Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout021184005 Geotech Assessment~~ ~ ~ n SHORELINE. BLUFF & SLOPE SPECIALISTS Craig . \ hrte, II 1~. GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATIONS GEOSCIENCES CONSULTING ~ °NSEDPROFESSIONALGEOLOGISP WSASFi1N 0 &AL.ASKA October 21, 2007 Mr. & Mrs. E. Scott Dahlgren 8300 SE 82°d Street Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: Geological Site Evaluation, August 31, 2006 Tax Parcel # 021184005 67 Reef Rd., Marrowstone Island, WA. SE1/4 Section 18, T30N, ROlE, W.M. Jefferson County, Washington And: Jefferson County Permit#SDP06-00046 E. Scott and Erin Dahlgren -Applicants Shoreline Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit # 2007-SW-03089-Conditioned Dear Mr. and Mrs Dahlgren: i~ '.~ , ~ t r, i.. ~_.~ , ~ , ,. i ~~} ~ a Ec - ~ zao~ a C~~lsl!!iY t~~~-. ~~~j ut.v~~~~p~~E~r At your request, I have reviewed the design sketches provided. by you and Mr. Peter Brockman (Brockman Builders) for your proposed stairway across the bluff face to the beach. This review was done in light of the comments and recommendations already provided in my Geological Site Evaluation report for your property dated August 31, 2006. Cleazly, the design revisions to include the use of driven, steel pilings instead of wooden posts founded on poured concrete piers on the mid- and lower-slope will add a significant measure of stability that should assist the structure in resisting both small slides from the upper portion of the bluff face, as well as erosion on the lower slope. We would caution you to conduct this installation in a manner that will minimize any disturbance to the upper bluff, and in the event that the action of driving the piles threatens to produce slides from this area, the plan should be reconsidered. We would again like to impress on you that the supports for the upper landing, at the top of the bluff, be installed as far inland from the bluff face as reasonably possible. We do NOT recommend that piling be driven in this area, but that the holes for the supports be dug, if necessary, by hand to minimize ground disturbance. We should clarify, again, that the bluff face and shoreline in this azea is a dynamic environment and that periodic slides and erosion should be expected to occur that may require repairs and even replacement of portions of the stairs. Given the re-design of the P.O. Pox 3398. ~.verdale. \\/ashington 98383 (360) 830-0718 pilings-that you have proposed, however, it is our opinion that the requirement for major repairs should be less frequent and more easily facilitated. Thank you for requesting my input on your proposed stairway re-design. If you have other questions or require additional information, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, White, Engineering Geologist i# ~ ! ~~~ i t `: ~~ ~~ DfC -3 2001 ~~ ~~ _~ c~uHrr OEp~ ;;'i Y ~`•LVELO'PrtENY ~~ ~ ~ n/~ SHORELINE, BLUFF & SLOPE SPECIALISTS Crain . \ hate, II Ili. GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATIONS GEOSCIENCES CONSULTING LICOE SEDPROFESSIONALGEOLOGIST,,WASHINGTONBcALASKA August 31, 2006 ; -~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~,~ ~ `~ _ _ ~~..~ Mr. & Mrs. Scott Dahlgren _; ~ ! ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ P.O. Box 3515 ~ °..__- . ~._.~ _ ,._ Seattle, WA 98134 ,~ ~ ~ ~ °~ . ~ ;~4 ~ R~, :_ za •~ ~ d ~..~ Re: GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATION Tax Prc.# 0211.84005 67 Reef Rd., Marrowstone Island, WA. SEl/4 Section 18, T30N, ROLE, W.M. Jefferson County, Washington Deaz Mr. and Mrs. Dahlgren: The attached report summarizes my observations of the geology, soils, drainage, and slope conditions at the above-captioned property during. my visit on August 12, 2006. The main objectives of this work were to evaluate the coastal bluffs and shoreline environment where you propose to build a wooden stairway from the top of the bluff to the beach; also, to determine the chazacter of the ground. materials, the potential for problems from water runoff, erosion and landslides. Three copies of this report aze being provided to you. One copy is for your own files. The second copy is for Mr. Pete Brockman, your builder, and. the third copy should be submitted to the Jefferson County Department of Community Development, 621 Sheridan Street in Port Townsend,. at the time you are ready to apply for your building permit. Thank you for requesting our services for this project. If you have any questions yr require additional .information, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, White, Engineering Geologist Principal Consultant I ~ _.._ _.._.____ __.__.~ t ~ .~ :~ .,~ P.O. i3ox 3398, Silverdale. \~/ashirlgton 98383 (360) 830-0~f8 - =--' ___ _ ___- _ _ - ~Y v ,~ ~__~ , ~ ~.. , GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATION Prepared for: Mr. & Mrs. Scott Dahlgren Prepared by: Craig K. White, Inc. Geosciences Consulting P.O. Boz 3398 Silverdale, WA 98383 August 31, 2006 ~Cr~ W~te~c: GG+C~C f?5 CCX~SGiI~'lI+lG. w._ T_.._ p. _. v~ ~- - ~-._ ,>._. _.,..e_~ ~ a ~~ i ~ ~ t ttt DEC - 3 2007 ~ ~,` _--~ ' ~._ ~' i u ; ~ )$p,=A1T Table of Contents Property Location and Description 1 Field Methods Reconnaissance Work 2 PrOjlerly Access ~ Topography and. Drainage 3 Vegetation ~ 4 Geology and Ground. Materials 5 Soil Characteristics 6 Slope Stability 1 7 Potential Seismic Hazards 8 3 Conclusions and Recommendations 9 j Summary and Limitations 11 Appendices: Location Map Appendix 1 Slope Stability Map Appena~x Z Potential Seismic Hazards (Fault) Map Appendix 3 Black and White Aerial Photo Appendix 4 LiDAR Based Slope Shaded Map (Slopes >30%) Appendix S Detail: Area of Study Appendix 6 ~~ Cram ~ n/~ SHORELINE, BLUFF & SLOPE SPECIALISTS d Imo.. \Vhite~ IIIti. GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATIONS GEOSCIENCES CONSULTING LICOENSED PROF SONAL GEOLOGIST',WASHINGTON &ALASKA August 31, 2006 GEOLOGICAL SITE EVALUATION Tax Prc.# 021184005 67 Reef Rd., Marrowstone Island, WA. SE1l4 Section 18, T30N, ROlE, W.M. 3efferson County, Washington Property Location and Description: The subject property is located at 67 Reef Rd, on Marrowstone Island near Ft. Flagler State Park, where it occupies a portion of the west-facing coastal bluffs overlooking Kilisut Harbor. The property is bounded on the north, south and east sides by other private lands and on the west by coastal tidelands. Property size is approximately 2b0,000 s.f. or about 6.0 acres. Existing structures on the property include atwo-story, wood-frame vacation cabin with a large front deck. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the stability of the coastal bluffwhere the construction of a wooden stairway to the beach is planned; also, to determine ways to minimise the effects of erosion on the bluff face. where uncontrolled storm water runoff from areas along the top of the bluff and undercutting by storm wave action along the base of the bluff has already produced several landslides. Appendices to this report include the following: 1~ Location Map, ~~ Sd~pp~~_ ~ ~y -y~ ___ ' ~ ~' ~ DEC - 3 2007 P.O.6ox 3398. ~iLverd~.e. \\/ashington 98383 (360) 830-0718 _.1 r f _ ~~~ 1 • ,: ,~ f Geological Site Evalua#on Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 Stability Map, 3) Seismic Hazards Map, 4) Black and White Aerial Photo,. 5) LiDAR- Derived Slope-Shaded Map, 6) Detailed. Property Plat showing drainage and slope features within the Area of Study. Field Methods:. Reconmaissance Work: Reconnaissance studies included a review of existing topographic, geologic and slope stability data along with an analysis of LiDAR (Light Distancing and Ranging) data. using GlohalMapper software. Raw LiDAR imagery was examined to determine the presence of lineaments possibly related to faults or slide escarpments, and other unstable landforns. Topographic contours were generated on a 20-foot interval across the property with. slopes steeper than 30 percent (17 degrees) shaded in red (see Appendix 5). Ground- truth checking of features identified by the imagery was performed with. the aid of a Garmin hand-held 12-channel GPS (satellite positioning receiver): Property Access: Access to the. property is directly offReef Rd. approximately 0.1 mites from its intersection with Fort Gate Rd. onto a gravel driveway that leads to the structure near the top of the bluff (see Appendix 1). Access to the top of the bluff was acl~e~d o~ foot ;fxoz~w ~ ~ , w.,J, _M _ ~. __.~~._..___.~. ! , ~ <~ 2 M ~, ~ ' DEC - 3 2001 ,_,,~' _._,~__~ Y- _,TJ Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, ZO(t6 the upland portion of the property. Access to the beach at the base of the bluff was made by walking down the beach from the parking area at Ft. Flagler State Park. Topography. and Drainage: Drainage on the subject property in the vicinity of the proposed building site is generally to the west, from Reef Rd. toward the top of the bluff. A component of drainage also occurs to the south where the bluff face bends inland to the southeast in the direction of a natural estuary south of the subject property. Topography on the bluff face can be subdivided into three parts: a steep, exposed, upper bluffface, aloes-relief middle-bluff area produced by a buildup of slide debris from the upper bluff face, and a steeper, lower bluff face. Slope angles were measured at several locations on the subject property using a Brunton hand clinometer and laser-sighting device (see Appendix 5). In the upland. porxion of the property slope angles ranged from five degrees to a maximum of 7 degrees. Measwed angles along the upper bluffface ranged from 70 degrees to as much as 85 degrees. In the mid-bluff area, slope angles were in the range of 38 to 45 degrees, steepening to approximately 55 degrees on the lower portion of the blid~~ Eleunt`ioz~ a~t~the r ~ ~ -~ top of the bluff is approximately 80 feet. ~ ____ DEC - 3 ~CG® ,~, Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs. Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 This site evaluation was conducted in mid-summer during a relatively dry period and no visible springs or seeps were identified along the bluff face. In several areas along the upper bluff, evidence of heavy water runoff was present which has produced surface erosion, sloughing of ground materials and several slides, the debris from which has accumulated both along the base of the bluff and in the mid-bluff area. Vegetation: Large-growth vegetation in the upland portion of the subject property consists of well-established stands of second-growth conifers (mostly Douglas fir and Western red cedar) as well as several varieties of broadleaf trees (Red alder, Pacific madrone and. willow). Lower-growth plants include Oregon grape, Salal and Red huckleberry as well as a variety of weeds and grasses in cleared areas of the property and on portions of the mid- bluff. Native vegetation in the upland. area of the subject property is well established.. On the upper bluffface, vegetationis totally absent, probably due. to frequent :slides that occur in this area. On the mid-blufiy vegetation is patchy and consists mostly of scrub alder and. grasses that have been established in the slide debris. On the lower bluff; vegetation is sparse to absent due to erosion along this steeper face and storm periodically removes .materials from this area. 4 ~ ~ {y ~, {` ~~ ~ Ec - 3 z~oa ,~.~ ~~ :, ~ .Y a ,~ r ~;~ a ____ t_ Geological Site Evaluation. Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 Geology and Ground .Materials: A review of existing geologic maps of the area indicates that the geologic amts present in the vicinity of the subject property aze glacial and interglacial deposits of Quaternary age, most of which aze Less than 20,000 yeazs old. The oldest geologic unit within the azea of study consists of Advance Outwash materials, a series of poorly- consolidated, fluvial (stream-deposited) sands and gravels laid down during the advance of the Vachon glacier from the north. The upland portion of the subject property is capped by the Ijashon till, a layer of compact cobbles and coarse sand in a binder of clay and silt that commonly ranges from a few feet to as much. as 100 feet in thickness. This unit is comprised of materials deposited directly beneath a massive layer of glacial ice that once overrode the Puget Sound region. In many places, the weight of the ice lobe compacted these. sedimentsinto a concrete-like mixture that is almost always impermeable, but. considerably more resistant to erosion than the underlying, unconsolidated. sands and gravels. Along the beach and in the mid-bluff azea, slide debris is identified on reconnaissance maps of the area as Quaternary age alluvium. Examination ofthe ground materials where exposed along the bluff face at the subject property generally supports the above geologic i s ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ r ~, ation. A ~~4 t _` ~ DEC - 3 ~00~ .~: _ ~_ ,~ _ _,_„, .,,, ,~ .:~. _ ___.. ~~ _ Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 20Q6 series ofweakly-bedded, buffto light gray, poorly-compacted sand, clay and pebble-to cobble-conglomerate. occurs in patchy exposures along the shoreline to an elevation of approximately 20 feet above the beach. Above this elevation, the unit is covered by slide debris from the upper bluff and vegetation. Along. the upper bhiff face, the sand and conglomerate unit is exposed again where it is finally overlain by more compact soils derived from glacially-ovemdden tills. Sail Characteristics: The dominant soil along the lower bluff face at the subject property is Townsend fine sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes. This nearly level to strongly-sloping soil occurs in narrow strips along marine bluffs. In these areas, strong prevailing winds blow fine sand from beaches and Muffs and deposit it on the surface. This soil is generally fine sandy loam to a depth of i 4 to 22 inches. The hazard of bluff slippage or slough. off is moderate to severe. Permeability is moderate above the cemented layer and the soil holds 2 to 5 inches of water available for plants. This soil can support rural homesites and is often used for growing a variety of fiuits, bemes and garden vegetables. The dominant soil in the upland portion of the property is Hoypus gravelly loamy .. r sand, 0 to 15 percent slopes. This nearly level soil is located on rolling ~-mot'aine-'=--- ' ' _ , ~ ~ , F tY Q ~ C - 3 ~~07 ~ `~ ,' 6 z__.' ~~ .' °~' ~ ~v' ~JP~~~~NT Geological Sate Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgrerr August 3I, 2006 terraces. In most places, slopes range from 6 to 12 percent. Included with this .soil in mapping are small areas of somewhat poorly-drained silt loam.. This soil is somewhat excessively drained Permeability is rapid and roots may penetrate to a depth of more than 60 inches. The soil holds 2 to 4 inches of water available for plants. Runoff is slow to medium and the hazard of water erosion is slight to moderate. This soil is used mainly for production of trees, recreation areas and. for homesites. Slope Stability: On maps showing Geologically-Critical Areas, prepared by the Jefferson County Department of Community Development, the northern portion of the coastal bluffs at the subject property has been identified as an "Unstable Recent Slide" due to the presence of steep. slopes, highly-erodable ground materials and the occurrence of recent slides. The southern portion of the bluffs has been identified as "Unstable' : On Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Zone Management maps, the hillside slopes and bluff face within. the Area. of Study have been classified as Unstable with recent slides (Urs) identified in the area where the subject property is located (see Appendix 2). Direct examination of the lower bluff face, immediately above the beach, reveals a number of places where slides, erosion and sloughing has occurred, removing soils and vegetation and exposing the underlying ground materials: This condition is ~ _^~ probably the result active springs within the bluff materials as well as water riu~off-a~~ess--- = -- -= SEC - 3 20Qi _ 7 ~.~ ~ ~~ i~ Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 the bluff onto the beach during periods of winter rainfall, along with undercutting by storm wave action at the foot of the bluff. Due of the steepness of the bluff face and the poorly- consolidated nature of the bluff materials, these slides will probably continue to occur. Potential Seismic Hazards: The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone III by the Uniform Building Code (ITBC}. Crustal earthquakes of sufficient magnitude to produce damage in structures have occurred along faults in several areas of the Puget Sound region (see Appendix 3, Potential Seismic Hazards Map). However, the largest earthquakes in this region have been subcrustal events, ranging in depth from 30 to 60 miles or more. These deeper-focus earthquakes aze not related to surface faults but are usually caused. by movements along plate boundaries or within deeper, subcrustal slabs. Although the mapping of faults and study of earthquakes in the Puget Sound region is a continuing effort,. the. potential effects of a large seismic eventon hillsides and slopesin this azea are still. not completely understood. In 2003, the State of Washington replaced the UBC with the International Building Code (IBC) which provides guidelines for construction based oa "Seismic Design Categories" rather than seismic zones. Architects and builders should refer to these guidelines as well as the UBC codes when designing structures in this '~ --_.___~_____ _,_ _ ___ _._ _ _~_, F_I Y.. V s U ~U~i~ t ` ..,... ~ g f ~ __i ~_l' i A~^~r Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 Conclusions and Recommendations: The observations and interpretations outlined in this report support the classification of the bluff face at the subject property as "Unstable ". Although evidence of erosion, sloughing of ground materials and recent slides is present in some areas along the lower bluff face, these activities appeaz to have been. mostly shallow-founded and. relatively limited in size. Accordingly, we do not feel that the construction of the„pro ,nosed stauwav from the upper bluff edge to the beach will significantly increase the risk of erosion or slides along the bluff face nor should it adversely affect the shoreline emrironment. However, the risk that ground movements will still occur that could damage the structure is high. In summary, it is our opinion that with good water management, preservation oflower-growth vegetation, and implementation of the slope stability measures, outlined below, we see no reason why the. construction of the proposed stairway should not occur. Specific recommendations are as follows: I . Because. of the unconsolidated nature of the ground materials and the presence of undercutting along the upper bluff edge, it is recommended that the foundation for the upper landing and supports for the portion of the stairway across the upper bluff face, be installed as faz inland- away from the upper bluff edge - as possible. This may require: _ _. _ ___ __.__ _._ _i cantilevering. the upper supports out over the upper bluff face. Any excava ' ,~ ~ r ~ - -- _ _ ' _._:.~ Q'~ ~ ~~ __ _ _.__. t Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 required of the ground materials on the face of the upper bluff should. be performed in a manner that will cause as little disturbance to these materials as possible. 2. The platform landing and stairway supports across the. middle bluff azea will be founded in slide debris from the upper bluff and the uppermost layers of these materials will probably be poorly consolidated. For this reason, we recommend that any pilings or supports required for the stairway or platform be founded well below the surface layer where mare stable ground materials should be present. 3. The lower landing and stair supports should be installed above the Ol`IWM (Ordinary High Water Mark) on the beach, so as not to be exposed to regular wave action during high tides. The OHWM is easily identifiable in this area and occurs below the lower limit of the lower bluff face slide debris. 6 i 4. An effective water collection system (gutters and downspouts) should: be installed on the existing structure and on any new structures to be built with collected water tightlined away from the azea of the upper bluff edge. In no case should water from any source be allowed to discharge from the upland portion of the subject property onto the face of the blufi~ and azeas where water collects. along the upper bh~ff edge should be idem:ified and remediated by filling or draining. 5. Efforts should be made to promote and maintain a growth of h ~ th~~,i ~ ~- ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ r , r `"' !; t t ~ i ~ i -` • i ., _ ;~ ~._._./ Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Ddhlgren August 31, 2006 vegetation, wherever possible, along the bluffto aid in retaining surface soils and reduce the effects of erosion The accumulation of construction materials, stumps, branches, cuttings or other yard debris on the mid-slope or bluffface should be discouraged as these materials may inhibit the growth of such vegetation. 6. Accumulations of slide debris as well as drift logs or other large flotsam that washes up onto the beach and collects along the upper shoreface should be preserved in place for as long as possible,. as these materials may serve to absorb storm wave action and reduce the rate of undercutting along the base of the bluff 7. Periodic examinations of the bluff face should be conducted during and after periods of heavy rainfall,. to determine the locations of any new springs or seeps, check for areas of excessive water runoff or erosion, and identify any unstable areas. Recording the appearance of the bluff in photographs, taken each year, and comparing them .with current conditions may assist in this evaluation. Summary and Limitations: Although the development of properties along hillside .slopes and .coastal bluffs in the Puget Sound region is common, it should be acknowledged by prop ----- ---- ----, ~- ~ =~ ,,.;~ - such areas maybe inherently unstable and involve higher risks than other ~ ~ e~~e `~- ~~ ,; _' ' ` DEC - 3 2~C7 :, `~ ii ~, . ,~~ , r ~~ ~ , v ____-_ -'_-'__ , Ia'_ _ __ Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mr.~ Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2©06 steepness of slope faces and the unconsolidated nature of the ground materials. Frequent and severe winter storms commonly produce large volumes of water runoff that may cause extensive surface erosion, .saturate ground materials and destabilize slopes, resulting in ground movements-that often occur without warning. Given these conditions; it should be expected that erosion and occasional sloughing of ground materials on the subject property may be a continuing problem. While the potential for lazger-scale deep-seated movements, such as maybe precipitated by a seismic event, are not well-understood in this area, the hazards that maybe posed by such an occurrence should also not be ignored. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Scott Dahigren for specific application to the referenced site, and the conclusions and recommendations presented, herein, should be applied in their entirety. Within the limits of scope and. budget, this study was conducted in accordance with generally-accepted practices. employed at the time this work was done. No other warranty of conditions is expressed or implied. You should also be aware that these conclusions and recommendations aze based on a general knowledge of this area and the nrterpretations of surface and subsurface conditions as they are believed to exist. These conditions may, in fact, be different than interpreted and events may inevitably occur that were not predicted. Clients should also be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report and recommendations without a site re-evaluation and critical review. Althou,~ -- .~ _~.--, tune limit is somewhat arbitrary, it is suggested that 2 years be considered a Xe' (~~,,, ;. ~ t `f 12 ., j ~~tr ~:.~,' __ ___ i i DEC - 3 ~-~`~%_`' ~-~~ i ~;~;r ~re~ k`'f;T ,Y _0~~. Geological Site Evaluation Mr. & Mrs Scott Dahlgren August 31, 2006 limit for the usefulness of this report. ,!White, Engineering Geologist 31, 2006 APPENDICES Appendix 1: Location Map Appendix 2: Slope Stability Map Appendix 3: Potential Seismic Hazards (Fault) Map) Appendix 4: Black and White Aerial Photo Appendix 5: Lidar--based Slope-Shaded Map (slopes >30%) Appendix 6: Detail, Area of Study ~¢ 0 At~acbr~ent 2 SIB a Stabile Stable Urs Unstable Recent Slide Intermediate Uos Unstable Old Slide Unstable M Modified Slope ~... ~~.~..~ . n...a~. _ ~ ~ .~~ ~~.~ . __r ~. ~~,~~; table duff ~~ ~:~ ~~ ~~~ ns z ~~ ~~ ~~ , Source: ~/asP~ing#®n Sfiaf~ Department 0~ fc~logy C~asra! Zone alas .k ~, .~ ~~ _. SEC ~ 201 ..,.. ~._+wa++.~ .. . ... .~.. r.nrr.~w ,.,... ~ ..., .~~ v.awwa...v.~~a...w...Y.wnw..+ +.`~^°' r !~ • ~ ~ l: 81 {~F~--,rte' ......~ ...r.., '" `-..' `.."" "'... """ ....-- --~ • Fault Zone -~ i ' ~ .~.. . De~1~ Mtg... .... '`~ ~,~ ~ ..r; • ~~ . ,~ , . ~ ,. 1 . ~ ~ . ~ : ~ . ~ .. . ~ ~ ~ ~ . . '~sn~~ rya ~ .,~,,~ ~ ~x~c~~ • ~,~~, t: ;~ ,~ • is '!.. '~ , •1 ~' J . 11 r .. .. ~ . ~ ;,~ r , u ~ , r' 'i,~ .rte ~•/ ~ { ~ t`~ r t r r r'~.• day ~~~ ' • • ~~ L ~ ~ 1 A tr' t ~ ~ 5.. t ~~r ~ t •.1 1.' IYT p I , ! , ~ • 1 . j' ~ "t' ., ~ r. ~, f l C P .. ~ N + ! ~' z . X. ~' •y. ~ f. ` ~ ! J t r { ~~ !1 r t,_ t ~ 1 .. j ,. A ,r .. •9 .. ... ~ F~ r.. f. r ~~#' ~f . ~d 1 ~.Ilr ~~ r ~~ r~ +~ 1 ''!*~..r 1+ , 1 ~~~~• '~ t~/Vfj~*11.. t t x •.0 ~. 'y ~ S! 1 ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ I N ~ ¢,1 . ~ 1 ,Ceti, ~ r,• . i r ~ ~1 r~ , , 1F, }r J k ~ t' 4 h F.r. ' I' ~ 'p, i ! J' r~ .t i + ~ Via, y ~~ rr ,IS r !, t ~. • ~ t {, » 1~~ r. ,`;~ x~,. ~ r 1 Y ° r 'hVYi.~.1 Aff°711 a ti 1-, tk `r ht r `.. o ~ t r.• •+. t' t .r ~~t i '~ y •+..'r:,:w p ' /t t'r./ r ~ ~ / rY ` ~ /Vr ~,{ / .*~ •.~ ;Y 1 t .. 1 W^~ ` iffy , p t.. ~• ,.. ~ ono! a~ ~ 1 •'i. ° jJ `t Ir ~~ ~, ~'•;' ••~ , y .~''.1~~t h'~' ~ ~ t 1 J J Y ~ tl 1 0 T~ I ~ r4 1 ~ T t} t, 5 1 s rt F . +1 rr )1 '• •11 ri Y~1' t :1.' S tf. J t", • V' r Y '. 1 1 r ll '~ til raMl, ~ r. .1 ~ J ~ .fit t~ rt~l /, tF~rh .r ~^~ ~ r'tr i, t _ y,~ 1 IF ~j,• .~ r tl . r. ,, ,~ t., ~ ~^ •1. ~ y t~ .~~,.: :•i!: ..~. 1 a ~ K.. t S ~ rat ~ N 'y ` * ! 1 i t 1 y • ~ l~ r F ~t t,,} ='d ~•,r7• .Yr h rr rYt ~ 1 1 .. ~~°~+ •]:ird: 12 fjL+. :I• ~ Vtr t ! t .i+ ~r~~ ~' ,~r ~ i '._~ ~ t 'qq~I~ }//yam .. ~N~ 1 I' J 1 ^ '~ ~ ~~~' •~ .. !~ '~lR.i ' r t rY' i : 1 F r1 •1' t it ~' . F.. ~, t: r 5~7. ~ ............_ +u'J ..r :.x.+.r.J. .... a!t?ir..l..~J4 [.~ t ~~ 'J r: t ..i.'. ! ~~`i, '•r. T t 1, .~ 1 ~ t Potential uake Faults Earth + q is the ~. • ~~~ ,~ Puget Sound Region ~ ~~. t Ilr,. ~ ice„ '%® _.~. ~ , ad' ~.s§,~ ~ . __. ~ ~ ~,~ ,,. °` I '~! . } rn _. ,.. ., a«. a o r..... ...... ~ I f ,~ _,~ i t y t i . '~ .~ 3 7 ~A W r X )' X a .. 0 y N C O Of .C ~. j. 3 1 3 ,. r., .~. ~ ..,,, ~„~ +J ¢ P