My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-03-17_REPORT - M2008078
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Report
>
Minerals
>
M2008078
>
2009-03-17_REPORT - M2008078
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:44:28 PM
Creation date
3/19/2009 4:02:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2008078
IBM Index Class Name
REPORT
Doc Date
3/17/2009
Doc Name
Slope Stability Report
From
J&T Consulting, Inc.
To
DRMS
Email Name
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
VII - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br />Case A - The resulting safety factor of 1.27 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.11 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed setback of <br />65 feet from the proposed permit boundary, and 75 feet from the edge of the existing County <br />Road HH.5 is satisfactory. <br />Case B - Omitted <br />Case C - The resulting safety factor of 1.38 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.17 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed of 80 feet <br />from the potential future multi-use rail spur is satisfactory. <br />Case D - The resulting safety factor of 1.27 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.14 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed setback of <br />95 feet from the parcel is satisfactory. <br />Case E - The resulting safety factor of 1.26 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.14 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed setback of <br />85 feet from the closest irrigation ditch bank is satisfactory. <br />Case F - The resulting safety factor of 1.35 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.22 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed setback of <br />90 feet from the boundary of the easement is satisfactory. <br />Case G - The resulting safety factor of 1.31 meets the SEO minimum requirement of 1.25 for an <br />embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.16 is above the SEO minimum <br />requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. The proposed setback of <br />40 feet from the proposed permit boundary, 60 feet from the property boundary, and 97 feet <br />from the edge of the existing wetland area is satisfactory. <br />West Farm Gravel Pit <br />Slope Stability Analysis <br />Page 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.