{"id":2517,"date":"2023-01-30T04:50:01","date_gmt":"2023-01-30T04:50:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/evertekengineering.com\/?p=2517"},"modified":"2023-02-03T19:00:04","modified_gmt":"2023-02-03T19:00:04","slug":"geohazard-report","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/evertekconsultants.com\/punjabi\/geohazard-report\/","title":{"rendered":"Geohazard Report"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Geohazard Report<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

1.Introduction<\/strong><\/p>

In 1991, the Fraser Valley Regional District (then the Regional District of Fraser-Cheam) prepared the Geo-Hazard Acceptability Thresholds for Development Approvals. These acceptability thresholds have since informed policy on geo-hazards throughout the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD) by guiding the development approval decisions and land use planning in hazardous areas. Local governments must define what acceptable risk is. The association of Engineers and Geo-scientists of British Columbia (EGBC) are clear that defining levels of safety is \u201cnot the role of a Professional Engineer or Professional Geoscientist\u201d; rather acceptable risk must be \u201cestablished and adopted by the local government or provincial government after considering a range of social values\u201d1. Professional Engineers and Geoscientists are critical to ensure safety by characterizing the geo-hazard and providing a professional opinion to the FVRD. However, it is ultimately the responsibility of the\u00a0FVRD to determine levels of acceptable risk in development approvals.<\/span><\/p>

2.Hazard Discussion\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/p>

2.<\/span>1\u00a0<\/b><\/span>Inundation by Flood Waters<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>

Inundation by flood waters is not considered a credible hazard due to the difference in elevation of the site to neighbouring bodies of water and the overall topography of the site.<\/p>

2.2 Stream Erosion and Avulsion<\/b><\/p>

\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/span>A creek located southwest of the property is confined to its banks and is located at minimum 40 metres southwests of the proposed building location. Waterflow in the creek is considered seasonal as there was little water at the time of Evertek\u2019s site reconnaissance. As such, stream erosion\/avulsion is not considered to be a credible hazard to the proposed site development.<\/span><\/p>

2.3 Debris Flow\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Debris flows and floods are not considered credible hazards to the proposed site development. In our opinion, mitigative measures for the protection from debris flows and floods are not required.<\/span><\/p>

2.4 Regional-Scale Landslides<\/span><\/span><\/p>

\u00a0<\/p>

A review of available regional geological and geotechnical information did not indicate regional scale landslide activity in the immediate vicinity of the property. As such, direct impact to the proposed building from regional scale landslides is not considered to be a credible hazard.<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0<\/p>

\u00a0<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t