Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGEO2014-00007 - GEO Geological Review - 4/16/2014 MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Division P O Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584 (360)427-9670 Geotechnical Assessment Review Acceptance Letter April 16, 2014 BEISLEY INC PO BOX 2355 BELFAIR WA 98528 Case No.: GE02014-00007 Parcel No.: 123305000088 Proiect Description: Building Residence The Geotechnical Assessment for BEISLEY INC has been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. The assessment was prepared by Michael Staten dated 2/19/2014. Based on the certification provided by the licensed engineer/geologist, the referenced Geological Assessment was prepared in general accordance with the requirements in the Mason County Resource Ordinance, Landslide Hazard Areas 17.01.100.E.4. Mason County considers the review valid until such time as scope of project, site conditions, and/or regulations change. Should the scope of work, site conditions, and/or regulations change after the original review, then an addendum from the original author of the assessment may be required to address these changes. The assessment would only be re-reviewed if a permit for development were submitted after these changes occur. Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geological Assessment. Please contact me at (360) 427-9670, ext. 365 if you have questions. Sincerely, Allan Borden Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department Comments: 4/16/2014 Page 1 of 1 GE02014-00007 Mason County Review Checklist For a Geological Assessment Instructions: This checklist is intended to assist Staff in the review of a Geological Assessment. The Assessment 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 Assessment 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: Permit# C�fDT(4, Parcel# ,3 - Date(s)of the Document(s) reviewed: ( Ct (1) A discussion of geologic conditions in the general vicinity of the proposed development, with geologic unit designation based on referenced maps. OK? V Comment: (2) (a)A disc sion of the ground water conditions at the site, OK? j�Comment: (b) A disc ssion of the estimated depth to water OK? Comment: (c) A discussion of the quantity of surface seepage OK?Comment:' (d) A disc sion of the upslope geomorphology OK? Comment: (e) A disc sion of location of upland waterbodies and wetlands. OK?Comment: (3) The approynate depth to hard or dense competent soil, e.g.glacial till or outwash sand. OK? ✓ Comment: (4) A discussion of any geomorphic expression of past slope instability(presence of hummocky ground or ground cracks,terraced topography indicative of landslide block moveme bowed or arched trees i diGating downslope movement, etc.). OK?--Comment: (5) A discussion of the history f landslide activity in the vicinity, as available in the referenced paps and records. OK?Comment: ] (6) An opinion on whether the prop sed development is within the landslide hazard area or its associated buffer or setback and the potential for landslide activity at the site in light of the propos development. OK?Comment: (7) A recommendation by the preparer whether a Geotechnical Report should be required to further evaloe site conditions and the Drgposed development of the subject property. OK? ►/Comment: 19 (8) If the presence of a hazard is determi d within 300 feet of the proposed development, then the following are delineated on a geologic map/site map: (a) the area the proposed development, OK? Comment: Page 1 of 2 Form Effective June 2008 � w r (b) the b daries of the landslide hazard area (top, both sides, and toe), OK? VComment: (c) the as ociated buffers (top, both sides, and toe) OK? Comment: (d) buildi or other setbacks (top, both sides, and toe). OK? j Comment: (9) A site map drawn to scale showing the property boundaries, scale, north arrow, and the location a nature of existing and pyopose development on the site. OK?Comment: Are the.Document(s)signed and stamped? Type and #of License: Pe %, 4/ If not approved, what is the next action/recommendation for further actio ? Reviewed by , on Time spent in review: SECOND REVIEW/ UPDATE: Reviewed by , on Time spent in second review: THIRD REVIEW/UPDATE: Reviewed by , on Time spent in third review: Disclaimer: Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geological Assessment Page 2 of 2 Form Effective June 2008 Zf)+om)J F E COPY Geological Assessment for Beisley, Inc. Single Family Residential Property 321 NE Anchor Drive Parcel No. 12330-50-00088 Mason County, Washington February 19, 2014 Project#1418 Prepared For: Beisley, Inc. PO Box 2355 Ptiv cwADE sTq Belfair, Washington 98528 °F�,S J�c Prepared By: Envirotech Engineering ��o `���S°ERti9 PO Box 984 ssroNAL��e Belfair, Washington 98528 Phone: 360-275-9374 Fax: 360-275-4789 Mason County Department of Community Development Submittal Checklist For a Geological Assessment Instructions: This checklist must be submitted with a Geological Assessment and completed,signed, and stamped by the licensed professional(s)who prepared the Geological Assessment 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 ��y',�_y . ��Ih�� Parcel#/�/23-3Q-50 e�2'0056 Site Address (1) A discussion of geologic conditions in the general.vicinity'of the proposed development,with geologic unit designation based on referenced maps. Located on page(s) C (2) (a)A discussion of the ground water conditions at the site, Located on page (b) A discussion of the.estimated depth to water Located on page(s) 9 (c) A discussion of the quantity of surface seepage Located on page(s) 9 (d) A discussion of the upslope geomorphology Located on page(s) L (e) A discussion of location of upland waterbodies and wetlands: Located on page(s) (3) The approximate depth to hard or dense competent soil, e.g.glacial till or outwash sand. Located on page(s) (4) A discussion of any geomorphic expression of past slope instability(presence of hummocky ground or ground cracks,terraced topography indicative of landslide block movement, bowed or arched trees indicating downslope movement, etc.). Located on page(s) (5) A discussion of the history of landslide activity in the vicinity, as available in the referenced maps and records. Located on page(s) J0 (6) An opinion on whether the proposed development is within the landslide hazard area or its associated buffer or setback and the potential for landslide activity at the site in light of the proposed development. Located on page(s) /0 (7) A recommendation by the preparer whether a Geotechnical Report should be required to further evaluate site conditions and the proposed development of the subject property. Page'9 of 2 For?Effective June 2008 APPENDIX A SITE PLAN SCALE, I INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 RECOMMENDED ROOF DRAIN OUTLET IN ROCK LINED CHANNEL. SEE REPORT. -90 FT EXISTING DRIVEWAY APPROXIMATE SLOPE SIDE (TYP) PROPERTY LINE 4 i ty Q, <4 PROPOSED TPI QQ-�J i Q2 rtiti� ♦ �� ♦ SEPTIC AREA J ♦ 4 10 BUILDING SETBACK ENCROACH PER REPORT r FILL-a ♦ APPROXIMATE TOE OF CUT SLOPE =13=FT_ VEGETATION BUFFER. DO APPROXIMATE TOP SEE REPORT IF NOT REMOVE VEGETATION CUT/ FILL SLOPE CONSTRUCTING FROM SLOPES. WITHIN FILL PROJECT/ OWNER/ LOCATION, SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY GEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT BEISLEY, INC. NOTES, 321 NE ANCHOR ROAD 1. SLOPE INDICATORS WERE FIELD MEASURED BY ENVIROTECH, AND/ OR PARCEL 12330 50 00088 EXTRAPOLATED FROM A PUBLIC LIDAR SOURCE WHERE APPROPRIATE. MASON COUNTY WASHINGTON 2. BOUNDARIES ON THIS SITE PLAN WERE NOT PREPARED BY A LICENSED LEGEND ENGINEER, SURVEYOR. LOCATIONS OF SITE FEATURES AND GEOLOGICAL/ SUBSURFACE ENVIROTECH ENGINEERING DESIGNATIONS AS SHOWN HERE, WITH RELATION TO THE PROPERTY LINES MUST BE VERIFIED BY THE OWNER. THE CONCLUSIONS AND --� SLOPE INDICATOR PO BOX 984 RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL/ GEOLOGICAL REPORT BELFAIR, WASHINGTON 98528 ARE BASED ON GEOLOGIC AND SPECIFIC SUBSURFACE FEATURES THAT MAY Po PROBE 360-275-9374 BE LOCATED ON AND OFF THE PROPERTY, AND ARE NOT NECESSARILY BASED OFF OF PROPERTY LINES SHOWN ON THIS SITE PLAN. TPle TEST PIT SITE PLAN APPENDIX B SOIL INFORMATION Mason County, Washington Ee—Everett gravelly loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • Elevation: 50 to 500 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 55 to 90 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F • Frost-free period: 160 to 180 days Map Unit Composition • Everett and similar soils: 100 percent Description of Everett Setting • Landform: Terraces • Parent material: Glacial outwash Properties and qualities • Slope: 5 to 15 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches • Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups • Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance • Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: A • Other vegetative classification: Unnamed (G002XN402WA) Typical profile • 0 to 7 inches: Gravelly ashy loamy sand • 7 to 21 inches: Extremely gravelly sand • 21 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sand Description — Map Unit Description TEST PIT LOG TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1 PROJECT: Beisley Geological Assessment DATE OF LOG: 02/12/2014 PROJECT NO: 1418 LOGGED BY: MCS CLIENT: Beisley, Inc. EXCAVATOR: N/A LOCATION: Parcel 12330-50-00088 DRILL RIG: None Mason County, Washington ELEVATION: N/A INITIAL DEPTH OF WATER: N/A FINAL DEPTH OF WATER: N/A OIL STRATA, STANDARD PENETRATION TEST S DEPTH SAMPLERS USCS DESCRIPTION LL PI CURVE AND TEST DATA DEPTH N 10 30 50 0 ..................... ......................... SP Light brown, moist,medium dense SAND with GRAVEL. Gravel is fine and subrounded. Non plastic. 1 •.r- _ 2 O GP Coarse GRAVEL with medium coarse O SAND. Non plastic. 4 001 00 5 Q 0 C) 0 6 0 very dense Excavation terminated at approximately 6.0 feet 7 8 9 10 No Groundwater Encountered ENVIROTECH ENGINEERING This information pertains only to this boring and should not be Geotechnical Engineering interpreted as being indicative of the entire site. Origi File *Copy and lost• py with Department of Ecology WATER WELL REPORT Appi)catioe No.&-.ZMZ.t'.22 Seeped Copy—Owner's Copy Third Copy-�Drlller's Copy STATE OF WASIt@I(i"14 Permit epe a... ...-- (i) OWNER: gparius,- Util.t�ties Inc. _,•_•_--_ Addr... .P. O. Box 495...Poulsboa_We hi. •g• � _s Zp 0 (2) LOCATION OF WELL: County-I!�SOYI -•.------� .. _- ---- -....--- --ME._mL ..SE sec-30-T--U.N.•R-4w -w.M. n. Bearing and distance from secdoe or subdivWon corner 1200 f t $ f t Wes —of a' (3) PROPOSED USE: ❑ Municipal❑ (10) WELL LOG: Irrigation 0 Test Well ❑ Other ❑ Formation:Describe by color,character,Are of material and structure,and allow ttrfckness of aq fen and the kind and nature of the material in each (4) TYPE OF WORK_ Owner's number of well ( stratum Penetrated,wwifth at least one entry for each change of furnution. (if mQ�ttun one).... ...............-•---..__ MATERIAL MOM TO M New well (a btethod: Dug lt❑ Bored ❑ ❑ XX a„r Deepened Cable Driven Q -- Reconditioned(] Rotary❑ Jetted ❑ -43 C (5) DIMENSIONS: Diameter of wall ._.. ._.-__-._—inches. 0 Drilled_]_ ._ —fit. Depth of completed well h. -- CU (6) CONSTRUCTION DETAH S: Caste% installeiJL 8 Diem.from 9— ft.to 134 et. — w Threaded p Dram ftom-- ft to It C Welded 6I Dram.tram ft.to ft. sPerforations: Year No 1"OMQ1 Type of perfoiratoo�ua.d--� 1. � .7E�-- rival 86 0 SIZE of perforations _ in. by __ --_--- Ia. r d 108 30_— parforations from it to ft, perau ws from_ it.to��tt. R s rn �o sit port-orations from-24--n.to -_BL_ ft. ess va cc Yes❑ No d Manufaetu w%Nate..._ ---- - • u Type._.. Model No .0 Diam. Slot size —tram.......it.to & �+ � D1auy. ._._..._.Mot else from ---n to_ ft , Gravel packed. Yes.❑ No D size of travel: fr Gravel placed from ft.to_-_ .___._T ft. L } SUrfatt Seal: Yes f] No I7 To what depth? -1-5 ---_ft ]IGaterlal used in O Did any strata contain unusable water? Yea Q No[l t• Type of water?_—_-_ Depth of strata.......__ 1 Q8 to il 4 •- n z Method of sealing.strata oC.._-----.---•-•-----..—__.-r.__ 118 to HZQ4M In tal.lad o era (7) PUMP:Type.nLtru "me`r`s i •e—-•�acuz�as '� (8) WATER LEVELS: Land-e-rhea elevation 50 above mean sea level.... O static level .......-_. t__.____.-_—tt.below tap of well 0 Artesian pressure----- _.— _1bs.per square inch 0 Artesian water is ar,,,trzlled W (Cap, valve, etc.) O (9) WELL TESTS: Drawdown is amount at,level is ry G lowered below static level Work start 7-:2Q_.--._._.._..• 19_LL.. Completed—��.0 iR . = Was a pump test made? Yes p Nog} If yes.by Whom?._-............................. Yield: sal./min,with ft.drawdown after hrs. WELL DRILLER'S STATEMENT: " This well was drilled under my jurisdiction and this report is s` true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Q, Recovery data {time taken as xero when pump turned off) (water level measured from well top to water level) 7 tD Staicari Drillin _Co. Inc. Q Time Water Level Time Water Level Tirne Water Lewi NEE ••_. ................... ..-..._.ype.or...rin.. (Person, firm,or corporation) (Type or print) --• 0 ........_.......................................................-_...... .......-.........._...........••..... t Address...Port Orchard, `riz................................I..._...._.................... ....._ .......•---.................. --•-------•••••......._............ .............................._....... Date of test .....-.........-.-_...._.._..................... [Signed].. � TtG_.i............. --- -•--------••-•-.....-•------•- Bailer test.._51(-�.4,dimin•with-4--ft.drawdown after— ...___hrs. (Well DrUler) Artesian Bow.._..----- Temperature of water_.-....___Was a chemical analysis made?Yes 1R Na(3 License ......... ............ Date...3-3....................., 19.75- Chsmical arl yA�is �y others 4Jl3h� (USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS ff NECESSARY) ��✓ 's �� TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................l 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......................................................................................................................................4 2.2.1 Upslope Geomorphology.............................................................................................................4 2.3 SURFACE DRAINAGE...........................................................................................................................4 2.3.1 Upland Water Bodies..................................................................................................................4 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.........................................................................................................................9 4.1.1 Landslides and Slope Stability Analysis...................................................................................11 4.1.2 Surface and Subsurface Drainage...........................................................................................12 4.2 EROSION HAZARDS...........................................................................................................................12 4.3 SEISMIC HAZARDS............................................................................................................................12 4.4 ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS.....................................................................................................13 5.0 CLOSURE............................................................................................................................................14 Appendix A- Site Plan Appendix B- Soil Information 1.0 INTRODUCTION Envirotech Engineering (Envirotech) has completed this geological assessment for a residential properly located at 321 NE Anchor Drive,identified as parcel number 12330-50-00088 in Belfair, 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. An initial geological/geotechnical evaluation of the Project was conducted by Envirotech without the property owner or owner's representative on February 12, 2014. It was determined that natural slopes between 15% and 40% were present within 300 feet of the Project. Due to these slope grades,a geological assessment is required pursuant to landslide hazard areas of the Mason County Resource Ordinance(MCRO). 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 consists of an unimproved driveway. The proposed development is expected to consist of a new single family residence and on-site septic features.Approximate site development with relation to existing 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 development i proposed op n s 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 Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 1 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 NE FERN WAY 41 Project Larson LakeSQ ' < yc z a Z 09 NE SEITZ DR 56: '.r ca, Q- �R LU J NELEY_-l.N HOOD CANAL �Q NE BYEaLV ti - I / 2704ft Vicinity Map,from Mason County Website. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 2 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 2.0 SURFACE CONDITIONS Information pertaining to the existing surface conditions for the Project was gathered on February 12, 2014 by Michael Staten, geotechnical 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 cleared for development with an existing driveway. The property and neighboring properties have some fill and earth cuts.NE Anchor Drive extends along the east side of the property, and Hood Canal is located over 1900 feet to the south. Vegetation on and near the property consists primarily of 2nd growth firs, blackberry, 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. 'U X O Project U ?40 �tA . l a , � Or' , r� U. • Z Q n PNGHOR�R 2 `v NE P Aerial Map from Mason County Website. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc. Geological Assessment Ph. 360-275-9374 page 3 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax: 360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 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. Descending slopes exceeding 15% are located on and beyond the property. Average slope grades are approximately 20% with a vertical relief of approximately 70 feet. Cut and fill slopes on and near the property have grades of over 60%vertical reliefs of nearly 10 feet. 2.2.1 Upslope Geomorphology Ascending grades are generally located to the northwest of the planned development. This slope grades within 300 feet of the Project and are of at least 30%in some locations. The upland area of the property is situated on a hillside. 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. 2.3 Surface Drainage The neighbor's drainage outlet is in close proximity to the property line. Significant scour, erosion and sediment transport was not apparent near the Project. 2.3.1 Upland Water Bodies There are no apparent water bodies or wetlands located in immediate vicinity upslope from the planned development that would significantly influence the Project. Larson Lake is located at approximately 2200 feet to the northwest direction of the property. 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. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc. Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 4 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax: 360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION Information on subsurface conditions pertaining to the Project was gathered during research and a site reconnaissance. The site visit was accomplished on February 12, 2014 by Michael Staten, geotechnical 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, Qg. 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 Polenz, 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 Beisley,Inc. Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 5 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-2754789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 .�-..��� ...�+•. -f�„ ___ 1, ',i Qgic _ Retrieving data Qa QgQf Op I i P as Qgof r -, r Qgl 10 �= M of , - ga A .. Q f - i � � QM i .41 r .;n1• Qm j QM I l 4 a Geologic Map USGS Website. Qgic Vashon glacial ice-contact deposits—Sand, gravel, lodgment rill, and flow till; minor silt and clay beds; tan to gray; variably sorted; loose to compact; massive to well stratified; locally includes over- steepened beds that typically reflect sub-ice flow, but their dip may, along with small-scale shears, also have developed as collapse features or due to glaciotectonic and tectonic deformation; formed in the presence of meltwater alongside ice, generally toward the end of the glaciation, and is thus commonly accompanied by stagnant-ice features,such as kettles and less-orderly hummocky topography, eskers(also separately mapped as subunit Qge), and subglacial or subaerial outwash channels. Deposits and morphologies that support conceptual association with both ice and meltwater are common in the map area and suggest that where unit Qgic is mapped in the presence of fluted topography,it is commonly only a few Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 6 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 feet thick and locally could have been mapped as undifferentiated drift(unit Qgd).Elsewhere,the unit may be over 100 ft thick. Unit Qgic also includes poorly consolidated till commonly accompanied by underlying, angular sand and noted as "sub-glacially reworked till' by Laprade (2003) (see Geologic Setting), especially in fluted areas that lack dead-ice features. See unit Qgo and Fig. 4 for discussion of similarities between units Qgic and Qgo(and its subunits Qgos, Qgof, and Qgol). A discrepancy between this map and the Vaughn quadrangle to the south resulted where Logan and Walsh (2007) mapped undifferentiated Quaternary deposits (unit Qu)because they lacked field exposures and geomorphic signs of the dead-ice deposits that are apparent north of the boundary.Dead-ice topography north of the boundary also reveals a sandy deposit mapped as unit Qgos by Logan and Walsh(2007) to be a facies within unit Qgic.Locally divided into: Qge Vashon glacial eskers—Sand and gravel;tan to brown; loose;moderately to well sorted;moderately to well rounded with good porosity and permeability;deposited subglacially by Vashon melt-water in areas occupied by stagnant ice;forms low,elongate,sinuous hills that seem to rest like slugs on fluted uplands or subglacial outwash channels and locally can be seen to merge into channel incisions (Fig. 1). One such transition causes a map boundary mismatch between unit Qgic on this map and unit Qgoe(esker) on the Vaughn quad to the south (Logan and Walsh, 2007). Some polygons of this unit abut against unit Qgic in the Lake Wooten quadrangle to the west(Derkey and Hehemann,2009),where eskers are noted by linear symbols over unit Qgic.The underlying interpretation is identical. 3.3 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, with indications of isolated fill as previously mentioned. Competent bearing soils were encountered at 18 inches below the existing native ground surface in locations where the ground was probed. Fill areas were loose and unconsolidated—not suitable for foundations.For engineering purposes,these native soils consist of distinguishable layers,as presented below. Soils within the upper 3 feet of natural ground were observed to be primarily moist, light brown medium dense sand with fine gravel(SP). Soils below the upper 3 feet SP layer were observed to be coarse gravel with medium coarse sand(GP). Soils below the upper 6 feet GP layer were very dense SM. 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, Soil Conservation Service (SCS), the site soils are described as Everett gravelly loamy sand, E,, 5 to 15 percent slopes. See the soil map below, and the applicable SCS soil profiles)in Appendix B of this report. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 7 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 I f , Q �5Q4 ft Soil Survey from USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 3.3.1 Groundwater From the water well report(s)and knowledge of the general area, permanent groundwater is at least 140 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. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 8 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-2754789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 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 development, as provided in the Introduction Section of this report, it is Envirotech's opinion that the proposed development 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. Landslides are natural geologic processes, and structures near slopes possess an inherent risk of adverse settlement, sliding or structural damage due to these processes. Geotechnical engineering cannot eliminate these risks for any site with sloping grades because gravity is constantly inducing strain on the sloping soil mass. Excessive wet weather and/ or earthquakes will exacerbate these strains. Geotechnical engineering considers excessive wet weather and `design' earthquakes in order to provide an acceptable factor of safety for developing on or near sloping terrain. These factors of safeties are based on engineering standards such as defining engineering properties of the soil,topography,water conditions, seismic acceleration and surcharges. Surface sloughing or other types of surficial slope movements usually do not affect the deep- seated structural capability of the slope. However, excessive and/or repeated surficial slope movements, if not repaired, may represent a threat to the structural integrity of the slope. Maintenance of the slope should be completed if the situation does arise in order to prevent the possibility of further surficial or deep seated slope movements that may be damaging to life or property- According to the Coastal Zone Atlas of Mason County, Washington, the Project is within and near terrain labeled `Stable' regarding potential landslide activity. Stable slopes are generally not prone to landslides due to small grades and accommodating geology. Historically, intermediate terrains have no known landslides.A site specific analyses and conclusions concerning the slopes are presented herein. A Stability Map from the Coastal Zone Atlas for the general area of this Project may be found below. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc. Geological Assessment Ph. 360-275-9374 page 9 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 Scale 1:24,000 - 5, o .s 1 idles , 0 M 1000 I500 kktro fair - r s _ t .. ,.�/f,• , _ �� fir.'- � - - r :�• Project M Urs � .� Map from Washington State Department of Ecology Website According to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) "LHZ —Final A-1 Map —Landslide Inventory—Mason Watershed, by Sarikhan, et. al., May 2007," previous landslide activity is not recorded near the project. 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 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: Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc. Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 10 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 -A ,y`.A - :A k Lt AAt1 c of F Lamon Laka f I 1 � Project = ._ _----- .. � ` FY Fr----- W F I!F . J �, i W Fe rf F:Y c4y�FY i FVi FIN FIN F:-" FIf 4Vl FVi Yi r'r F FW FY. P --- Z3 FV FIN FW r*e fS Fw Fii F: rYl FW FYl 'FYi A A V4- F: FYi FW F:Y =r —`�Ji 'F A A. Fy�iAQ. % etc, j1 F:: (AW�Fu' r rSY Frd i_ k-Fv/t��y j A A)-- re F:Y riiv kk S union Rivar•{ • ..;�. , W r-iaAAA A'--. r" - - ,• AAA'++Aia�ry �— - AA RAAA'FY o----. Fes! , FiS FW; -�- .,lp' 11FIN,, . -'- A --tFV F:Y L.OttL4 f FVYtee. A A r- -r QAA AA:kAA:r r - AAAA A AAAAT $1-- ---_._.__„-_- Q A A A -r A A�. 9PugatSound � x A AAAAAA AA-Q_ �FJAAAA'F AAAA .L A..• ;xAAQR4F - AARA Q'c Washington State Department of Natural Resources Map from Washington State Department of Natural Resources Website 4.1.1 Landslides and Slope Stability Analysis Past landslide activity or high slope instability indicators near the proposed development was not revealed during the Project research.In addition,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. Due to these factors, and existing/proposed conditions,a slope stability analysis was not deemed necessary for this Project. Considering the planned construction 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. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 11 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-2754789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 4.1.2 Surface and Subsurface Drainage Although neighboring outlets directly affect the property, it does not appear to cause landsliding. Minor erosion is expected. If these outlets become problematic, Envirotech should be contacted for possible solutions. See the Engineering considerations provided later in this report for roof runoff mitigation. 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. 4.3 Seismic Hazards Soils immediately below the expected foundation depth for this Project are generally Type D, corresponding to the International Building Code (IBC) soil profiles. According to the IBC, the regional seismic zone is 3 for this Project. The estimated peak ground acceleration ranges from 0.50g to 0.60g.This estimation is based on the United States Geological Survey(USGS)National Seismic Hazard Project in which there is an estimated 2% probability of exceedance within the next 50 years. There are no known faults beneath this Project.The nearest Class `A' or'B' fault to this property is the Tacoma Fault Zone. This fault is a Class `A,` and is located approximately 6 miles 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 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 Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 12 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 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 Engineering Considerations Conclusions in this report are based on the type and location of the anticipated development, and existing on-site and off-site conditions. Roof drainage for this project should have an outlet above ground, and located downslope as much as possible.An outlet with rip-rap lined channel between the driveway and property line is recommended. Existing fill should be removed and replaced with engineered fill,or foundations should extend to at least 18"below bottom of fill. Although slopes are currently stable, development could induce instability. For this reason, buildings should be located at least 10 feet from top of descending slopes. Encroachment of this 10-foot setback may occur by deepening foundations an additional depth of 12 inches per every 1-foot of setback reduction. Site development that significantly deviates from the anticipated improvements presented in this report, or nearby development that influences this Project may require geotechnical design recommendations. Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 13 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014 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. 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 Michael Staten,P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Envirotech Engineering Beisley,Inc.Geological Assessment Ph.360-275-9374 page 14 Parcel 12330-50-00088 Fax:360-275-4789 Belfair,Mason County,Washington February 19,2014