HomeMy WebLinkAbout937800120 Geotech Assessment~~ -
--.
~®
~wru~.nriaa.can
NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC.
717 SOUTH PEABODY STREET, PORT ANGELES, WA 98302
Englnaers ~ Land Survoyors t Geologist
Consfrucflon Inspacflon ~ Maferlais Tesfing
(3G0) 452-8491 1-800-854-5545 FAX 452-8498 E-Mail: info(~nli4u.c ~ .: - ~
~,_ APR 1 0 2001
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
for
Lots 20 and 21, Victoria Loop
Cape George Colony
~n
Section 12, Township 30 North, Range 2 West
Jefferson County, Washington
Prepared for
Dr. and Mrs. Barton J: Blinder
Prepared by
NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC.
717 S. Peabody Street
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
March 13, 2001
-.,.
NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC.
71T SOUTH PEABODY STREET, PORT ANGELES, WA 9862
~ Englnoors ~ Land Surveyors ^ Geologlsl
Conslnrc(ion lnspecfion !• Mafcrlals TosUng
(a80) 452-8491 1.800-054.5545 FAX 452-8499 E-Mail: Info~nll4u.com
~I
rvirrv.n lion. com
March 28, 2001
Dr. and Mrs. Barton J. Blinder
2008 Yacht Resolute
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Geotechnical report for the property described as Lots 20 and 21,
Victoria Loop, Cape George Colony in Section 12, Township 30N,
Range 2W, Jefferson County, Washington.
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Blinder:
[ntroduction
At your request, Bill Payton of Northwestern Territories, Inc. conducted a
geotechnical inspection of the above mentioned property on March 6, 2001. The
purpose of this inspection was to examine the marine bluff at the subject property
by visual means and make recommendations regarding the development of the
property in accordance with the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. It
is our understanding that you plan to construct a small, temporary vacation home
on the property,
Site Conditions
The subject property consists of two adjacent lots located near the northern end
of Victoria Loop in Cape George Colony. The property is bounded on the north
by an existing home and on the south by an existing home that has been
condemned due to its close proximity to the high marine bluff to the west. The
property is bounded on the east by Victoria Loop and on the vvest.by a high
marine bluff. . , ..
The upland portion of the property is relatively flat and level, and is covered in
grass. It is reported that the bluff varies in height from 130' to 145'. The upper
portion of the bluff face slopes at an angle of about 80 to 90 degrees from
horizontal. There is a mid-bluff bench approximately two-thirds of the way down
the bluff. This bench is roughly 50' wide. The lower portion of the bluff slopes at
an angle of about 40 degrees to the beach. There is recent slide debris at the
base of the upper portion of the bluff and the bench is littered with slide debris.
There is also a large slide mass at the toe of the bluff that is covered with young
alder trees (Photo 1). Recent sliding has also taken place at the toe of the. bluff
(Photo 2) and cracks were noticed on the bench close to the edge of the lower
bluff. Except for sparse, isolated patches of grass, there is no vegetation on the
upper portion of the bluff.
At the time of the site visit, the base of the upper portion of the bluff, the bench
and the lower portion of the bluff were saturated with water. It appears that
groundwater exits the bluff at bench level. The presence of this groundwater
contributes to the erosion and sliding of the upper bluff material. The presence of
excessive groundwater is also a factor in the recent sliding at the toe of the bluff.
Site Geolo
A visual inspection of the bluff face revealed the upper portion of the bluff to
consist of stratified sandy and gravelly deposits. The lower portion of the bluff
consisted of laminated silty deposits.
The Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington classifies the soils in the area of the
subject property as "Undifferentiated stratified sediments older than Vashon
lodgement till" (Qpf). The Atlas describes these soils as consisting mainly of sand
and gravel, but in some areas contain silt, clay, peat, and possibly till. The Atlas
also labels the slope stability at the property as "Unstable-old slide" (Uos). The
Atlas was printed in 1978.
The marine bluff at the subject property is very typical of the bluffs found
throughout northwestern Washington, where a layer of pervious sandy material
overlies an impervious silty layer. Groundwater percolates through the sandy
strata and then is restricted by the impervious strata. This causes the overlying
material to become saturated and increases its pore water pressure. The
groundwater also migrates towards the bluff face and exits the bluff above the
confining layer. These processes weaken the bluff and contribute to landslide
activity. These processes also contribute to the formation of a mid-bluff bench
such as is found at the subject property.
Another mechanism for erosion of the bluff is the relentless attack of the toe of
the bluff by wave action. When slides occur, the slide debris that forms at the
base of the bluff acts as a temporary stabilizing factor. The debris temporarily
protects the toe of the bluff from wave action. The debris also acts as a buttress,
2
and sometimes, trees will grow on the debris. The trees help reduce the erosion
of the debris (Photo 1).
Historical Data
The subject property is in an area that has received much attention over the past
several years due to continuing slide activity. The home just south of the subject
property has been vacated due to recent slides that have [eft it within a few feet
of the bluff edge. Several reports have been written on this and other nearby
properties dating back to at least 1976. These reports can provide insight into the
recent activity that the bluff has undergone.
A 1982 report for a property on Victoria Loop mentions two landslides that
occurred in 1979 and in 1982. In each of these slides, the top edge of the bluff
was reported to have receded approximately 8 feet. The report further states that
the average rate of recession is approximately one foot per year.
Another report from 1983, and also for a property on Victoria Loop, mentions
activity within the two years prior to 1983 that had resulted in the loss of
approximately 15 feet. This report states that prior to the past two years,
residents had reported little if any bluff regression. This report further states that
residents report observing cracks in their yards prior to the material between the
cracks and bluff sloughing off and cascading down the slope. Ina 1985 follow up
letter to the above report, it is estimated that since 1982, the maximum average
rate of regression of the top of the bluff is approximately 8 to 10 feet per year (for
the time period from 1982-1985).
From the above mentioned reports, it appears the bluff is receding in a manner
typical of many bluffs in the region. An event will remove severa( feet of material
at once, then become relatively stable for a time until the next event. Please
review the enclosed Figure 21, which describes this cyclical process of bluff
recession in more detail.
Conclusions and Recommendations
It is quite evident that the bluff at the subject property is undergoing bluff .
recession, sometimes at a rapid rate. There is no way to accurately predict rates
of bluff recession or when a landslide will occur. There is also no way to know
how far the bluff will recede in any one event. From the above mentioned
reports, it appears the bluff has receded 16 to 20 feet or more in the last 20 years
or so. Thus, the average rate of recession over the last 20 years would be
3
around one foot or more per year, even though several feet are lost in a single
event.
Preliminary plans for the property call for the home to be situated on Lot 21 and
for the septic drainfield to be situated on Lot 20. Based on preliminary septic
design plans and the size of the property, the proposed home would sit about 67
feet from the edge of the bluff. It must be understood that this is a marginal
situation and that any development of this property should be considered
temporary and short term.
Based on the recent history of the area outlined above, it may take several large
slide events for the edge of the bluff to recede to the proposed home if
constructed 67 feet back from the bluff. At some point, it would be necessary to
determine when the home is no longer habitable. This report will not make that
determination. Consideration should be given to a type of home that could be
relocated when the bluff encroached too close to the home.
As noted above, residents have noticed ground cracks prior to slide events. It
would be prudent to develop a monitoring program in order to be aware of the
possible development of such cracks. It would also be helpful to monitor the rate
of bluff recession by establishing a benchmark and taking regular measurements.
The following recommendations .should also be considered with regards to
development of the subject property:
1. It will be necessary to maintain ground cover to reduce erosion from
surface runoff. Any bare areas that develop should be revegetated. Native
vegetation that requires little or no irrigation would be the most beneficial.
2. Surface water should not be allowed to flow over the face of the bluff and
cause erosion of the bluff face. Likewise, it would be beneficial to reduce
the amount of infiltration near the bluff. A formal drainage control plan
should be developed for this property to address the issues of surface
water runoff and infiltration.
3. Heavy irrigation or other activities that would contribute large quantities of
water to the soil should be avoided. One cause of landslides is the
presence of excessive groundwater in the soil near the bluff.
4. To help reduce the level of groundwater, it may be possible to drill one or
more wells on the property and pump out the groundwater.
5. Surface runoff from hard surfaces such as roofs, driveways, walkways and
patios should be controlled and routed to the beach via tightline. Surface
4
water discharge to adjacent properties should not exceed predevelopment
conditions.
6. Silt fences or other sediment control devices may be needed during
construction such that sedimentation to adjacent properties does riot
exceed predevelopment conditions.
7. All drainage control devices should be maintained in good working order
and inspected at least once a year.
8. Septic systems and/or detention basins should not be constructed
between the house and the bluff.
Based on the findings, recommendations and limitations of this report:
a. The landslide hazard to the proposed home would be reduced due to the
mitigation measures proposed in this report.
b. An analysis of slope stability indicates that the proposal could be modified
such that hazards are reduced.
c. The proposal would not increase surface water discharge or
sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions.
d. The proposal would not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties.
e. The proposed home would be stable under the normal geologic conditions
that have occurred over the last 20 years at the property.
For further information please review the three pamphlets, which are enclosed
with the original of this report, published by the Washington State Department of
Ecology entitled: "Slope Stabilization and Erosion Control Using Vegetation",
"Surface Water and Groundwater on Coastal Bluffs" and "Vegetation
Management: A Guide for Puget Sound Bluff Property Owners". Information
online can be found at: www.ecy.wa.go~/programs/sea/shorelan.hfm! and at:
www. wa.goy/dnr/hfdocs/qer/index.htm! .
Limitations
This report is based on a visual inspection of the existing site conditions, barring
major catastrophic events such as earthquakes or abnormal weather conditions.
No scientific measurements, tests or calculations were performed. The findings
5
and report are limited to the normal standard of care of the industry for an
investigation without benefit of scientific data and calculations.
The sole objective of this investigation has been to diagnose the geotechnical
conditions at the site. The report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Dr.
and Mrs. Barton J. Blinder. It may be used by others only with expressed written
permission of the Engineer. The report has not been prepared for use by others
or other uses. The observations, interpretations, and conclusions herein are
based on generally accepted professional engineering and geologic principles
and practice. This warranty is in lieu of all others, either expressed or implied.
Sincerely,
SORRY N~
NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC. ~
oe wnsy l
~
~ 5
~
V
J.R. Jerry Newlin A t+ ~' ~
~~AS~CISTtiR~~fi~
~sf
~~`
Principal Engineer 0'v~`
E41'IRES
Bill Payton
Geologist
6
~i /' // /~
'~~'.,f ^M,,~~•/, ~ drain and local runo~f•~ ~_, ~ - --
,~„ ' d ` ~ " ,rr 'r / soak Into ground% ~ /~ AI tiro boglnning of an Idoallzod cyclo, rho buff
r . ,. • ti ~ / /'-~ has a unllorm slopo. Walor Inflltratos trio sur-
~(/ ~ t ' ~.~ / taco soils and ponchos abovo rho rolatlvoly Im•
~ Qj ~ { ~ ; ~ ~^^~ l ~ l pormoablo matorlals al rho baso of this sandy
soil/ ~ ,_• ; .. ~` ~ ~ erosion of ground surface soquonca. Saturation croates poro-wator
till ~ -~ ~' i ~_ 1 ~•t ~ ~ -~_ '~' ~ during overland flow prossuros that roduco Iho offoctlve strongth of
_ _~ thoso matorlals.
Sand -- ~ T~,, \.. 4~';~~, perched ground-water
and - ~ .~~ 5pring
'~~.c1+:
gravcl S~zn'ou~ra ~~ ~~ , / .,'..~
--_~~L-~ ;~~ wave cro5ion
'` ~ ~ rcmovc5
Ic55 I ~~~~ I t l + slide dcbri5
permeable ~~~. potential failurc y
matcrial5 ~~` ~t surface
potentaa( '-'-----"
dccp failurc
5urfacc
~iV ~~ - ~~ - r 't / / ~ ~ ~ Runoff and precipitation introduced by the
• ~~ d' i / ~- B sources shown in A have infiltrated and weak-
t ® ~ , ,~~ / ened the sediments, causing lailure of the un-
~ i ' ~ ~••~••••••••. l prcviou5 51opc profile consolidated upper sand unit. Once mobilized,
Soil/ t the sand moves (sometimes episodically,
till ~-= t ~ ~'~ ••''•~ mid-slope sometimes continuously} along the contact
-`i` bench dcbri5 from upper with the underlying less permoable unit on the
Sand ~~,~' ~~ , ~ , ~-.. 51opc contributc5 to mid-slope bench, often cascading as a secon-
and `~~~~`.~ ~~'= 5ccondary land5liding dory landslide oft the bluff formed by the lower
~ •. L-` ~ '••., unit. This migration of material across the
gravcl ~~ •~ ' ~~. •• ~ ~ bench decreases the buttressing of the upper
'~ `•• ~~==_`~ ~:..°• •-4 :~ `Y'~~ • ~ ~ bluff. Failure surfaces can be deep (those that
---- ~-l'~`` I ~-- ~ -~ , , ~ lower project into the lower, less permeable materi-
Ic55 ~~ I I l + ^' •~"' -~ bluff als} as well as shallow.
permeable ~~, :~ -
matcriais
`~~,
,~
patefTtial failurc - ___ ______-
surfaces If ground ~ potential
not stabilized dccpp failurc
5urfacc
~~ , i t / / ~ ~ Benched biuff retreat continues. Movement of
~ ~ ~~ ^~ ~'I / ~- C slide debris toward the lower bluff further de-
~, ® ~~. •~ stabilizes the upper bluff, causing continued
. -. ~ ~ ~;~ ~ ~ l sloughing onto the bench. Either failure of the
5O1(/~ -~ , , tapper bluff onto the bench or failure of the
till -_ t E-Z~ 51opc continuc5 to retreat, slide debris off the lower bluff can trigger a cy-
' .~~yt ,5~~ ~ cvcntuallycncroaching on the house cla of movement. Movement along adeep-
sand ~ . ~ seated surface can reset this sequence of
~ }~' ~' events.
and ~ - - ~t
~ _
\ _ .._ ~.
gravcl \ _ _. _ ..._..
`~` \ _ ~ .
~~ I `
IG55 ` I
~`.
permeable ~,
matcrial5 ~`
potential ~\' - -----___--_
dccp failurc
surface
Figure z1. This sequence of sketches shows the idealized, potentially cyclical process by which bluffs in the northern Puget Sound area are
forming and retreating.
26 Washington Geology, vol. 25, no. 1, March 1997
PHQTQ 1
View ofi Bluff at Subject Property
PHOTO 2
View ofi Recent Slide Activity at Toe of Bluff
- - _ 7.
~+.
_ NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC. ~ -
~ A JLS GROUP COMPANY ~ ~ ~ 2~"`~---_
717 SOUTH PEABODY STREET; PORT ANGELES, wA 88362 ~ v
^ Engineers ^ Land Surveyors ^ Geoiogisfs .
~~I ~ ^ Consfructlon Inspection ^ Materials Testirig FED 4
(36~) 452-8491 'FAX 452-8498 www.nti4u.com- E-Mail: info@nti4u.cgm. f
' JLS GROI~P,
INC. : DEPL'i3F COMMUN TY DEVE
February 5, 2003 LOPMENT
Dr. and Mrs. Barton J. Blinder- -
c/o George W. Andrews, Design and Construction`Consultant. '
' P.O. Box 480 .
Chehalis, WA 98532
Subject: Geatechnicai report.adderidum.forthe Blinder properly described as Lots
20 .and 21,. Victoria Loop, Cape: George Colony in Section 1.2, Township -
• 30I`J, mange. 2W, Jaffersan .County, Wushir:gton.
Dr. and Mrs. Barton J, Blinder:
- ~ You have. requested. that we clarify- our geotechriical -report for. the -above referenced
..:location dated March 28,..2001, .to reword the setback language from '`house" to
"foundation" since the house is a cantilever design. ,
We hereby amend our -report to recommend a setback distance of. not less than 59'=6`': .
from the top edge of the bluff to the foundation of th.~ proposed home.
If you have any questions. or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact -
this effice. _ _
Sincerely, ~ . - ~~R~ A ~F9
O~~ ~~ \`
~ of wasy, cy
- - NORTHWE$TERN TERRITORIES, INC. ?• .
-off ~F 13772 ~O ~~
O,t~s ~ t SS S~G~~~
S/n , FC1
Robert A. Leach; P.E., MBA ExPiRla ,z,3o;2002
...Principal Engineer ------------
L ~~' ; *~
L
- - _.
: `Bill Payton, L.E.G.
Engineering Geologist ,.
G:\Gen1Bi111Reports\BLIIV02b1.report addendum 2.12(30-2).Cape George.doc ~~~~ ~'~~~
Wifli~t77 L+. ~r~~~GF1 Jf`.
. Expires 11-06-D3
NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC,
_ T~ A JLS GROUP COMPANY
` 717 SOUTH PEABODY STREET; PORT:ANGELES, WA 98362
^ Engineers ^ Land Surveyors ^ Geologists
~~~ ^ .Construction lnspeGtion ^ Materials Testing
(360) 452-8491 ,FAX 452-8498 www.nti4u.com E-Mail: info@nti4u.com
JL,S GROUP,
INC: ~ ~ ~ -
_November 27, 2002_ ~ -
.- .,
. -. ,-
.:. .: ~ . ,
~' ~ JAN. •2 i .?003 ,. .
Dr. anct Mrs. Barton J. Blinder ~.
coo George 1(V .Andrews ~~ .. _J I
uesigt=.i acid ic~risit~ctior~ Cor~suitant -_ ~ ~~ G ~'~ ,' ~'' - -
~_ ~~ ..
P.O.'Box 480 . - _ . _ _. v -
. Chehalis, WA 98532 ~ - _
• - Sukiject: Geotechnica! report addendum for the Blinder-property described - _ .
_ as Lots 20. and 2.1, Victoria Loop, CapeGeorge Colony in Section
12;_ Township 30N, Range 2V11, Jefferson County; Washington,
Dr. and Mrs. Barton J. 13iinder:
-You have requested.:.#hat'we amend- ou_r geotechnical report .for tl~e above. ~ , .
- •. referenced 16cation dated March 28,.2001; to provide for a setback-d.istance from-
the bluff to the •proposed house of 59~-6" rather than 67'. This amendment is ~ y-
desired because of°the building area constraints .imposed on the .property by the -
~_ • setback. Lf 'is .understood that the 6.7'setback .distance. shown on the original site • .
- . ` plan was preliminary, and riow_ that the. site plan- has. begin finalized, .an additional .
7.5' is necessary''rn order io site the house on;the lot. This report_addendum, as . •
well as the previous geoi:echnical; report does not address septic design issues:
A seccinci S11'P VISIt t~taS rs,-+arla to thg prCt~a;-ty~nn RITZ/Pmhar ~! R~ ?fly? i:'1 Cruvr +G .
- determine if any new sliding. had taken. place. After observing the bluff at •the .
- aubject propertx and reviewing photographs from the. previous report, it. was. .
:determined that little or no:sliding had fakeri .place at the property since the. last
• site visit:
We hereby revise our. report and- recommend a setback:distance. of not less.thar
,~
59 -6 . from the top -edge. of: th.e bluff fo-.the proposed home.: This new setback
distance does not alter-the: conclusions,. •limitatien~s or recommendations of the
.. previous report except that the. reduction.:in . .setback may ,result :in_ a :.
corresponding reduction in the economicaife of the home.
~,
Dr. & Nlrs. Barton Blinder
Geotech~nical Report Addendum ~ JAN 2 1 2Q03
November 27., 2002
.,
.~ . Page 2 of 2 ~ ~ __ -
_. .
- It Was noticed on -.the site plan- (Farwest Horimes; Sheet 1, ~1/1/20.a2) that a
drywell is planed for roof and driveway runoff. 1Ne~recomrriend that surface runoff
. from hard surfaces such as-.roofs, driveways, viialkways and patios be controlled •
and routed to tfie beach via tightlirre rather than using a drywell due to the
.sensitive bluff conditions.
Limitations - _ .
- This. re~~rt i~~ase~ orr tw~:visuai;inspections of the:eXisting site-conditions. No ~: ~.. ~ _
scientific measurements, tests~s~r calculations were performed. The~findings and ~.
` report are limited to. the normal standard of care ~of the industry for an
investigation without benefit of scientific data Arid calculations:
The sole objective of.this:investigation has been to diagnose the .geotechnical
conditions at the site. The report:-has been prepared for the exclusive use of our.
.client~in conjunction with the above mentioned projeet.~.lt may be used by others
only with:expressedwritten pe"rmissiori of the Engineer. The observations, ,
. interpretations; and conclusions herein are based on generally accepted
. ~. ~ professional engineering and geologic pri~iciples an.d~ practice: This warranty is in
tieu of all others, Either expressed or.~implied:
:. _ ERA A. `,~
:Sincerely, ~ O~ fl~ wasy~'9C'y
NORTHWESTERN TE.RF2ITORIES, ING. y- ~ . °2
.. ~ ".
' 'O~px ~F~` 377 O. \`~rc.~
` obert A: Leach,- P,E., MBA ~ ~SS~aNAI. ~ ENG ,
Principal Engineer ~ -
EXPIRES 12/3D/2002 - .
~~, -
'~ ,.rj
v ~~+4; ~~
- .Bill- Payton, L-.E.G. ~ ~ ~ .
Engineering Geologist
. G:1Gen1Bi111ReportslBLIN0201.report addendum.12(30-2):Cape George.doc '~'+,,,;. ~~ry~{~ "`•
~ilta~rri C. Payt~n.,fr:
Expires 11-DFrd3