The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTract Map 008/359 Chaparral Courtyard Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation � 2 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHMCAL INVESTIGATION Chaparral Courtyard Nicolas Road Just East of Winchester Temecula, California Prepared For: Ginny Uyeno-Bridy DIN Retail Ventures, LLC. 1224 Prospect Street Suite 150 La Jolla, California 92037 Prepared By: MTC7, Inc. 14467 Meridian Parkway,Bldg. 2A Riverside,California 9251 S Project No. 6625-A02 Log No. 06-1501 August 21,2006 f Geotechnica! Engineering Construction Inspection Ar,r, rM Materials Testing Amamahma Environmental August 21,2006 Office Locations Ginny Uyeno-Bridy Project No. 6625-A02 Orange County Corporate Branch: DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Log No. 06-1501 2992 E.La Palma Avenue 1224 Prospect Street,Suite 150 Suite A Anaheim,CA 92606 La Jolla,California 92037 Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax: 714.632.2974 SUBJECT: PRELEVIINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Chaparral Courtyard Los Angeles Nicolas Road Just East of Winchester Ventura County 13010 San Fernando Road Temecula,California Unit I Sylmar,CA 91342 Tel: 818.833.8100 In accordance with your request and authorization we have completed a Geotechnical Fax: 818.833.0085 Investigation at the subject site. We are pleased to present the following report with our conclusions and recommendations for remedial grading and foundations. San Diego Imperial County EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7313 Carroll Road Suite 6 San Diego,CA 92121 Although g p preliminary building plans or re loads are not available at this time we have assumed Tel: 858.537.3999 normal foundation loading of 50 to 75 kips for pad footings and 3 to 6 kips per foot for Fax: 858.537.3990 perimeter footings. If expected loads exceed these ranges we should be consulted for additional foundation recommendations. Our report concludes that the site is suitable for Inland Empire construction if the recommendations presented are incorporated into the plans and 14467 Meridian Parkway specifications for the proposed construction. Building 2A Riverside,CA 92508 Tel: 951.653.4999 Removals and recompaction of onsite soils beneath the structures are recommended to be 2 Fax: 951 653.4666 feet below proposed foundation or 4 feet from existing ground surface, whichever is lower in elevation. Removals in hardscape and paving areas are expected to be 2 foot below subgrade. Central Dispatch The onsite soils have low expansion potential and the moisture content of the subgrade soils Boo<91.2990 below foundations and slabs on grade should be near the optimum to a depth of 18 inches San Diego Dispatch prior to placing concrete. The soils are potentially corrosive to ferrous metals. 888.B44.5060 Page i www,mtglinc com DBI Group Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral /Nicolas Office Park North Log No. 06-1501 We look forward to providing additional consulting services during the planning and construction of the project. If you have any questions concerning our report or planned construction please contact our office. Respectfully submitted, MTGL,Inc. M.B. (Ben) Lo Brad Ilulse Registered Geotechnical Engineer R.G.E. 2088 Project Geologist Expiration Date: December 31,2005 Distribution (4) Addressee QPoFESS1pN Zc h Q No.6E 2088 m Exp.12/31107 x *TgO$b7r PSNP pF cALft Page ii DB[Retail Ventures,LLC Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................1 PLANNEDCONSTRUCTION......................................................................._......»...............I SCOPE.........................................................................................................................................I SITE.............................................................................................................................................I LABORATORYTESTING..._.................................................................................................2 GEOLOGY/STESMICITY......................................................................................................3 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS............................................................................................3 SITEGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS.....................................................................................................3 GROUNDWATERCONDMONS....................................................................................................4 SEISMICHAzARDs.....................................................................................................................4 LIOUEFAC71ON...........................................................................................................................5 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY..........................................................................................6 SEISMICI'I'Y.................................................................................................................................6 CONCLUSIONS.........................................................................................................................7 GENERALCONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................7 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE...........................................................................7 SETTLEMENT CONS[DERATIONS.................................................................................................7 EXPANSION POTENTIAL/FILL.....................................................................................................8 CORROSIVrrY AND THE ON-SITE SOILS......................................................................................8 SITE COEFFICIENT SUBGRADE MODULUS..................................................................................8 RECONMENDATIONS...........................................................................................................8 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................8 SITEOVEREXCAVATION.............................................................................................................9 FOUNDATIONAND BUILDING SLABS..........................................................................................9 SpreadFootin¢s.....................................................................................................................9 Concreteand the On-Sire Soils...........................................................................................10 RETAININGWALLS...................................................................................................................10 SLAB-ON-GRADE RECONDAENDATIONS....................................................................................l l Prewettin2 Recommendation...............................................................................................12 PAV EMENr RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................12 CONSTRUCI70N CONSIDERATIONS...........................................................................................13 Page iii DBl Retail Ventures,LLC Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns..........................................................13 Drainage and Croundivaier Considerations...................................................................... 13 Excavations.......................................................................................................................... 14 UtilityTrenches...................................................................................................................14 SITEDRA WAGE........................................................................................................................15 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVAT70N/ImWG OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS.................................15 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................................................16 Appendix A-References Appendix B- Field Investigation Appendix C-Laboratory Testing Appendix D—Seismicity/Liquefaction Appendix E-General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Figure 1 - Site Location Map—Next Page Figure 2- Boring Location Plan—Following Report Page iv TopoZone - Tucalota Creek, USGS MURRIETA (CA)Topo Map Page 1 of 1 1 O20B2: Hot Spri�igs Gptlfldt7D;3 rawsmanz is - . .a S. Pas 00 Le r IJV--r w Illyr�-�( rf /�• / + it i+ le, ,I)`+ a '1 Mond? * M 0 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.5 kn v 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Ni UTM 11 486702E 3711293N (WGS84/NAD83) Tucalota Creek, USGS MURRIETA (CA) Quadrangle M=13.201 Projection is UTM Zone 11 NAD83 Datum G=-0.079 http://www.topozone.com/print.asp?lat=33.54117&lon=-117.14323&sized&layer—DRG... 8/20/2006 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authorization, MTGL, Inc. has completed a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the subject site. The following report presents our findings, conclusions and recommendations based on our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering review. PLANNED CONSTRUCTION It is proposed to construct four (4) condominium structures comprising approximately 50,000 square feet along with site improvements including access and parking paving. See the Boring Location Plan (Figure 2)for approximate location of the planned construction. SCOPE The scope of our Geotechnical services included the following: • Complete a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation consisting of excavating 3 borings. (See Appendix B for Logs and Boring Location Plan for Locations) • Laboratory testing of samples(See Appendix Q. • Geotechnical engineering review of data and engineering recommendations. • Preparation of this report summarizing our findings and presenting our conclusions and recommendations for the proposed construction. SITE The site is on Nicolas Road near the intersection of Nicolas Road and Roripaugh. The site is located adjacent to existing buildings and in front of an existing storage lot. The site is currently an empty lot that has a road dividing the lot that leads up to the storage lot. The site is vegetation free and is relatively flat. Page 1 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 LABORATORY TESTING The laboratory testing consists of moisture density determinations of the relatively undisturbed samples and moisture content of the disturbed samples—Grain Size, Atterberg Limits and #200.Wash were determined for soils classification and liquefaction analysis. The maximum density was determined on samples of the near surface soils .so that an. estimated shrinkage during grading could be made. Direct shear and consolidation testing were accomplished for foundation bearing and settlement determinations. Corrosivity, Expansion Index and Soluble Sulfates in the near surface soils were determined for slab-on- grade and concrete recommendations. R-Value testing was.completed.for hardscape and pavement recommendations. The results and expanded explanation of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C and on the Boring Logs, Appendix B. Page 2 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 GEOLOGY/SIESMICITY Regional Geologic Conditions The site area is located within the Elsinore-Temecula Trough in the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province. The Elsinore-Temecula Trough extends from the Lake Elsinore Basin, north of the Temecula, to the Agua Tibi Mountains, located south of Temecula. Topographically, the site lies in a relatively flat area at an elevation of approximately 1100 feet above sea level. Structurally, the area lies within the broad Elsinore Fault Zone with the Santa Ana Mountains to the west and the Perris Block to the northeast- Quaternary alluvial deposits 'reportedly reach thicknesses of up to approximately, 3,000 feet in the central portion of the Elsinore-Temecula Trough. Within the Elsinore Trough, these sediments overlie pre-Tertiary crystalline bedrock. The Tertiary Bedford Canyon Formation underlies the Santa Rosa Mountains southwest of the Temecula Valley. Site Geologic Conditions The'site is located along the north.side of Nicolas Road between.Roripaugh Road and Winchester Road in Temecula, California. The ground surface is relatively flat and slopes gently toward the west ai a slope angle of approximately 40 feet per mile. The site vicinity is drained by Santa Gertrudes Creek. The site is underlain_by alluvium derived from weathering of poorly consolidated and poorly-cemented silty sandstone of the Quaternary age Pauba formation that craps out on the hills in the immediate site vicinity (CDMG, 1991). Where encountered in the borings advanced for this investigation, the native alluvium consists of brown, moist, dense to very dense silt and sand with scattered gravel and was generally encountered at a depth of approximately 1-foot below the existing plowed ground. According to the USDA Soil Conservation Service (1971), soils of the Hanford-Tujunga- Greenfield soil association occur across the majority of the site. Based on samples retrieved from the soil borings, and review of the Soil Conservation Service soils report, the most of the site is underlain by fine sandy loam associated with the Hanford soil series. The soils which comprise the Hanford soil series consist of well drained to somewhat excessively drained soils on alluvial fans with slopes ranging from 0 to 15 percent. Typically, the upper Page 3 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 18 inches of the soil profile is grayish brown coarse sandy loam underlain by brown, stratified coarse sandy loam and loamy sand to a depth of approximately five (5) feet. Historically, these soils have been used for dryland pasture, grains and for irrigated alfalfa , potatoes, citrus, and grapes. More recently, they have been extensively developed for homesites and other developments. According to USDA (1977), the Hanford soil series has low shrink swell potential and pH values of approximately 6.1 to 7.8. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 44 feet below ground surface in boring B1. It is considered possible that, in the future, due to changes in runoff and infiltration associated with regional site development, groundwater depths could become shallower. Due to the generally fine-grained nature of the .near surface soils, sudden fluctuations of groundwater at the site are not likely. Seismic Hazards The site is located within the seismically active area of southern California. However, no active faults appear to exist on the site or immediately adjacent to the site. Seismic risk is considered relatively high as compared to other areas of southern California, mainly because of the relatively close proximity to active faulting along the Elsinore Fault zone. Based on review of the Fault-Rupture Hazards Zones in California, the site is not located within an earthquake hazard zone. The site is located east of the Elsinore Fault Zone, and south of the Murrieta Hot Springs Fault (north of Murrieta Hot Springs Road). The Elsinore Fault Zone is an active northwest trending strike slip fault with probable vertical displacement of up to 1;500 feet or more and is the major structural feature influencing the site and site vicinity. The Elsinore fault is located approximately three (3) miles southwest of the site. Primary seismic hazards in the site and site vicinity include severe ground shaking,"actual surface rupture due to faulting, and secondary ground failures such as liquefaction, ground lurching, lateral spreading, seiche, tsunami, and landslides. Due to the presence of numerous active faults within the southern California region; severe ground shaking potential is considered high. However, the actual surface rupture potential due to faulting Page 4 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 across any portion of the site is considered very low. Liquefaction is the temporary loss of cohesion in saturated, granular soils subjected to ground shaking. Because of the soil types encountered in the four (4).soil borings, the seismic setting of the site, and the depth to groundwater, a liquefaction analysis was conducted (see below). Lateral spreading is the horizontal movement of loose, unconsolidated sedimentary deposits or imported fill material. Lateral spreading potential is considered low. Ground lurching is the horizontal movement of soil, sediments or fill founded on steep slopes and embankments. Due to the relatively flat surface and"lack of significant embankments, lateral spreading potential is considered very low. A seiche is the periodic oscillation of a body of water resulting from seismic shaking. As there are no surface impoundments or reservoirs in the immediate site vicinity, seiche potential is also'considered nil. Because the site is located a sufficient distance inland from the coast and at an elevation of approximately 1100 feet above:sea level, inundation by tsunamis is not an issue. Finally, landslides are unlikely due to the relatively flat topography at the site and surrounding site vicinity. Liquefaction Liquefaction occurs in water-saturated sediments during moderate to great earthquakes and results in loss of strength which can damage structures. The soils at the site locally have clean, medium dense sand layers within 40 feet or less of the ground surface and the site is in relatively close proximity to active faults. Although the regional groundwater depth at the site was in excess of 44.0 feet below grade at the time of the field investigation, future land use changes, utility line leakages and over-irrigation could cause shallow groundwater or perched groundwater conditions to develop, especially given the presence of low- permeable interbeds of silt and clay. Review of CDMG(2000)and CDMG(2001) suggests that the site soils have no to low susceptibility to liquefaction. Nevertheless, based on the findings of our investigation,a liquefaction analysis was conducted(see below). Liquefaction, the process by which water-saturated sediment loses strength and may fail during strong ground shaking, commonly accompanies moderate to great earthquakes throughout the world. Water-saturated, cohesionless, granular sediment situated at depths less than 50 feet beneath the surface constitutes the principal environs of the liquefaction process. A liquefaction assessment was completed using current standards and California Special Publication 117. Page 5 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No.06-1501 A liquefaction study was conducted based on the subsurface conditions encountered at B-1, using current standards and California Special Publication 117, and an assumed ground water table of 20 feet below ground surface. Details .of the liquefaction analysis are presented,in Appendix D. Based on the liquefaction study, there are sand layers that may liquefy during the life of the project due to the design earthquake. Liquefaction of the zone would.cause up to 1.51 inch of settlement. Due to relatively level nature of the subgrade, this settlement is expected to produce a maximum of 3/4 inch of differential settlement: The recommended remedial grading may reduce some of the estimated settlements. However, we recommend that the structures to be designed to tolerate 1.5 inch and 3/4-inch of total and differential settlement respectively. Landslides and Slope Stability The slope gradient at the site is approximately 40 feet per mile toward the southwest. Slope stability is not considered an issue on this gently sloping,developed site. Further, according to CDMG(2001), the site is not within a designated landslide zone. Seismicity The computer program FRISKSP (Thomas F. Blake, 2000) was used to calculate the site accelerations using the probabilistic method. See Appendix D for results. The Design-Basis Earthquake ground-motion (10% chance of exeedance in 50 years) is 0.60g. The Upper- Bound Earthquake Ground-Motion(10%chance of exeedance in 100 years) is 0:75g. The computer program UBSEIS (Thomas F. Blake, 2000) was used to calculate the UBC seismic factors. The results are located in the.Appendix. The site soil profile is So. The nearest active fault is the Elsinore-Temecula fault, which is located approximately 3 miles away:The fault type is B. Selected UBC seismic coefficients are: Na= 1.0,Nv = 1.2, Ca= 0.45 and Cv=0.79(Other parameters may be found in Appendix D). The computer program EQFAULT(Thomas F. Blake, 2000) was used to deterministically calculate the maximum peak ground acceleration-for the site. Based on the results, the site may experience a maximum peak ground acceleration of 0.415 g. Page 6 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No.06-1501 CONCLUSIONS General Conclusions Given the findings of the investigation, it appears that the site geology is suitable for the proposed constriction provided our conclusions are taken into consideration during design, and our recommendations are incorporated into the construction plans and specifications and implemented during grading and construction. Based on the investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed development is safe against landslides and ground rupture from active faults. Grading and construction of the proposed project will not adversely affect the geologic stability of adjacent properties. The nature and extent of the investigation conducted for the purposes of this declaration are,in our opinion,in conformance with generally accepted practice in this area. There appears to be no significant onsite geologic constraint that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and sound construction practices. Excavation Characteristics/Shrinkaee Based on the drilling for the subsurface investigation, which was done by hollow stem . auger, excavation of the onsite soil materials can use conventional earthmoving equipment. Shrinkage of the undocumented fill and alluvium is expected to be 10 to 15 percent. Settlement Considerations Based on the known subsurface conditions and site geology, we anticipate that properly designed and constructed foundations supported on the recommended material would experience total and differential settlement. As a minimum all foundations bearing into the engineered fill should be designed to accommodate a total settlement of at least one inch with a differential settlement of 1/2 inch over a horizontal distance of 50 feet. Page 7 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard_ Log No. 06-1501 Expansion Potential/Fill The onsite soils are suitable for use as fill if organic debris is removed prior to placement as fill. Expansion potential is expected to be very low. Corrosivity and the On-Site Soils Based on testing and our experience, concrete in contact with the on-site soils may utilize type 11 Cement due to low soluble sulfates. Based on the Corrosivity test results,the onsite soils will be potentially corrosive to ferrous metals. We recommend Corrosion Engineers be consulted for any ferrous material that may be installed in direct contact with onsite soils. Site Coe fficient/Subgmde Modulus The Subgrade Modulus may be taken as 105 psi per inch. In compliance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code the site is Type So and the Seismic Coefficients presented in Appendix D may be used. RECOMMENDATIONS Our recommendations are considered minimum and may be superseded by more conservative requirements of the architect, structural engineer, building code, or governing agencies. The foundation recommendations are based on the expansion index and shear strength of the onsite soils. Import soils, if necessary should not exceed the existing expansion potential and should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to importing to the site. hi addition to the recommendations in this section, additional general earthwork and grading specifications are included in Appendix E. Site Grading Recommendations General Compaction Standard: All fills should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method 131557-96. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts, not.thicker than 8 inches. Material should be moisture- Page 8 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 conditioned as processed as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is over optimum and within moisture limits required to achieve adequate bonding between lifts and compaction. Site Overexcavation Building plans, grading plans and foundation elevations are not available at this time. When these plans become available this office should review them in-order to make additional recommendations,if necessary. All organics, debris, trash and topsoils should be removed offsite. To provide a uniform bearing support across the proposed building pad, we recommend the pad area to be over excavated to a minimum of 4 feet below the existing surface or 2 feet below the bottom of footings,whichever is lower in elevation. Ibe horizontal limits of over excavation beyond the perimeter footings should be equal to the depth of over excavation, but not less than 5 feet Hardscape areas which include paving sections will require a minimum of 2 feet of removal and recompaction. Processing for hardscape should extend to a minimum of 2 feet outside the structural limits. The excavated on site material, moisture conditioned to approximately the optimum moisture content, could be used for back fill in the over excavation. The fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90%of the maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557-96. Foundation and BuildingSlabs labs Spread Footings An allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf may be used for conventional shallow footing design for the minimum embedment recommended below. This value may be increased by 200 psf per additional foot of embedment and 100 psf per foot of width for a total not to exceed 3,000 psf. The allowable bearing pressure may be inereased,by one-third for wind or seismic loading. Continuous footing should be reinforced with one 44 reinforcing steel bars, top and bottom as a minimum. The recommended minimum footing widths are 12 Page 9 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 and 24 inches for continuous and isolated footings respectively. The embedment should be a minimum of 24 inches for perimeter footings or 18 inches for interior footings Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value of 300 pcf. Further,for sliding resistance,a friction coefficient of 0.3 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. In combining the total lateral resistance, either the passive pressure or the friction of resistance should be reduced by 50 percent. In addition, the lateral passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded strictures will remain intact with time. Concrete and the On-Site Soils Based on testing and our experience, concrete in contact with the on-site soils may utilize type II Cement. Retaining Walls Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load,the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls as basement and swimming pools should be designed for the "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance. For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water table and backfilled with nonexpansive soils is provided below. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Recommended pressures are shown on Table 1. Page 10 DBi Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Table 1. M Equivalent Fluid Weight(ticfl: Condition Level 2:1 (H:V)Slone Active 40 70 At-Rest 50 95 Passive 300 140 (Maximum of 3 ksf) (Sloping Down) It is recommended that the footings be embedded at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent finish grade. In addition, the wall footings should be designed and reinforced with structural considerations. For walls less than 15 feet in height, the back cut should be flattened to a gradient of not steeper and 1:1(H: V)slope inclination. The walls may be drained by a vertical layer of Miradrain 6200 with Mirafi 140 Geofabric, or equivalent, placed at the back of the wall; or by a minimum 12-inch width of 3/4 inch open-graded crushed gravel enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabric. Subdrains should consist of 4-inch diameter Schedule 40, PVC pipe or equivalent, embedded in approximately 1 Olinear foot of 3/4-inch down open-graded gravel, enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabric Filter or equivalent, with the pipe being 3+inches above the trench bottom; a gradient of at least 1% being provided to the pipe and trench bottom; discharging into suitably protected outlets. Alternatively low retaining walls (less than 5 feet retained) may use weep holes. The Factor of Safety used in calculating the above fluid pressures and coefficient is 1.5. Slab-on grade Recommendations The recommended minimum slab-on-grade should be a nominal 5 inches in thickness, reinforced with#3 reinforcing bars on 18-incb centers in both directions. A thicker slab-on- grade with heavier reinforcement may be required based upon the proposed loading conditions in the structure. Anticipated dynamic settlements due to liquefaction should be also considered in the design of slab thickness and reinforcements. Page 11 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Where moisture sensitive flooring is anticipated the placement of membrane with 2 inches of free draining sand placed above and below the membrane is recommended. The membrane as a minimum should be 10-mil visqueen. Prewetting Recommendation Due to the low expansion potential of the onsite soils,the soils underlying the slab-on-grade should be prewetted only to prevent water loss in the concrete foundations and slabs. Pavement Recommendations We have assumed a Traffic Index of 4 for parking areas, 5.5 for travel lanes and 7.5 for heavy truck lanes. Where the pavement is subject to repeated turning stress (i.e. Trash Enclosures Aprons) the pavement should be PCC. Based on the R-Value test result of 19, we recommend the following pavement sections. V t _ TRAFFIC , AC, BASE INDEX TIBCKNESS` TI-HCKNESS Parking Areas 4.0 3.0 inches 5.0 inches Driveways 5.5 4.0 inches 8.0 inches Heavy Truck Lanes 7.5 6.0 inches 11.0 inches Base for paving should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum in accordance with the overexcavation section. Minimum reinforcing should be considered for the concrete and the concrete should be placed on subgrade compacted to 90 percent of ASTM D 1557. The R-Value should be confirmed and the sections recalculated where necessary at the completion of grading. Page 12 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No.06-1501 Construction Considerations Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns The upper soils encountered at this site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and to changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture content of, the soil•can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities. In addition,soils that become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the,progress of grading and compaction activities. It will,therefore,be advantageous to perform earthwork and foundation construction activities during dry weather. Much of the on-site soils may be susceptible to erosion during periods of inclement weather. As a result, the project Civil Engineer/Architect and Grading Contractor should take appropriate precautions to reduce the potential for erosion during and after construction. Drainage and Groundwater Considerations Groundwater was encountered at approximately 44 feet below existing grade. It should be noted, however, that variations in the ground water table may result from fluctuation in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, precipitation, irrigation,and other factors that may not have evident at the time of our exploration. This sometimes occurs where relatively impermeable and/or cemented formational materials are overlain by fill soils. In addition, during retaining wall excavations, seepage maybe encountered. We recommend that a representative of MTGL, Inc. be present during grading operations to evaluate areas of seepage. Drainage devices for reduction of water accumulation can be recommended if these conditions occur. Water should not be allowed to collect in the foundation excavation, on floor slab areas, or on prepared subgrades of the construction area either during or after Page 13. DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped toward one comer to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater,groundwater,or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath the Floor slabs. The grades should be sloped away from the building and surface drainage should be collected and discharged such that water is not permitted to infiltrate the backflll and floor slab areas of the building. Excavations In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October 1989), the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P". This document was issued to better insure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by this federal regulation that excavations, whether they be utility trenches,basement excavation or foundation excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new OSHA guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if they are not closely followed the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as.required 'to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person",as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no ease should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state,and federal safety regulations. Utility Trenches Except where extending perpendicular under proposed foundations, utility trenches Page 14 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC. Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 should be constructed outside a 1:1 projection from the base-of-foundations. Trench excavations for utility lines, which extend under structural areas should be properly backfrlled and compacted. Utilities should be bedded and backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least 1-foot over the pipe. This backfill should be uniformly watered and compacted to a &run condition for pipe support. The remainder of the backfill shall be typical on-site soil or imported soil which should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, watered or aerated close to optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density(based on ASTM D155n. Site Drainaee The site should be drained to provide for positive drainage away from structures in accordance with the building code and applicable local requirements. Unpaved areas should slope no less than 2% away from structure. Paved areas should slope no less than 1% away from structures. Concentrated roof and surface drainage from the site should be collected in engineered, non-erosive drainage devices and conducted to a safe point of discharge. The site drainage should be designed by a civil engineer. Geotechnical Observation/Testing of Earthwork Operations The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions as interpreted from the investigation. Our preliminary conclusion and recommendations should be reviewed and verified during site grading, and revised accordingly if exposed Geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The Geotechnical consultant should perform Geotechnical observation and testing during the following phases of grading and construction: During site grading and overexcavation. During foundation excavation and placement. Upon completion of any foundation and retaining wall footing excavation prior to Page 15 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 placing concrete. During excavation and backfilling of all utility trenches'. During processing and compaction of the subgntde for the access and parking areas and prior to construction of pavement sections. When any unusual or unexpected Geoteehnical,conditions are encountered during any phase of construction. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation and further assume the explorations to be representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site. If different subsurface conditions are observed during construction, we should be promptly notified for review and reconsideration of our recommendations. This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for evaluating the design of the facilities as it relates to geotechnical aspects. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only, and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions included in this report. Our investigation was performed using the standard of care and level of skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable soil engineers and geologists currently practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Page 16 APPENDIX A REFERENCES 1. Blake, Thomas F., 2000, "EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults 2. Blake, Thomas F., 2000, "FRISKSP, A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults 3. Blake,Thomas F., 1998,"'UBCSEIS", A Computer Program for the Determination of UBC Seismic Coefficients. ' 4. CDMG, 1997 (updated 02), Special Bulletin 117, Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. 5. CDMG,2000, DMG CD 2000-003, Digital Images of Official Maps of A-P Zones. 6. Southern California Earthquake Center, 1999, Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Publication 117, Guidelines For Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California 7. CDMG Special Publication 42,Revised 1997,Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California 8. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994a, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Special Publication 42. 9. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994b, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas. 10. CDMG, 1991, Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 1:100,000 Quadrangle, California, DMG Open-File Report 91-17 11. Jahns, R.H., 1954, Geology of Southern California: CDMG Bulletin 170, Guidebook No. 3. 12. Morton, P.K:, and Miller, R.V., 1981, Geologic Map of Orange County, California, Showing Mines and Mineral Deposits: CDMG Bull. 204, Plate 1, Scale 1:48,000. 13. Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E., and Vedder, J.G.,,1965, Geology of the Los Angeles Basin California- An Introduction,U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A. 14. U.S. Geological Survey, 1981, Topographic Map of the.Temecula, California Quadrangle, Scale 1:24,000. 15. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1977, Soil Survey of Western Riverside Area,California, 157 p. APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating 4 borings with a 6-inch hollow stem auger, to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet below existing grade. The approximate location of the borings are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 2, attached. The field exploration was performed under the supervision of our Geologist who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Subsurface conditions are summarized on, the Logs of Borings. The soils encountered were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (see Key to Logs, Figure B-0). The borings were located in the field by pacing and measuring, working from appropriate locations on a map. The soils were classified based on field observations and laboratory tests. The borings were backfilled with cuttings,compacted and patched. APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING.PROCEDURES 1. Classification Soils were classified visually, generally according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classification tests were also completed on representative samples in accordance with ASTM D422 for Grain Size. ASTM D4318 for Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index and No. 200 wash. The test result is shown on Figures C-1 through C-4 and on the Boring Logs. 2. Maximum Density One maximum density test was performed on a representative bag sample of the near surface soils in accordance with ASTM D1557. The test result is shown on Figure C-5. 3. Direct Shear Direct Shear Tests were performed on undisturbed samples of site soils in accordance with ASTM D-3080. Test results are presented on Figures C-6 through C-8. 4. Consolidation Consolidation tests were.performed on representative, relatively undisturbed samples of the underlying soils to determine compressibility characteristics in accordance with ASTM D2435. Test results are presented on Figures C-9 and C-10. 5. `R' Value Testin¢ 'R' Value testing was completed in substantial compliance with Caltrans Test Method 301. The test result is presented on Figure C-1 1. 6. Expansion Index and Corrosivity Testing Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with UBC 18-2 and a sample was tested in the laboratory Corrosivity Testing in compliance with Caltrans Test Method 417, 422,&643. Test results are presented below. Expansion Index Sample Location Soil Descriptiot` Expansion Index; .Expansive Potential B-2 @ 0-3 feet Brown Silty SAND 13 Very Low Corrosivity Testine Semple Location y� pH Soluble Sulfates Soluble Chlorides Mm Resistivity B-2 @ 0-3 feet 8.0 126 920 600 APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM , The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating 3 borings with a 6-inch hollow stem auger, to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet below existing grade. The approximate location of the borings are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 2, attached. The field exploration was performed tinder the supervision of our Geologist who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Subsurface conditions are summarized on the Logs of Borings. The soils encountered were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (see Key to Logs, Figure B-0). The borings were located in the field by pacing and measuring, working from appropriate locations on a map. The soils were classified based on field observations and laboratory tests. The borings were backfilled with cuttings,compacted and patched. Existing Storage Lot 1N i B-2 -�- B-3 ICI U I I B-1 Nicolas Road Project No. 6625-A02 Boring Location Plan Figure 2 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS CLEAN Well graded gravels. Gravel-eand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS GRAVELS O GW Fmea. J CC C MORE THAN (LESS THAN GP Poorly graded gravel$ or gravel-sand mixture&, little or w o HALF OF 5% FINES) .'.'S no lines. y < a COARSE Silty gravel&,.gravel-sand-silt mixtures. non-plastic 76 FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM ones. W LLO Z N LARGER THAN WITH FINES Clayey gravel&, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic Z a a m NO. 4 SIEVE GC fines. µ > SANDS CLEAN Gass SW Well graded sends, gravelly &and&, little or no floes. Z W H MORE THAN (LESS SAN THAN a N = ¢ HALF OF 5% FINES) , ' SP Poorly graded Sande or gravelly sands, little or no fines. lr µ COARSE Q w FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands. Band-silt mixtures, non-plastic tines. UGH SMALLER THAN WITH FINES f NO. 4 SIEVE SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. w Inorganic silts and very line sands, rock flour, silly or J CC 0ML clayey fine sands or clayey sills with slight plasticity. o o w 0SILTS AND CLAYS � Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticlty, gravel ly g) I J uj LIQUID LIMIT IS CL CIO a. sandy clays, lean clays. 'Q a 2 w LESS THAN 50% W s 01 rn OL Organic silts and organic silly Clays of low plasticity. Z m o Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy Q = N MH or silly soils, elastic Slits. CCC w ¢ z SILTS AND CLAYS plastic".LIMIT IS CH Inorganic Clays of high Dlaellc , tat clays. Z 2 < = GREATER THAN 50% / OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic LL F i sills. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peal and other highly organic soils. GRAIN SIZES SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS SILTS AND CLAYS FINE MEDIUM COARSE F FINE COARSE 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3' 12- U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS GROUND WATER LEVEL OR GROUND WATER SEEPAGE. mLOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A STANDARD SPLIT TUBE SAMPLER, 2-INCH O.D.. 1-3/8-INCH 1_D. DRIVEN WITH A 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30-INCHES. LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN.USING A MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER. 3-1/8-INCH d.D., WITH 2-1/2-INCH I.D. LINER RINGS, DRIVEN USING THE WEIGHT OF KELLY BAR (LARGE DIAMETER BORINGS) OR USING A 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30-INCHES (SMALL DIAMETER BORING). ® LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A 3-INCH O.D..T HIN WALLED TUBE SAMPLER (SHELBY TUBE).HYDRAULICALLY PUSHED. LOCATION OF BULK SAMPLE TAKEN FROM AUGER CUTTINGS. KEY TO LOGS - UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) DATE: FIGURE: B.-0 Project No. 6625—A02 August 2006 DATE OBSERVED: 07/19/06 METHOD OF DRILLING:_6"Hollow Stem Auger Page 1 of 2 LOGGED BY:(ice GROUND ELEVATION:&LOCATION: SEE BORING WCATION PLAN X > ti m W W U oa w U °- aJ Z W v LL Z Ow w v BORING NO. B-1 a o, �O 2 c0.' Z55 w Z > — o O y Co U m DESCRIPTION 0 Bulk @ 0 to V-Plowed Ground, Brown Silty SAND(SM) Max Density @ 1'-Silty SAND,Slightly Moist(SM)*Native Direct Shear 3 6 S-1 40 7.7 @ T-Olive Brown Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT, Atterberg Moist, Herd (CL-ML) LL-29 PI= 12 39.5% <#200 10 S-2 16 6.8 @ 10'-Gray to Yellowish Brown Clean SAND, 3.3%<#200 Moist, Medium Dense (SP) 16 S-3 13 8.9 @ 15'-Brown SAND to Silty SAND,Very Moist, 34.4% <#200 Medium Dense (SP-SM) 20 S-4 20 3.1 @ 20'-Yellowish Brown Medium SAND, Moist, 3.7% <#200 Medium Dense (SP) 25 S-5 22 4.6 @ 25'-Grayish Brown Fine to Medium Silty SAND, 16.2% <#200 Moist, Medium Dense (SP-SM) 30 S-6 32 6.8 @ 30'-Yellowish Brown Fine SAND, Moist, Dense 12.2%<#200 (SP) 35 S-7 15T 23.4 @ 35-Olive Brown CLAY, Moist to Very Moist, Atterberg Medium Dense (CL) LL=25 PI =B Project No.6625-A02 LOG OF BORING Figure B-1a DATE OBSERVED: 07/19/06 METHOD OF DRILLING:_6"Hollow Stem Auger Page 2 of 2 LOGGED BY:S'd_ GROUND ELEVATION:_A—LOCATION: TION PLAN cc y LL 2 F � W K - 0 a w 0 a a Z W " tWi� w 0 ¢ rn H g BORING NO. B-1 (continued) F- J �fn W le 2 O Q. w Q 0 a U Z 0 Cl) co m DESCRIPTION 40 S-8 42 1 14.8 @ 40'•Gray Clean SAND, Moist, Dense (SP) 4.0%<#200 @ 44'-Groundwater Encountered 46 S-9 34 18.5 @ 45' -Gray Clean SAND,Wet, Dense (SP) 4.9%<#200 50 S-10 48 15.2 @ 50'- Reddish Brown Silly SAND,Wet, Dense 24.4%<#200 (SM) Total Depth of Hole=51.5 feet Groundwater Encountered @ 44.0 feet bgs Hole Backfilled and Tamped Project No.6625-A02 LOG OF BORING Figure B-1 b DATE OBSERVED: 07/19/06 METHOD OF DRILLING:_6"Hollow Stem Auger Page 1 of 1 LOGGED BY:GJ GROUND ELEVATION? NA LOCATION: SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN mW > u- w Lu ma c) F E I— Ja W W oa LU w z O iR Z c7 BORING NO. B-Z W � to oz Q. Lu a 0 0 zo 0 rn m 0 m DESCRIPTION 0 Bulk @ 0 to 1'-Plowed Ground, Brown Silty SAND(SM) Expansion @ 1'-Silty SAND, Slightly Moist(SM)*Native Corosivity R-Value 3 D-1 19 x 6.6 111.1 @ 3'-Brown Silty SAND, Moist, Medium Dense Consolidation (SM) 6 D-2 22 5.4 110.2 @ 5'-Dark Brown Silty SAND, Moist, Medium Direct Shear Dense(SM) 10 D-3 22 3.5 108.3 @ 19-Yellowish Brown Clean SAND, Moist, Consolidation Medium Dense (SP) Grain Size 16 D-4 24 6.2 98.5 @ 15'-Brown Silty SAND to SAND, Moist,Medium Dense (SM-SP) 20 D-5 13 8.6 116.4 @ 20'-Gray Clean SAND. Moist, Medium Dense, Consolidation (SP) 25 D-6 28 11.0 96.9 @ 25'-Brown Very Silty Fine SAND, Moist, Medium Dense (SM) 30 -Total depth of hole=26.0' -No groundwater encountered -Hole backfilled and tamped 35 40 Project No.6625-AO2 LOG OF BORING Figure B-2 DATE OBSERVED: 07/19/06 METHOD OF DRILLING:_6"Hollow Stem Auer Page I of 1 LOGGED BY: Of GROUND ELEVATION:�1 _LOCATION: :SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN ro w w Lu � U 0 _Q :5 Lu O O a a O Z w " w Z O $ c. BORING NO. B-3 0 3 co Y M0 0.5Z a O > v ? p O Co C m DESCRIPTION 0 @ 0 to,l' -Plowed Ground, Brown Silty SAND(SM) @ 1' -Silty SAND,Slightly Moist ISM)*Native 3 D-1 34 Z 7.6 119.9 @ 3'-Brown Silty SAND w/gravel, Moist, Dense. Grain Sae (SM) 60.2 26 11.9 114.8 @ 5' -Brown Silty SAND, Moist, Medium Dense Consolidation (SM) 10 D-3 28Z 5.2 105.1 @ 10'-Brown Silty SAND. Moist, Dense (SM) Direct Shear 15 Dr3 30 Z 4.4 102.0 @ 15'-Yellowish Brown Fine to Medium SAND, Grain Sae Moist, Medium Dense(SP) [25 D5 22 2.5 98.5 @ 20'-Yellowish Brown Clean SAND, Moist, Medium Dense (SP) Total depth of hole=21.9 No groundwater encountered Hole backfilled and tamped 30 35 40 Project No.6625-A02 LOG OF BORING Figure B-3 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES ]. C'lassifiratinn Soils were classified visually,generally according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classification tests were also completed on representative samples in accordance with ASTM D422 for Grain Size, ASTM D4318 for Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index and No. 200 wash The test result is shown on Figures C-I through C-3 and on the Boring Logs. 2. Maximum Density One maximum density test was performed on a representative bag sample of the near surface soils in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The test result is shown on Figure C-4. 3. Direct Chem Direct Shear Tests were performed on undisturbed samples of site soils in accordance with ASTM D-3080. Test results are presented on Figures C-5 through C-7. 4. C'nncnlidatinn Consolidation tests were performed on representative, relatively undisturbed samples of the underlying soils to determine compressibility characteristics in accordance with ASTM D2435. Test results are presented on Figures C-8 and C-10. 5. 'R' Value.Testing 'R' Value testing was completed in substantial compliance with Caltrans Test Method 301. The test result is presented on Figure C-11. 6. Expansion index and Carmcivity Testing Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with UBC 18-2 and a sample was tested in the laboratory Corrosivity Testing in compliance with Caltrans Test Method 417, 422, &643. Test results are presented below. Expansion Index Sample L�ocahon x ,' Sorl Descnptlon ; t , Expansi6nlndex �xpansrve Pgtentral. B-2 @ 0-3 feet Brown Silty SAND 8 Very Low Cormgively Testing 5am-06 Eyocabon, pH' ' '$oluble Sulfates Soluble Chlorides y 1vCm Resrstr Ity y (PP..,Y III B-2 @ 0-3 feet 7.8 102 1,185 600 DBl Retail Ventures, LLC Grain Size Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Particle Size Analysis #4 #200 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 80.0 - 3 50.0 s a 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 IL s1ze(mm) Soil Classification= Yellowish Brown Clean SAND (SP) MTGL, INC. Figure C-1 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC Grain Size Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Particle Size Analysis #q #200 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 g Goo 50.0 g 40.0 30.0 1 lip 20.0 1o.o 0.0 0 o s o S o Size lmm) ..... .. O—B-3@3fed . _ �. Soil Classification= Brown Silty SAND (SM) MTGL, INC. Figure C-2 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC Grain Size Projcct No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 Particle Size Analysis as #zoo 1ao.o 90.0 e0.0 70.0 — 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 o.o e o e o s 8 0 � o a Size(MM) — —O-13-3 15 feel Soil Classification= Yellowish Broom Fine to Medium SAND (SP) MTGL, INC. Figure C-3 DBI Retail Ventures,,LLC. Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 1 145 140 135 130 its 120 , _ .• its ---- — i II0.0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Moisture Content-%of Dry Weight Maximum Density Test Results Boring 1 @ 0-3 feet Brown Silty Clay, Test Mcthod ASTM DI557A, 0% Retaincd.on 94 Maximum Density = 134:5 pef Optimum Moisture=7.0 % MTGL,Inc. Figure C-4 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC Direct Shear Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Test Data Log.No. 06-1501 Direct Shear Stress/Strain a000.0 3500.0 3000.0 2500.0 g 2000.0 N 1500.0 1000.0 500.0 0.0 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 Strain on) Direct Shear Test Results a000 13-1 @ 0-3 feet 3500 Remolded 90% 3000 — Saturated 1 2500 --- Peak ¢= 36.5 ° 2000 c= 805 psf 1500 c y 1000 500 0 Normal Stress" (pap MTGL, Inc. Figure C-5 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC Direct Shear Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Test Data . Log.No. 06-1501 Direct Shear Stress/Strain 4000.0 I 3500.0 3000.0 2500.0 S 2000.0 � La 1500.0 1000.0 500.0 0.0 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 S6aln(In) Direct Shear Test Results 4000 B-2 Q 5 feet 3500 Undisturbed Saturated 3000 Peak 2500 = 36 ° N 2000 c= 630 psf 1500 L n 1000 I 500 0 Normal Stress(pat) MTGI., Inc. Figure C-6 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC Direct Shear Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Test Data Log.No. 06-1501 Direct Shear StresslStraln i 45D0.0 I 4000.0 3500.D 3000.0 gg� 2500.0 y 2000.0 1500.0 1 D00.0 500.0 0.0 1-ri —— 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 ' Strain(in) - Direct Shear Test Results 4000 I B-3 @ 10 feet 3500 ._ Undisturbed 300o Saturated g Peak 2500 = 41.5 ° y 2000 - c= 680 psf 1500 — W 1D00 500 LL 0 g gg Normal Stress(pall A MTGL, Inc. Figure C-7 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC Project No.6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 0 -1 e 0 0 -3 -4 -50.1 1 10 Load(tst) Consolidation Test Results Water Added at 1 tsf,collapse of approximately 0.20 percent Boring B-1 n 3 feet MTGL, Inc. Figure C-8 DBI Retail Ventures, LLC Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 t 0 v -1 4 w -2 -3 _40.1 I 10 Load(tst) Consolidation Test Results Water Added at 1 tsf, collapse of approximately 0.25 percent Boring B-2 @ 10 feet MTGL, Inc. Figure C-9 DBI Retail Ventures,LLC Project No. 6625-A02 Chaparral Courtyard Log No. 06-1501 0 -1 -z 0 8 -3 -4 _50.1 1 10 Load(tst) Consolidation Test Results Water Added at 1 tsf,collapse of approximately 0.75 percent Boring B-3 @ 5 feet MTGL, Inc. Figure C-10 Project Name: Chaparral/Nicolas Office Park-Temecula Tested By : R.V. Project No. : 6625-A02 Date Tested: 7131/2006 Client: DBI Group-Retain Ventures, LLC Input By: P.S. Sampled By: B.H. Checked By: P.S. Date Sampled: 712812006 Depth (ft.) : 0'-3' Sample Location: B-2 Lab No.: 611 Visual Sample Description: Dark Brown Clayey Sand wl Gravel Sample No.: 2 Test Methods: ASTM D2844 SPECIMEN I.D. A B C Moisture Content 13.1% 12.2% 11.3% Compaction Pressure(psi) 150 175 180 Specimen Height Qnchec) 2.52 2.50 2.64 Dry Density(pd) 118.6 116.5 122.6 Horiz.Pres.@ 1000lbs(psi) 35.0 27.0 21,0 Horiz.Pres.a 2000lbs(psq 123.0 105.0 92.0 Displacement 4.63 4.71 4.45 Expansion Pressure (ps0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Exudation Pressure(psi) 224 347 420 R Value 13 22 32 100 90 80 — 70 60 > 50 rc ' 40 30 I -a i 20 10 0 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Exudation Pressure(psi) R Value at 300 PSI- 19 CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP 1100 l000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 E e � a e -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 ia++aaaaaaaa+aaaaaat+'a+ a a ` U B C S E I S ` a + + Version 1.03 a a aaaa++aaaaaa+++aaa++aaa "COMPUTATION OF 1997 - - UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: 6625-A02 DATE: '08-15-2006 JOB NAME: Chaparral / Nicolas Office Park North FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.5393 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.1444 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SO NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 21.8 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-TEMECULA DISTANCE: 4 .7 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.0 Nv: 1.2 Ca: 0.45 Cv: 0.79 Ts: 0.700 To: 0.140 a�.aaa.aaaaaaa:aaa+aaaa r a + E Q F A U L T a a + Version 3.00 + + a a i+aaaa+aaaa+++++aaa+aa DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 6625-A02 DATE: 08-15-2006 JOB NAME: Chaparral / Nicolas Office. Park North _ CALCULATION NAME: Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA=FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.5393 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.1444 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi ATTENUATION RELATION: 5) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. SOIL (310) UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma) : M Number of Sigmas: 0.0 DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2drp SCOND: 0 Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell. SSR: Campbell SHR: COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km) : 0.0 -END OF SEARCH- 57 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. THE ELSINORE-TEMECULA FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT 2.9 MILES (4 .7 km) AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4154 g --------------- EQFAULT SUMMARY --------------- ----------------------------- DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS , ----------------------------- Page 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------- I (ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT I APPROXIMATE I---- ----------- ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK JEST. SITE FAULT NAME I mi (Ian) IEARTHQUAKEI SITE (INTENSITY I I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC. ELSINORE-.TEMECULA 1 2.9( 4.7) 1 6.8 1 0.415 - I X ELSINORE-JULIAN 1 13.5( 21.8) 1 7.1 1 0.202 1 VIII ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 1 13.7 ( 22.1) 1 6.8 1 0.171 1 VIII SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 1 19.1( 30.7) 1 6.9 1 0..141 1 VIII SAN JACINTO-ANZA 1 19.1( 30.7) 1 7.2 1 0.165 1 VIII NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 1 29.8( 47.9) 1 6.9 1 0.101 1 VII CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 1 31.5( 50.7) 1 6.7 1 0.106 1 VII ROSE CANYON 1 32.6( 52.4) 1 6.9 1 0.094 1 VII SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 1 '33.4 ( 53.8) 1 6.7 1 0.OB3. I VII WHITTIER 1 35.7( 57.5) 1. 6.8 1 0.083 1 VII SAN ANDREAS - Southern 1 36.1 ( 58.1) 1 7.4 1 0.113 1 VII SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 1 36.1( 58.1) 1 7.3 1 0.107 1 VII SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 1 37. 1( 59.7) 1 6.8 1 0.081 1 VII EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 40.8( 65.6) 1 6.5 1 0.064 1 VI PINTO MOUNTAIN I 43.3( 69.7) 1 7.0 1 0.079 1 VII NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I 45.2 ( 72.7) 1 6.9 1 0.073 1 VII CORONADO BANK I 46.6( 75.0) 1 7.4 1 0.093 1 VII SAN ANDREAS - Coachella I 47..0( 75.7) 1 7.1 1 0.079 1 VII CUCAMONGA I 47.6( 76.G).1 7.0 1 0.090 1 VII NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 48.2( 77.6) 1 7.0 1 0.089 1 VII ELYSIAN PARK THRUST I 4B.9( 78.7) 1 6.7 1 0.075 1 VII PALOS VERDES 1 49. 1 ( 79.0) 1 7.1 1 0.076 1 VII SAN JOSE I 50.6( 81.4) 1 6.5 1 0.066 1 VI COMPTON THRUST I 51.0( 82.0) 1 6.8 1 0.077 1 VII NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 51.0( 82.1) 1 6.7 1 0.073 1 VII . CLEGHORN I 51.2 ( 82.4) 1 6.5 1 0.054 1 VI BURNT MTN. I 52.4 ( 84.3) 1 6.4 1 0.050 1 VI SIERRA MADRE I 52.9( 85.2) 1 . 7•0 1 0.083 1 VII EUREKA PEAK I 55.2( 88.8) 1 6.4 1 0.048 1 VI SAN ANDREAS - Mojave I 57.7( 92.9) 1 7.1 _ 1 0.067 1 VI SAN-ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture I 57.7 ( 92.9) 1. 7.8 1 0.097 1 VII SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 1 59.5( 95.8) 1 6.6 1 0.050 1 _ VI HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 1 59.6( 95.9) ) 7.1 1 0.065 1 VI ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 60.0( 96.6) 1 6.8 1 0.056 VI LANDERS I 60. 1( 96.7) 1 7.3 1 0.072 1 VII CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 63.1( 101.5) 1 6.5 1 0.056 1 VI LENWOOD-LUCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGSI 63-.4 ( 102.1) 1 7.3 1 0.069 1 VI RAYMOND 1 65.9( 106.0) 1 6.5 1 0.054 1 VI JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 1 67.2( 108.1) 1 6.7 1 0.048. 1 VI EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 1 69.3( 111.6) 1 6.9 1 0.052 1 VI ----------------------------- DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ----------------------------- Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I IESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT I APPROXIMATE I------------------------------- ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK JEST. SITE FAULT NAME I mi (km) JEARTHQUAKEI SITE ( INTENSITY I I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g JMOD.MERC. VERDUGO 1 71.1( 114 .4) 1 6.7 1 0.056 1. VI HOLLYWOOD I 74.3( 119.5) 1 6.4 1 0.046 1 VI CALICO - HIDALGO I 76.0( 122.3) 1 7:.1 1 0.054 I VI PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK 1 77.0( 123. 9) 1 7.1 1 - 0.054 1 VI SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 1 79..9( 128.. 6)-.1 6.6 1 0.040 1 V SANTA MONICA 1 81.9( 131.8) 1 6.6 1 0.048 1 VI ELMORE RANCH 1 82.2 ( 132.3) 1 6.6 1 0.-039 I V SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 1 83.6( 134.5) 1 6. 6 I 0.039 1 V SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) 1 83.6( 134.5) 1 6_7 1 0.050 1 VI BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 1 83.8( 134.9) 1 6.4 1 _0.035 1 V SAN GABRIEL 1 84.7( 136.3) 1 7.0 1 6.047 1 VI MALIBU COAST 1 86.9( '139.8) 1 6.7 1 0.048 1 VI NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge) 1 88.1( 141.8) 1 6.9 1 0.053 1 VI LAGUNA SALADA 1 91.9( 147.9) 1 7.0 1 0.044 1 VI GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE 1 93.0( 149.7) 1 6.9 1 0.042 1 VI ANACAPA-DOME 1 94 .4 ( 152.0) 1 7.3 1 0.062 1 VI SANTA SUSANA 1 94.8 ( 152. 6) 1 6.6 1 0.043 1 VI PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE BOORE ET AL. (1997) SOIL (310)1 F 25 yrs50 yrs u --] 100 75 vrs 100 Vrs 90 ., 80 0 T 70 c� 60 0 50 a. c_i 40 c 30 a� a� X 20 W . 10 0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) Aug. 18. 2006 8:580 MTGL INC No. 6785 '. 7 ESTI t TEp nYNAKC SETTLEMENT DUE TO LIQUEFACTION Project Name-Chaparral/Nicolas Office Park Project No.—6625-A02 Nearest Fault—Elsinore-Temecula Fault M-6.8 Upper Bound A=0.75g Measured Groundwater Depth During Drilling=44 feet Assumed Groundwater Depth for Liquefaction Analysis a 20 Feet Estimation based on Tokimatsu and Seed(1987). Boring_B-1 — Analysis indicates soil layer between 20 and 28, 33 and 38 feet are liquefiable Soil H(in) N N160 rd Induced Delta Delta Dept Stress H H Ft. Ratio % in 20-23 36 20 20.1 0.950 0.479 1.2 0.43 23-28 60 22 27.3 0.941 0.522 0.7 0.42 33-38 60 15 24.2 0.928 0.573 1.1 0.66 Estimated Total Settlement= 1.51 inches Aug. 18. 2006 8:58AM MTGL INC No. 6785 P. 8 6625A02.OUT .aradaaaaaaaaaarara+a+++dr++# * L I Q U E F Y 2 ° a + * version 1.50 ° # R4tr##aabiaaaaaddd+a#trtr4+}SS#4 EMPIRICAL PREDICTION OF EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL JOB NUMBER: 6625-AO2 DATE: 08-17-2006 108 NAME: chaparral / Nicolas office Park North SOIL-FROFILE NAME: 6625A02.LDW BORING GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 20.00 ft CALCULATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 20.00 ft DESIGN EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE: 6.80 MW SITE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION: 0.750 g BOREHOLE DIAMETER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.15 SAMPLER SIZE CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00 N60 HAMMER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00 MAGNITUDE SCALING FACTOR METHOD: Idriss (1997, in press) Magnitude Scaling Factor: 1.285 rd-CORRECTION METHOD: NCEER (1997) FIELD SPT N-VALUES ARE CORRECTED. .FOR THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVE RODS. Rod Stick-Up Above Ground: 3.0 ft CN NORMALIZATION FACTOR: 1.044 tSf MINIMUM CN VALUE: 0.6 Page 1 Aug. 18. 2006 8:58AM MTGL INC No. 6785 P. 9 6625AO2.ouT ------------------- ----------------------------- NCEER [19971 Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUM14ARY PAGE 1 ------------------- ----------------------------- File Name: 6625A02.OUT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CALC. TOTALI EFF. IFIELD FC CORR. LIQUE. I INDUC. LIQUE. SOIL DEPTH STRESSISTRESSI N DELTAI C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY NO. l (ft) I (tsf) I (tsf) ICe/ft)INI-601 N (8/ft) RATIOI d I RATIO FACTOR ----- ----- ----- 1 0.25I 0.0161 0.016 20 11.781 ' I + f * I ° I •• 1 0.75 0.047I 0.047 20 11.78 • I • I • I f I 4 i+ 1 1.25 0.078 0.078 20 11.78 ° ° 1 • • I` + r+ 1 1.75 0.109I 0.109 20 11.78 * + I + * I * ** 1 2.25 0.141 0.141 20 11.78 • * I ` _ ` ' •' 1 2.75 0.172I 0.172 20 11.78 1 3.25 0.203 0.203 20 11.78 1 3.75 0.234 0.234 20 11.78 ° • f f +• 2 4.25 0.2661 0.2661 40 17.40 ' • • * *' 2 4.75 0.2971 0.297I 40 17.40 • * * * I * +* 2 5.25 0.3281 0.3281 40 17.40I • • ' • *` 2 5.75I 0.3591 0.3S9 40 17.40 • * I • 2 6.25 0.391I 0.391 40 17.40 + • • 1 « • of 2 6.75 0.422 0.422 40 17.40I • • ' I ` • •+ 2 7.251 0.4531 0.453 40 17.40 • • 1 I ' * " 2 7.75 0.484 0.484 40 17.40 3 8.25 0.516 0.516 16 0.02 3 I 8.75 O.S47 0.547 16 0.02 3 I 9.2S 0.578 0.578 16 1 0.02 * • " •' 3 9.75 0.609 0.609 16 10.02 * " • " * *` 3 10.25 0.641 0.641 16 0.02 • • • ' ' *` 3 10.75 0.6721 0.672I 16 10.02 • • * * * *` 3 11.25 0.703 0.703 16 0.02 • * * * ' *` 3 11.75 0.734 0.734 16 0.02 * * ` • I '* 3 12.2S 0.766 0.766 16 0.02 * * • * I " •* 3 12.7S 0.797 0.797 16 0.02 * * I • I • I • '* 4 13.25 0.828 0.828 13 7.50 ` I ' * * +' •* 4 13.75 0.859 0.859 13 7.50 • 1 + + + I • •# 4 14.25 0.891 0.891 13 7.50 4 114.75 0.922 0.922 13 7.50 * I * * * I * I 4 11S.25 0.953 0.953 13 7.50 * 4 15.75 0.9841 0.984 13 7.50 * 4 16.25 1.016 1.016 13 7.50 • • * I * I ** 4 16.751 1.047 1.047 13 7.50 4 17.25 1.078 1.078 13 7.50 * + • I • * ** 4 1 17.75 1.1091 1.109 13 7..501 5 1825 1 20 0.03 5 18.75 1I 149 20 003I ° 1 ' 1 1 1 *' 5 19.251 1.166 .1 20 0.031 a I ° I I • •` 5 19.75I 1.182 1.166 20 10.03 I ` I ° I ` * *' 5 20.25 1.198 1.190 20 0.03 0.9371 20.1 0.214 0.953 0.468 0.59 5 20.75 1.214 1.191 20 0.03 0.937 20.1 0.214 0.952 0.473I 0.58 5 1 21.2SI 1.231 1.1921 20 1 0.03I0.937I 20.1 0.214 0.950 0.4791 0.58 Page 2 Aug. 18. 2006 8:58AM MTGL INC No. 6785 P. 10 662SA02.DUT NCEER [19971 method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUf+QdARY PAGE 2 ------------------- --------------------------- File Name: 6625A02.OUT --------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- I CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC I CORK. LIQUE. IINDUC. ILIQUE. SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA( C (N1)60 RESIST � STRESS SAFETY NO. I Cft) I (tsf) (t5f)I(B/ft) I N1.601 N I (B/ft)I RATIO( d I RATIO(FACTOR ----+------+------+------+------+-----+-----+------+------+-----+------+------ 5 21.7SI 1.247� 1.192I 20 0:0310.117 20.1 0.21410.949I 0.4841 0.57 S 22.25 1.263 1.193 20 003 0.937 20.1 0.214 0.948 0.469 0.56 5 22.75 1.279 1.194 20 0.03 0.937 20.1 0.214I0.9471 0.495 0.56 6 23.25 1.296 1.194 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 1 0.32210.946 0.500 0.83 6 23.751 1.312 1.195 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 1 0.32210.945I 0.506 0.82 6 24.251 1.328I 1.196I 22 4.02 0.9341 27.3 1 0.322I0.943 0.511 0.81 6 24.751 1.3441 1.196 22 1 4.02 0.9341 27.3 0.322 0942 0.516 0.80 6 25.25 1.3611 1.1971 22 14.02 0.934I 27.3 0.32210:941I 0.5221 0.79 6 25.75I 1.3771 1.1971 22 1 4.02 0.934 27.3 0.322I0.940 0.5271 0.79 6 26.25 1.3931 1.1981 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 0.322 0.9391 0.5321 0.78 6 26.75 1.4091 1.199 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 0.322 0.9381 0.537 0.77 6 27.251 1.4261 1.199 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 0.32210.936I 0.543 0.76 6 27.75I 1.442 1.200 22 4.02 0.934 27.3 0.32210.935 O.S48 0.76 7 28.25 1.458 1.201 32 2.64 0.932 36.9 Infin 0.934 0.553 NonLiq 7 28.7S1 1.474 1.201 32 2.64 0.9321 36.9 Iinfin I0.933 0.558 NonLiq 7 29.25 1.491 1.202 32 2.64 0.932 36.9 Infin 0.932 0.563 NonLiq 7 29.75 1.507 1.203 32 2.64 0.9321 36.9 (Infin 0.931 0.568 NonLiq 7 30.25 1.523 1.203 32 2.64 0.9321 36.9 Iinfin 0.928 0.S73 NonLiq 7 30.75 1.539 1.204 32 2.64 0.9321 36.9 Iinfin 0.924 0.5761NonLiq 7 31.25 1.556 1.205 32 2.6410.9321 36.9 Infin 0.920 0.5791NonLiq 7 131.75 1.572 1.205 32 1 2.64 0.932 36.9 Iinfin I0.9161 0.582INonLiq 7 32.25 1.588 1.206 32 1 2.6410.9321 36.9 Infin 0.912 0.535 NonLiq 7 32.75 1.604 1.207 32 1 2.64 0.932 36.9 Infin 0.907 0.588 NonLiq 8 33.25 1.621 1.207I 15 8.14 0.929I 24.2 0.26510.903 O.S91 0.58 8 33.75 1.637 1.208 15 8.14 0.929 24.2. 0.265 0.899 0.594 0.57 8 34.251 1.653I 1.209I 15 8.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.895 0.597 0.57 8 34.75I 1.669 1.209 15 8.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.891 0.600 0.57 8 35.25 1.686 1.210 15 8.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.887 0.603 0.57 8 135.75I 1.702 1.210 15 8.1410.929 24.2 0.265 0.883 0.605 0.56 B 36.25 1.718 1.211 1S 9.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.879 0.608 0.56 8 1 36.751 1.734 1.212 1S 18.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.875 0.610 0.56 8 1 37.251 1.751 1.212 15 18.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.871 0.613 0.56 8 1 37.75I 1.767 1.213I 1S 18.14 0.929 24.2 0.265 0.867 0.615I 0.55 9 38.25 1.783 1.214 42 10.06 0.927 44.8, infin 0.863 0.618 NonLiq 9 38.7S 1.799 1.2141 42 10.06 0.927 44.8 Infin 0.859I 0.6201NonLiq 9 39.25 1.816 1.215 42 0.06 0.927 44.8 Infin 10.855 0.6231NonLl'q 9 39.75 1.832 1.216 42 0.06 0.927 44.8 Infin 10.8511 0.625INonLiq 9 40.25 1.848 1.216 420.06 0.9271 44.8 Infin 0.846 0.627 NonLiq 9 40.75 1.864 1.217 42 0.06 0.927I 44.8 infin 10.842 0.629 NonLiq 9 41.25 1.881 1.218 42 .. 0.06 0.927 44.8 Iinfin 0.838 0.631 NonLiq 9' 41.75 1.897 1.218 42 0.0610.927 44;8 Infin . 0.834 0.6331NonLiq 9 1 42.25 1.913 1.219 42 0.06 09271 44.8 Iinfin 0.830 0.63S NonLiq 9 1 42.75 1.929 1.220 42 100610:927 44.8 infin 0.826 0.637 NonLiq 10 1 43.251 1.946 1.220 34 1 0:0510.924I 36.2 Iinfin 0.822 0.639 NonLiq Page 3 Aug. 18. 2006 8: 50AM MTGL INC No. 6785 P. i I 6625A02.OUT ------------------- -----------------`----------- NCEER [19971 method. LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 3 ------------------- ------------------ __-- File Name: 6625A02.OUT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CALC. I TOTAL EFF. FIELD I FC CORR. LIQUE. 1 IINDUC. ILIQUE. SOIL DEPTHISTRESSISTRESS N DELTA C ((N1)60IRESISTI r STRESSISAFETY No. I (ft) I (tsf) I (tSf)I(B/ft) INI-60I N � (B/ft) I RATI01 d I RATI0IFACTOR ---- ----- 10 1 43.75 1.9621 *1.221 34 0:05 0.924 36.2 (Infin I0.8181 0.6411NonLiq 10 144.25 1.979 1:222 34 0.05 0.924 36.2 infin 0.814 0.643 NonLiq 10 1 44.75 1.994 1.222 34 0.05 0.924 36.2 (infin 0.810 0.644 NonLiq 10 1 45.25 2.011 1.223 34 0.05 0.924 36.2 Infin 0.806 0.646 NonLiq 10 45.75 2.027 1.223 34 0.05 0.924 36.2 Infin 0.802 0.6471NbnLiq 10 46.25 2.043 1.224 34 10.05 0.924 36.2 Infin 0.798 0.6491NonLiq 10 46.75 2.OS9 1.2251 34 10.05 0.924 36.2 infin 0.794I 0.65OINonLiq 10 47.25 2.076 1.225 34 0:05 0.924 36.2 Infin 0.789 0.652 NonLiq 10. I 47.75 2.092 1.226I 34 10.OS 0:924 36.2 infin 0.78S1 0.653INonLiq 11 148.25 2.108 1.2271 48 1 9.65 0.9221 60.5 Inf in. 10.7811 0.655INonLiq 11 48.7S 2.124 1.227 48 9.65 0.922I 60.5 (infin I0.7771 0.656 NonLiq 11 49.25 2.141 1.228 48 9.65 0.922 60.5 infin 0.773 0.6571NonLiq 11 49.75 2.157 1.229 48 9.65 0.922 60.5 Infin 0.769 0.658 NonLiq 11 50.25 2.173 1.229 48 9.65 0.922 60.5 Infin 0.765 0.659 NonLiq 11 50.75 2.189 1.230 48 9.65 0.922 60.S infin 0.761 0.660 NonLiq 11 51.25 2.206 1.231 48 9.6510,922 60.5 Infin 0.757 0.661 NonLiq 11 S1.75 2.222 1.231 48 9.65 0.922 60.5 Infin 0.753 0.662 NonLiq 11 52.25 2.238 1.232 48 9.65 0.922 60.5 Infin 0.749 0.663 NonLiq 11 152.75 2.254 1.2331 48 19.6SI0.922 60.5 Infin 0.745 0.664 NonLiq Page 4 APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECLFICATIONS 1. rFVFRAr These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled,placement of fill,installation of subdrains,and excavations. The recommendations contained in the attached geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained herein in the case of conflict Evaluations performed by the Consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations,which could supersede these specifications,or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. Z FARTHWC)RKnRCFRVA7TOMANnT-FMWr Prior to the start of grading,a qualified Geotechnical Consultant(Geotechnical Engineer and Engineering Geologist)shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work'was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances,these specifications and the approved grading plans. Maximum dry.density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Test Method(ASTM)D1557-91 or later revision. 3. PRFPARA-"OM nF ARFA4Tn RF FR 1 lzD Clearing and rru bbing: All brush,vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of. Processing- The existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground,which is not satisfactory,shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. nvcra ravafinn- Soft,dry,spongy,highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground,extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition,shall be overexcavated down to firm ground,approved by the Consultant. M kture r ditinuing: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered,dried-back,blended;and mixed as required to have a relatively uniform moisture content near the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557. Rarnm a[ rtinn. Overexcavated and processed soils,which have been mixed,and moisture conditioned uniformly shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of ASI'M D1557. Rem Where soils are placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical),the ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be excavated in firm material for a minimum width of 4 feet 4. FIT 1 MATERTAI General Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances,and shall be approved by the Consultant nvorti7n- Oversized material defined as rock,or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches,shall not be buried or placed in fill,unless the location, material,and disposal methods are specifically approved by the Consultant Oversize disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversize&material does not occur,and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground construction,unless specifically approved by the Consultant. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading,the import material shall meet the general requirements. 5. FrII mACFMFMr AlrnrntmarrrnM Fill I ifis Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The Consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. Fiu Mnich.rm• Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed,and'wet fill layers shall be aerated by scarification or shall be blended with drier materiaL Moisture conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at uniform moisture content at or near optimum_ romnarhon of Eill; After each layer has been evenly spread,moisture conditioned,and mixed,it shall be uniformly compacted to not less that 90 percent of maximum dry density in accordance with ASPM D1557. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability,to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. F'Il Clnpes- Compacting on slopes shall be accomplished,in addition to normal compacting procedures,by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet as the fill is placed,or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading,the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent in accordance with ASl'M D1557. Cmi artion Tmcfing: Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the consultant The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's discretion. In general,these tests will betake at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise,and/or 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. In addition,on slope faces,at least one test shall be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. 6, SiTR1lRAT1Q IArgI Arr ATIOM Subdrain systems,if required,shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the Consultant, The Consultant,however,may recommend and,upon approva4 direct changes in subdrain line,grade or materials. All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of fill over the subdrain. 7. FXCAVATInM Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. if directed by the Consultant,further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas,and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill over cut slopes are to be graded,unless otherwise approved,the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope.