Interactive Geologic Map, Division of Geology and Earth
Resources-Washington's Geologic Survey, previous landslide activity recorded on and near the
property is a deep seated,dormant landslide. Per the Resource Map from DNR,the Project is not
within terrain labeled `highly unstable' or `highly erodible' relating to soils. DNR labeled
portions of this project as medium to high slope instability with relation to slopes. This
delineation is primarily dependent upon slopes and convergence. Secondly, lithology and
precipitation are modeled within this delineation. In summary, this designation is based on
mapping without field observations or knowledge of the specific site geology or soils. A resource
map from DNR is provided below:
Project
re
•
r
Map from Washington State Department of Natural Resources Website
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 9 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
I -
4.1.1 Landslides and Slope Stability Analysis
Past landslide activity near the planned site alterations was not revealed during the
Project research. Detrimental landslide activity or potential high landslide indicators were
not observed during the site visit as outlined in the Surface and Subsurface Conditions
Sections of this report. The mapped landslide is ancient and dormant, and it is our
opinion that this landslide will not be re-activated due to this Project.
Considering the planned site alterations as summarized in the Introduction Section of this
report; the aforementioned surface and subsurface conditions for the Project; the slope
stability assessment provided herein; and the Engineering Conclusions provided later in
this report, it is our opinion that the Project is not within a landslide hazard area,and that
the proposed site alterations will not encourage a landslide hazard.
4.1.2 Surface and Subsurface Drainage
It is our opinion that standard and ordinary stream setbacks from the network of un-
named steams on both properties are sufficient for this project with relation to
geotechnical and geological hazards.
Due to the acreage of timber to be removed, we recommend that an engineered drainage
and erosion control plan should be prepared for this project, or that a drainage engineer
certifies that the planned tree harvesting will not create additional runoff or sedimentation
from leaving the property or entering the streams due to the planned logging.
4.2 Erosion Hazards
Based on the USCS description of the Project soils, the surface soils are considered moderately
erodible. According to the Resource Map from the Washington State DNR, as provided above,
the Project is not within terrain labeled `highly erodible.' This Project is not within an erosion
hazard area as defined by the MCRO. Erosion hazard areas are those with USDA SCS
designations of River Wash (Ra), Coastal Beaches (Cg), Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam on
slopes 15% or greater (Ac and Ad), Cloquallum Silt Loam on slopes 15% or greater (Cd),
Harstine Gravelly Sandy Loam on slopes 15% or greater(Hb), and Kitsap Silt Loam on slopes
15%or greater(Kc).
Temporary and/ or permanent erosion control measures may be required for any site when land
disturbance is involved. Erosion control will mostly depend on the timeliness of construction,
moisture content of the soil,and amount of rainfall during construction. Soil erosion typical to the
existing conditions and planned disturbance of this Project include wind-borne silts during dry
weather, and sediment transport during prolonged wet weather. Sediment transport of disturbed
soils could be from stormwater runoff or tracking off-site with construction equipment. Although
an engineered erosion control plan is not warranted for this project, Best Management Practices
(BMP's) should be employed during and after construction. Ordinary BMP's includes silt
fencing, protection of drainage outlets and vegetating denuded areas.
Erosion control information and specifications may be found in the applicable "Stormwater
Management Manual for Western Washington,"prepared by the Washington State Department of
Ecology Water Quality Program.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph. 360-275-9374 page 10 Parcels 1232941-00180, 1232944-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
43 Seismic Hazards
There are no known faults beneath this Project. The nearest Class `A' or 'B' fault to this property
is the Sunset Beach Scarp, Tacoma Fault Zone. This fault is a Class `A,` and is located
approximately 1 mile to the south of the Project. This information is supported by the USGS
Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States.
The potential for liquefaction and other earthquake induced hazards are believed to be very low to
low for this Project. This is based on subsurface conditions such as soil characteristics and the
lack of a permanent and substantial shallow water table. Subgrade characteristics that particularly
contribute to problems caused by seismic events include submerged and confined, poorly-graded
granular soils. Although gravel- and silt-sized soil particles could be problematic, fine and
medium grained sands are typically subjected to these types of seismic hazards.
4.4 Timber Harvesting Recommendations
The selective harvesting areas encompass the entire property except for designated stream
buffers, and geotechnical buffers. Geotechnical buffers are designated as slopes exceeding 40%
and within 10 feet from the top and toe of slopes exceeding 40%.
Although not a geotechnical constraint, the selective harvesting is expected to include partial
cutting by leaving all trees with a breast height diameter of less than 4 inches in place and
undisturbed. All trees left in place,and underbrush shall be minimally disturbed.
Conventional equipment such as skidders and crawlers may be used for this Project. Logs shall be
elevated on one end when dragging across the Project,although dragging should be minimized as
much as possible for this site. Timber harvesting causes a disturbance of a complex interaction
between water, soil and vegetation. Recommendations in this report are provided as a cost
efficient way to alleviate problems that may arise from this disturbance. Young trees should be
monitored and protected from competing vegetation. Permanent erosion control, drainage
facilities and slopes shall be immediately maintained as necessary. Some conditions that may
need immediate attention includes excessive erosion, scour, sloughing, significant changes to
drainage patterns, new springs, new seepages or isolated areas of ground saturation. Maintenance
may include curtain drains, swales, other drainage facilities, or slope remediation such as
reinforcement,retaining structures or surface protection.
Conclusions in this report are based on the type and location of the anticipated site alterations and
existing surface and subsurface conditions. Site work that significantly deviates from the
anticipated improvements presented in this report may require geotechnical design
recommendations.
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page I 1 Parcels 1232941-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County, Washington
May 18,2017
5.0 CLOSURE
Based on the project information and site conditions as presented in this report, it is Envirotech's
opinion that additional geotechnical studies are not required to further evaluate this Project.
However, future developments should require additional geotechnical studies.
Due to the inherent natural variations of the soil stratification and the nature of the geotechnical
subsurface exploration, there is always a possibility that soil conditions encountered during
construction are different than those described in this report. Therefore, it is recommended that
Envirotech is promptly notified if project and subsurface conditions found on-site are not as
presented in this report so that we can re-evaluate our recommendations.
This report presents a geological/geotechnical assessment, and is intended only for the owner, or
owners' representative. Furthermore, this report is only valid for the project information and
location described herein.
The services described in this report were prepared under the responsible charge of Michael
Staten, a professional engineer with Envirotech. Michael Staten has appropriate education and
experience in the field of geotechnical engineering in order to assess landslide hazards,
earthquake hazards,and general soil mechanics.
Please contact Michael Staten at 360-275-9374 if you have any questions, comments, or require
additional information.
Sincerely,
Envirotech Engineering
Robert McNearny,E.I.T. Michael Staten,P.E.
Staff Engineer Geotechnical Engineer
Envirotech Engineering Geological Assessment
Ph.360-275-9374 page 12 Parcels 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000
Mason County,Washington
May 18,2017
APPENDIX B
SOIL INFORMATION
TEST PIT LOG
TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1
PROJECT: Cady Geotechnical Report DATE OF LOG: 4/17/2017
PROJECT NO: 1756 LOGGED BY: RJM
CLIENT: Alan Cady EXCAVATOR: N/A
LOCATION: Parcel 12329-41-00180, 12329-44-00000 DRILL RIG: None
Mason County, Washington ELEVATION: N/A
INITIAL DEPTH OF WATER: N/A FINAL DEPTH OF WATER: N/A
SOIL STRATA, STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
DEPTH SAMPLERS USCS DESCRIPTION LL PI CURVE
AND TEST DATA DEPTH N 10 30 50
0 . ....... ............ ............... .... . ... . .. ...
r. SM Brown, moist, loose to medium dense
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL. Gravel is
,i primarily well
and subangular.
" � i Sand is mostly medium. Low plasticity.
I �
T.
F r-
-4 f
Excavation terminated at approximately I a
t 6.0 feet
q
No Groundwater Encountered ENVIROTECH ENGINEERING
This information pedains only to this boring and should not be Geotechnical Engineering
interpreted as being indidUve of the entne sde.
i
Map Unit Description:Everett very gravelly sandy loam,15 to 30 percent slopes—Mason
Cry, gton
Mason County, Washington
Ek--Everett very gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent
slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. 2t62c
Elevation: 30 to 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 91 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-fr+ee period. 180 to 240 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Everett and similar soils. 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of
the mapunit.
Description of Everett
Setting
Landform: Karnes, eskers, moraines
Landform position(two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position(three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Sandy and gravelly glacial outwash
Typical profile
Oi-0 to 1 inches., slightly decomposed plant material
A- 1 to 3 inches., very gravelly sandy loam
6w-3 to 24 inches: very gravelly sandy loam
C1 -24 to 35 inches: very gravelly loamy sand
C2-35 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly coarse sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Kset): High
(1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding. None
Available water storage in profile: Low(about 3.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification(irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification(nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Natural Resources Web Soll Survey 5/15/2017
Conswvadon service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2
Map Unit Description:Everett very gray sandy loam,15 to 30 percent slopes—Mason
Canty,VV&O*Vton
Other vegetative classification: Droughty Soils(GOO2-XN402WA),
Droughty Soils(G002XS401 WA)
Hydfic soil rating: No
Minor components
Alderwood
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Ridges, hills
Landform position(two-dimensional): Sackslope
Landform position(three-dimensional): Side slope, nose slope, tall
Down-slope shape: Linear,convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Indianola
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Eskers, karnes,terraces
Landform position(two-dimensional): Backelope
Landform position(three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydfic soil rating: No
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Mason County, Washington
Survey Area Data: Version 12, Sep 9, 2016
Mahn al Resoumse 1Meb Soil Survey 5/15/2017
Conservation service National Cooperative Soil Survey Pape 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1
Michael MacSems-Cady Geo Assessment#1756
From: Michael MacSems
To: Staten, Michael; envirotech_ak@hotmail.com
Date: 9/7/2017 1:40 PM
Subject: Cady Geo Assessment#1756
CC: Innis
Hello Michael,
Today I read through your geological assessment for the Cady Tree Farm in Belfair(job# 1756). The
checklist is mostly good,but I have the following comments and questions:
1. I was surprised when this turned out to be an assessment rather than a report,because of the
steepness of the slopes on site. However I see your reference to MCC 17.01.100.E.2 for justification.
There is one unanswered question though, in the context of MCC 17.01.100.E.1, is this a type "c" or a
"type "d" site?
2. In section 2.2 (and elsewhere) you reference Appendix "A" but neither of the copies of your report
that I was provided by the applicant contain Appendix "A". Can you provide me with a PDF copy of
Appendix "A" for job#1756, I need it for a number of reasons, including being able to check off
Section 8 of the submittal checklist as complete.
3. Section 3.3.1 reference a "building pad location." As discussed elsewhere in the document,this
assessment was only written to address the proposed logging and future site development will require a
second geo-technical review. Is this reference to a building pad a cut-and-paste typo?Please clarify.
4. In section 4.1.1 you mention a mapped ancient dormant landslide as well finding that the site is not a
LSHA. Please confirm that these both statements are accurate.
5. In section 4.1.2 you state that due to the scale of the project an engineered drainage and erosion
control plan should be required(even though the area of ground "disturbance" as represented by the
Cadys as less than one-acre). In section 4.2 you state that an engineered erosion control plan is not
warranted for this project. I need you to confirm which statement is operative and to retract the other
statement.
I would appreciate i v "pp eciate t very much if you can supply me with a copy of Appendix A and a brief
addendum that address my questions above.
Thank you,
I
Michael MacSems
Lfi le:///C:/Users/mms/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/59B l4C52Masomnail l O0161346213... 9/7/2017
doo
0.00
00
ol
' s
' .00
INK Ole "00
000
,s
- — - j,,,. Y k ems ►
wk
Ir
00
e�
x
r: a�V.•. '' �'�� `� ��2�, /` '`�s.�y'y Jrl,,.e.•` �o�'.. '� J- �Y'„Q}�� �, ra• :�1+ �;.xj'"t• 1
i � � � �,. y •�` i �`'/x��IR�,• � � `ice� ,
v "1
,y
�3
'
,','� - �� ''� „ `•�'♦ �. ?►'� 'F �.p� �j, ,I( .� •Y �wrt .�,t_ �_ ;'niwp'a- � g.. .�w� ✓ -�
' � � � meµ, ��� /. � i' �, d-'d � ti��� y- }�. � !�r},{.A�• �S'M;� �
f c -. / 'mil;`T � •+ er,fi��• �`
r F A � :± ., `,� � .f► a,, .. � .,,.y,+rat s�,�`•;� f �. ` M• ,4.� t•: -
�,•� �' J� r", `�� •y' .f'<.�n '�',.'�.�", i r ,�1�;. - :tFs ���.,�� ,.lr• a` `}��ruT'•��f�' sfj�.` 1
x- r\ �t'.- at+'+,.:-r / r•i.• � r4 < rli..�• s � / . �Y f° '�r�� / r. .
'�, � ,' r -.Fs`r jr„'f .f� R5',.jr�'Y� S'*��' �:'•.�i.�,r�'. ! _
�; `•�• r\ l p. \�a..o ' s, 4_M7f�• t,q��r�Q,j° ..ram �.i�
j \ •a \ ,.+`�` dap�C'r-I. (���` ti'•h ,;�y��.. ;r I f�'
_
r t
-CI'fr A ,� �<a t'.f�'} ,,,.��• 'b•j$ ;�. -..L 1''Y f i !; Jr • _�^ •�.�. CS �n,NV ?
v .'3t• r .�' �
z
!`.+.-� �/1.� `� * � .iY�'r^�f r r* v rr"� :. •�. } ... .'L '°�'A ., y '4:'� �• -� •1 ,� Imo. .nn' �, /,..
_lr!///�¢�+!, f, R ��•�w,2'�y? des N C /p�� �+ . 4 ti ��,rs• s '.���-.✓�•/-. � ✓��.��•.. � 5'
' :,.-.� 'it =.� "�Li""-`.der*. � ,fr� -' ���" .r { '~� - _ ti "a. � •b�
i �� I '- • `'- t fir ' '.•"r i' w. - ~* A {r 'Q r .•-
Aff
�`
"
, W r
•��jCf -_PJ-P IJII ��..,r y
• ', ,�''"A, _. Iti �SY Iry '-i�'S.�" T..0 �"Y. ��� a•_YT' 4 �d�'1 4. ,i,� '
• ' :.._ p�. .ice �`ii.}�C.r4w,�tj .* : `• .~�-�_-..!'•-• .Sr, � '� "�^ ,.B � •�-.
// ! m �-- •-r� C,°.' "'str,r ,��°� �i••ri•',{�•y9 � � '�" •fl! +•f•����3'��• �� - _ e-
fi , 7► hr `c«asp E'vy►' } 1,►'�,, ��r '
WAVV
i yirr .^� •••��k�11 �h�•*, -'p•1 b g � ��t y-,i f, _
a ..:� pis, �� >. ^ 'gip{ a'. ♦ !'�":„., y ,`, �'► 3, r,1
�•``y � ter•!'- * .�.,. +s �. t � � ,
4•'fir' • '/�. YSj.. �, .4 J�1�}re'.. 1p.• � , r7ji'' 1%} ��• f\ r fr �►..f•
., r•",i.r ,� r ` �'� �Y� .
:4a-.... s � P'S .' .1.T: tam. •
I:' u.*- _. � `. v 7: ,,,,••�;;/aa1`. �`�T::+` `' ♦ j �'r.,r'� t.'. -. -�'av'mo°"+ •- �` ''f�i��i
1 ( t{a,�b � _T"` • � �' t' �.r art}rw�.y �
It
` .,`�--• l�♦ �r ,i�J4 � � / r/��/�/}\/ �, f � �`yy� �1: ���J T��' Y ,r ��- �r r rl�
0
o
.010
7-1 PrT
57
i M •r:•
. •�""( a ram• i.,a .. X +. .':t (�f fTA;;B: �x�� R� r:T• r ,,�M' � "�
,, r;,a•���'. � :•e is �f•/. ,. '.,,� .l: � ,r,• - t• E •� �,r,- _,'�"' - 'fir` rr j, �'
- ,. ,� r-> -. •. � � _.,ice� .:� 'ram•-� ��_'mot'*•. ;Y .
CADY FAMILY TRUST PROPERTY
SCALE: 1"=100'