The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 29974 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation . L I, 'I I I I I I I I I I n I I I n I 1- J PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ,PROPOSED WINCHESTER MEADOWS BUSINESS PARK 117~ ACRES, NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: BEDFORD PROPERTIES 28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE, SUITE 200 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 Prepared by: GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS, INC 27431 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 JULY 12, 1991 WORK ORDER NO. 019107.00 & 019108.05 \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS section Paqe ,1. INTRODUCTION....... 1.1 Proposed Development. 1.2 Authorization. . 1.3 Scope of Services 2 2 2 2 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 2 l3 ; 0 SITE DESCRIPTION . 3 4;0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Laboratory Testing Program. 4 4 '5 ; 0 GEOLOGY. . . . . . . . 5 5.1 Geologic setting. . . . . 5 5.2 Geologic units. . . . . . 5 5.2.1 Recent Alluvium (Map Symbol - Qal) 5 5.2.2Pauba Formation (Map Symbol - QP. 5 5.3 Structural Geology. 6 5.4 Drainage. . . 7 5.5 Ground Water. 7 6;0 SEISMICITY. . . . 6.1 Regional Seismicity 6.2 Ground Rupture. . . 6.3 Ground Surface Cracking 6.4 Liquefaction. . . . . . 6.5 Potential for Earthquake Induced Flooding and Seiches . . . 8 8 9 9 9 10 7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS. 10 8.0 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH LINEAMENT STUDY. 10 9.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 13 13 14 14 GEOTECHNICAL 9.1 General 9.2 Grading 9.2.1 9.2.2 and Earthwork . . . . . . . . . Site Clearing . . . . . . . . Preparation of Existing Soils/ Alluvium Removal. . . . Artificial. Fill Removals. . . Fill Placement. . . . . . . . Subdrainage . . . . . . . . . and Settlement Consideration. Shrinkage and Subsidence of Natural Ground. . . . . . . . 15 Foundations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 and Subgrade Drainage . . . . . . . .. 16 9.3 9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5 Earthwork 9.3.1 14 15 15 15 15 9.4 9.3.2 Surface $- I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m I I 'Section 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.10 9.11 9.12 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Paqe Foundation and Slab Recommendations 9.5.1 General.... 9.5.2 Foundations...... 9.5.3 Concrete Slabs. . . . . 9.5.4 Lateral Load Resistance 9.5.5 Flatwork........ 9.5.6 Building and Footing Setbacks Slope Stability . . . . . . . . . Soil Sulfate Content Implications utility Trench Backfill . . Retaining Walls . . . . . . . . . Pavement Design . . . . . . Grading and Foundation Plan Review. Construction Monitoring . 16 16 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 19 19 20 20 20 110.0 LIMITATIONS OF, INVESTIGATION. 21 ?> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc. July 12, 1991 Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties 28765 SinglE' Oak Drive, suite 200 Temecula, California 92590 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed winchester Meadows Business Park 117~ Acres, Northeast of the Intersection of Margarita Road and Winchester Road Temecula, California Work Order No. 019107.00 & 019108.05 Dear Mr. Katz: In accordance with your request, we have completed a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation including a geologic lineament study of the subject site. The purpose of our investigation was to identify geologic constraints which could impact site development and to provide recommendations for preliminary design. For this investigation, we were provided with the referenced geotechnical reports of the site (see Appendix A), and a 100-scale Mass Grading Plan of the project, dated June 21, 1991, prepared by RANPAC Engineering, Corp. This plan was utilized as a base map for the Geotechnical Map of the site shown on Plates 1 & 2, enclosed with this report. Provided the recommendations presented implemented during site development, the feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. in this report are proposed project is This opportunity to be of service on your project is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, Deepak Moorjani General Manager IDM: j ek Distribution: 15 addressees 27431 Enterprise Circle West . Temecula . CA 92590 . TEL (714) 676.8337 . FAX (714 ) 676.8527 -\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed development of 117~ acres located northeast of the intersection on Margarita and Winchester Roads, Temecula, California. The geographic relationships of the site are shown on the attached Location Map, Figure 1. l.l Proposed Development It is our, understanding that the proposed development will consist of the construction of one and two story commercial buildings with associated parking and drainage areas. 1.2 Authorization This work was outlined in our Proposal Nos. RPS-91- 101.REV and RPS-91-119, dated May 15 and May 17, 1991, respectively, and were authorized by Mr. Gary Katz of Bedford Properties. 1.3 Scope of Services The purpose of our investigation was to perform field, laboratory and office services to determine the geotechnical engineering and geologic parameters of the site, and to develop conclusions and recommendations relative to site grading, design, and construction of the proposed project. 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the information obtained during our investigation of the site. Our work was limited to the scope requested and is specifically addressed to the proposed project, as described herein. In summary, our findings are as follows: 1. The proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report are implemented during planning, design and construction. ~ I I I I I I I I I B I I I I n u I I I / ,~::: ,- _ 2.- """-";~' , ,%~.-:">:'~' :':.,i ,,";,. ,/ .~?, '\~ - - - .. I L . - - . .~ './/" "~'-~"'} "'.'1" ......,..,[0<,,' J9"'/oO, "-c-:J"-..f2-.,,'1.:C:" ~ c:-'/;::'-....--' ~ -" ....----l\\~:(J :.;"'6..--';~~':";(.' Olll :'/~~ '--'~-/\')_-~''.Jlf1:~e I.~VT\''''':~=:::>'''''' ~~=--- --~_-~----::.- --:"~_'-:)?ig;)i~~/!.~::A:."",,'~r~__r:'., ,bJ,/C-:[;J~~VJ ~/~"'~I /' :~!! ::::-:::,,--:.-, ~-::::--"--:""--_::"'"i1--:'" \).q:;....!-.~:.:~~.~:.~<..-::::::--~:.~-,...-.~.-:- '~~ -~, ...'"" ---" -.." - -'\ _ ____ '(1"~~', ~..,\.,.. ....\?"""'....// ,) ,"'/ __....~"l_.-,:..( '.' -'. ,,' - . ,.~~,' ~,......'I ..,-Y'" " . -~ f -- ~" _.' -;;::"-"=",:" -">n~"'......,:..,..'.,-,""",, ''-'""-'" ~13' ~'O~-aM ~ ~ .:~,---_-,,:,=.,,:=::-\: -(, -(\II'<..r",:..:;r.,}",,':j':".\I,~-'~- 7-r. / J--/', ~~ M'- ::,jl~o"----7"s:,_:;;::,;:=I;~:-"\~-r::~'8:::::r:;;.~',(~.("'""-, 7..-71~.::t;:'-:~Z7li\'f'. jz~:;';'J )):.,) .S~~ ~ ':::'..... I:~' ;;~)1rioJ! ::-,;~M~i;:'~, ~t(??'""'" !/... -Iff l) ~ I V "'" :~~{. ~--- v~ ____<-g; ,-' ~ .,-:"-.!"'-~~_~{I'~H S . ~~VL/6;:--'~~-'" - - .-- - - -~/~b~ "-.""........ ) !-:'~""_~ .E-.=_.~.r, ot 1?,':\"~.':(..s_/.-_ - -:/ -. r;"&fB- -=---,/((.9" ..c;.. -- '/', A:i\t~""~-':'~-}?':";:~- c~>;~P7'! :c::-- ,('\"~~,J;..:,:j~ /' --.,/ . . -- .! --~--==-~- ,-" :'//l/ r --;/)"'" ,~'I;. :: ~ .---~--, V'I:_/ ".<,,~ 'I~ -"~/r-~ -' -----;- ~ ;~'-'::"_____/l,,~_ (-1..,;-": '-::"-,~ -===. ~ ---.~,'(,. "-' ~- . - . ,;"3~ - - 113.. "'~J~_ '- ......-c'C-T200.:/lt i,J1 -_ ~; ~ ~~ .-;::...-.:>-:.. -..::" ""-' - J7. '.~,-".'!' "':f-' '~~." ~~, \, -~ ~-- U;-J)\-~ --' ...., "" :---. -' / ..g. F ,- -." ~.._ \<:... ,,,<-..::7' r--.....; _ -./ .~ _ -T/"'::;:::-~,.f.;..~' r08r7 .-9 ~ r-:.0- ~ r? -;, I 0.' @,~.".. ~"""L-i---';;-"" ~.J --' .... -. ---.,0 emec,:'~\~ ~ )-_ ,-~r--.._/ -:rp' :~ 7 .:::-~~,~ r~__' _~ '7- + __ H tC" -. ..'V/"~ ,-- ';:--::::::' /~ 1,( - - //,- [...-~ -, r::: . o >>prn\gsv, >~' ~-'~""1' "".. - f,-~;ory, '- jY'?- .....'... - P / - " ,:Co'--,i .Yo.' '<>.,/ o~ -- .~_ _ ~ ",/ ~~-:'/--../_, _-.::::~ ;'". ".,,"", // . '(,""'..' I. ,0 r--.. ',- -~ ..,.""~" ~ '-'_ ---.~............ y "' ~ 24 17 ~~ _ /,..5.'-o.;;f';: :.~)ct,,>.:,; '.. > o--".~. -~:.:-~ -+:::- .,,=F' , If /~>>~~ -' '"'"\, r ,,--;!:i """,,\\Ji, -'1/ r1l'" f ::..,,~' r:::::...... --. ~/ '''''. I '(~ -~ ~ ~' \ I/Jj/r' ,'L,,,,,) /;::---\ .-::::::-~, .:s I r:: 1\ \.. "',,.-' --~../~? "cpA>;'.- /"'"0?-i1'~:r""'f~ l---- -;~ ,'.;.. y \--- "'IJ~I I r-::;-~'~- ~~:-j"-"/_I!/~F./<':"--:'::' ----?- w.::_.....j/~/ ".,..y.;.,\,".,>/ '_ "'/(,:, 1~-'1"-2~))-'~ '~_, /If--: :..'-.~,~ f/( ~;.~~, ~ . ,r"';" ~Ool'" ': U'( 1/, /, ......, ~-'-""-, /(1' 1168 ,.., /.' U'-/~Jt 0. I ""OIl ,? ,.... J ~ ,/ / ,(',~~ r--' r-FJ-o~J!.. ,I 1\ \~ ':v ", / (/~/ ,~ , (._ -.. '" ...(.c ~,/ I ";)J~' '_ ,,1/ 1/1 \\\\) -). ....,) ,> I'''. :::....c--'~, r' -r-"-- , 1'_ ~ . ( ~ I ;:Z __~ ::;-110~'';;/ -'01[\' ,-:: /'~(,., )/ ~I "\" /. "..-.0 ,-!'.........~v1...,>.r--'->--! {"-;-/' ~I 10y'" "'7-' ___ . al ".J -----...... --= /' I \ ~ \"" 'I I . /. ~ / I \ <--........... I / I" .""'-'--__ ( .... ..... - . __ ~, -. I- --..' / -'./ ,,.... , -'"; ,,.-' ,-~ / /? ,/":=" \ v.. / ;Y.' _____ ~ .,/ d....'Q--.\?/-:--, ~~' _,I .r ,.-'/ :...... )(,~ ---/ ---J ~// ........... (),,y1{d.~' \.....'" -1~~7' /~~ /f'V ) 'f~=< (\'i,";;;",,,i""~'''' 'yll'_"~ '~>~'1<:r;I, ~; I '11~~~rc- ;:. ~__\ 'II~ ~ ~ (" - ~:">2~'1 '" -. '~, , \ ,\ ___ /Q/;:---, ~~, I ~; I '; -...--....... .:::.~---( ~'-. ' I ~ '~'~l 0--,1 F ~ ;)~' ":"- ~ ) \ ~ /1 "- I ; , ___lg/~ ,"" - ,/ 1'). ~,,-,~(,o~~~~!f)~''./J~ z.~,~ ~/ ~',~~ ~ I ~'-Y~: --, ? ~~::.:- 5".1/ ,CS~v-; ~ \,. -' ,) '-.....---=> "../1'// ......-'-....... o~.... ,_____ ........------::'-'/ i_' I (' -=--..1 ;, _-----~ c- "....,..-/ t,;:::./~. '.--J.f"' --=::-. 0-'" !,-~:':"-.J'::.-::" I,-./'\. U\....-' ". I ~v ---- ~~:'::/ :)1' "........ ----.."----...C--/f( ~/I;:;: ""__ 1_", p-r ~ i~ . ,----- ~,_____ '~,~~F/__ 'I . ' ,~ ,,/?( '-'i;--; \G' (' ~ ,,"- ........~"oo ~ L . ''b:r-~,-- :,-~\ I If ',/- , '--= <'flr!'-'- 'v ''--'''=; /' ~I ; ~'--::.'-' lr.....~' -;., ,......-;:::---' :;":i.+,\:T~ller",",,-~ r: -... ,0::;;;--:,/ "-._. C:~q))(f~ V~, I -;;;-Z ~ ~t:;jYl~.a[~~/)I'~'''''''''--' '~~/~ /:---, ':::':/'\/\':<' '087, l lr"~ ~.__ ~/Z:4@\ "" VyJ_-"/11 ,'::: -,/..-'~I/ ___ --- I~ .---::- - j / ~./ '~::::-.. 1~~\"I / '''C/@il,.,,,&..-., > 0~. ~? ~.:.~' ~_.") ( ;/ V'co,. I C'>----,~ 1# /! _ ~ '"'~, ...-- -~ _< ..... -,' ~. . \,s ~ ~ / _-.~- o ~-..) '-- --- ' -~69\ \ '-~' ..t'//"-~_~"""i"'O~ C-:::- -=;iT/-~I' __ .~-~ -,,-~~-- .'G ,<r;- :::i'/ ,,<:;(~...... /p T -, :-. ..-<0 c:..,~- -, '~,Y, ,- - ,~~V, _0 / <;" I----. u, -i'<'-- , .~ 7~ .;..,r__-' -c;;-q/':.. '-;.:-:i<t- ~~~-7---~-' / " / k. es~.~o _~.,--J?'::.~ ---l '0~ '"\/: ~'\ - ~J ~ -"' - ~ =-~..<_:. " ~ /, . -;; -..',~ -,( G: .--0-'-:::' :~. ,,_)~/ __' _' '- _ ..-,,-~~ , . V ''-? )r==-:../)V';-h___ .;::~ -' ...' -...... ~...~....... ~ --...--,::" .;, ~'(" -- ~~ ~{' '<[':I '-."'-'/'/'/ J... -[[E.~i~:""::: ~:: .-~;:, --.2-~ II.----.-~ /...- .~ C t r;;J:'/ I .." ". r!:'-,-,,;-'---'SI '........ .~, _/.,c, , . ~:-.""''- c:: ., ...,.,,, ,- 7~- ~ Q .~ . ' . /2~'''' = - ,.~,'~~ . '-'>~;."..- I~,. "z:, o.r-'?'",-,_" u /(1 f79\Q~::"--:~'_":"'~--""':.-.......o:..o;~-:_-<~:~:~-:.~3::';,...-.\:" ,\, 'c' I ~/I/- ~(/G, ,- ./ ~ ,w--~ _"- ~;..."' y .y.,:--~.:J--"""'~;..,---~..7,-' ~. ~;->~ 0~ -=:-- .:'"'('/;:-' _../_/1 /--- --~, 1 _-::::;.--..:/-...~~~? -.-::A.:~.'),j-~~;c~'~';.0' fo,,1< r- -~ '... 0) --- _ ~ ' I < l.. ""..- ~'l .fl - J'..... ' -"'r 1-/(" "o'.' ~=-~ ~ ."'-=....... '.-'.~-~ ~' "'- '~l,1)>~:~ J'Z~~~~ ,,~~l';-'~ N,II -'~::;~~:;) 0~~~0:\~~7) it~~,~~'0:;~~ ". ./ r "-,---- -. ~ y?, .. ~(i'.".' .-..r./I' I -?) ._.k.,,,".1 - ." '/.- '....~.....:'.".';i,,~....'.,.,. ,'.i-;:'O':'''''''''I",,':::'''_':::-'~,~':o,/:,'.'' \:- --- ~- :-->/'S. '-J~:: .< I. d .,.:' .U ~oo/ - ","' b~" ;; ---::;.0"1--::::::;.::...-....... ~-- /= 'x _ .,' ' ,- r-"--I1~~::'-' -IV 0 ; ~~I~--."7',,__);/" .:..;:---.______. I ,_--:'~.-'--= --~~ ~ ~ .') \'. 0'), ... d1 ???':=:--- '~/ :;.....-~~-//~ i :,-,,-- ~<:"":'_:" # . '{yl.. ~J c;- '(cIOO--:-, r!(.(1~',;/ vi;- \ r-' _""____~:~- :/ ::;~~ _ _~:~.<>'~,,~?',({/" :,-:./- ; /=...-:_-.,0-- - -"...-~ I. .,~;:_ - .--_~ '..--.--').<-q ..~ .-- '-"~/.-...... - -:-.- ................~......- ~ 'Rese,...olr"- - .' /..., . 0 G',,",-?~ .>' ~/~~ (,~ ;~\\)~~~~~~48~~S ": ~/,";-'~\.~ ',\\'''S/ . -/~'--'" - -~,' .., ~ ~ C--,~ " , / . ? \,' .. . Rm~o" , /::;;;~ j- "c :;;~;ij~~.~,tf;~:'=~. ". f ..' '\v. .a / =-~-!/ ~ %'S-_~~7C-,-__ ---'"o~ :::'~~~-::~-S=Z-:"-::7 REFERENCE: USGSi MURRIETA CAllE, 1953, PR 1979 I o . SCALE ?COO 4ii feet w.o. ,NO: 019107.00 LOCATION MAP - BEDFORD DATE: JULY, 1991 FIGURE: 1 GEOTECI-NCAL & ENVIROt-.t.1ENTAL ENGN:ERs, INC. <b I I I n n I n I n u I I U D I U I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties cruly 12, 1991 Page 3 2. Faulting or Secondary seismic hazards such as, lateral spreading or seismically-induced settlement or landslides are unlikely within the site bounds. 3. The liquefaction potential in the majority of the site is unlikely. However, in the western portion of the site, liquefaction may be considered as likely due to the occurrence of ground water within 40 feet of the ground' surface and the existence of loose to medium dense alluvium within the ground water zone. 4. Due to the loose nature of the near surface soils, alluvial removals will be necessary. The depths of the existing alluvial removals in the majority of the site is anticipated to be on the order of 3 to 5 feet below the existing grade or below the proposed bottom of footing elevations, whichever is greater. The actual depths of removal should be established in the field by inspection and density testing during grading. 5. The estimated shrinkage of the near surface on-site alluvial materials is 12 to 15 percent. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The site consists of approximately ll7 acres located northeast of the intersection of Margarita and Winchester Roads, Temecula, California. The project is bounded by Santa Gertrudis Creek to the north, Winchester Road to the east and south, 'and Margarita Road to the west. Topographically. the site generally consists of a relatively flat parcel of land which slopes to the southwest at less than 1 percent. The site varies in elevation from 1053~ feet in the western,portion of the site, to approximately 1085 feet in the northeast portion of the project. Currently, the Santa Gertrudis Creek traverses the northern portion of the site. Man-made developments in the site include several subsurface and surface irrigation lines throughout the site, several dirt access roads which traverse the project, and a ground water production well in the southwest portion of the site. The majority of the site has previously been utilized as open agricu~tural land. t I I I I I I I I I I U I n n I u I I I Mr. Gary Kat:z Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 4 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field investigation of the site included the drilling of 6 exploratory borings to a maximum depth of 49.5 feet, the excavation of l2 test-pits to depths of 5 to 8 feet, and the excavation of approximately 511 lineal feet of exploratory trench. The borings were drilled with an 8-inch diameter hollow-stem, auger, powered by a truck-mounted rotary drilling rig. The exploratory test-pits and trenches were excavated with a Case Model 580 backhoe. A previous subs~rface investigation of the site was conducted by Highland Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1989. Additionally, geotechnical investigations of the north and west adjacent properties were performed by Converse Consultant Inland Empire, 1990, and RANPAC Soils, Inc., 1991, respectively. These and other referenced reports were reviewed and considered in our evaluation of the subsurface soil, geologic, and ground water conditions of the site. The approximate locations of the exploratory borings and test- pits performed for the preparation of this report, and the previous exploratory borings performed in the site by Highland Geotechnical Consultants, 1989, are shown on the Geotechnical Maps of the project, Plates 1 & 2, included in Appendix F. Our exploratory trench locations are shown on Plate 3. The logs of exploratory borings and test-pits are presented in Appendix B. The exploratory trench logs are shown on Plate 4. 4.1 Laboratory Testinq Proqram samples of the materials obtained during our field investigation were taken to the laboratory for testing. The testing program consisted of particle-size analyses, sand equivalent determinations, direct shear testing, maximum dry density/optimum moisture content determinations, expansion index tests and sulfate tests. The laboratory testing was performed on bulk samples of materials anticipated to be in the areas of building and/or pavement support. The test results and descriptions of testing procedures are included in Appendix C, Laboratory Test Results. ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 5 5.0 GEOLOGY 5.1 Geoloqic settinq The site is located within the peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of Southern California. The Peninsular Ranges, which extend southward from the Los Angeles Basin through Baja California, are characterized by Mesozoic age intrusive rock masses flanked by volcanic, metasedimentary, and sedimentary rock. The Peninsular Ranges have a general northwest-trending structural ,grain that includes such geologic features as faults, bedding and foliation trends, and geologic contacts. Lateral displacement and uplift of the region has occurred on a series of major, northwest-trending faults which are thought to be related to the regional tectonic framework. Some of these fault zones have remained active to the present time which include the Elsinore Fault Zone (Wildomar Fault zone) located approximately 1.0 mile southwest of the site. Locally, the site is underlain by 20 to 40 feet of loose to medium dense alluvial deposits which are underlain by dense to very dense older alluvium of the pauba Formation. 5.2 Geoloqic Units 5.2.l Recent Alluvium (Map Symbol - Oall Recent alluvium in the site generally consists of fluvial and stream deposited silts, sandy silts, and sands. These materials were found to be loose to medium dense in consistency, and very low to low in expansion potential. 5..2.2 Pauba Formation (Map Symbol - Opl Underlying the recent alluvial material at depths of 20 to 40 feet below the ground surface, is the Pleistocene age pauba Formations. This geologic unit was found to consist of medium dense to dense silts, silty sands, and sands. a.. I I I I I I I I n u I I I I I I I . m Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 199,1 Page 6 5.3 structural Geoloqv The dominant structural feature in the area is the northwest-striking Elsinore Fault Zone. The Elsinore Fault Zone fits the dominant northwest-southeast structural and regional tectonic pattern displayed by other ,fault systems, including the San Andreas and San Jacinto Fault Zones. The Elsinore Fault Zone extends for more than 200 kID from Corona on the north to the international boundary with Mexico and beyond on the south (Biehler and other, 1964). Individual faults in the zone are generally less than 1-2 kID long, although several have continuous mapped lengths in excess of 25 kID (Weber, 1963). The Elsinore Fault Zone is a prominent and youthful structural boundary that separates the perris Block (English, 1926) along its eastern side from the Santa Ana Mountains along its western side. The term Elsinore Trough is commonly used to describe the fault controlled graben valley between Corona and upper Wolf Valley. Geologic mapping by Kennedy (l977), indicates that the eastern side of the Elsinore Trough (Wi1domar Fault Zone) is composed principally of right-stepping, strike-slip faults, that have a west-dipping normal component, whereas the western site (Willard Fault Zone) is composed of a series of east-dipping, steeply inclined faults. Locally, the Elsinore Fault Zone is divided into three principal northwest trending faults; the Wildomar Fault Zone located approximately l.O mile southwest, the Willard Fault Zone located 1.7 miles southwest. and the Murrieta Hot Springs Fault Zone located l.5 miles to the north. Most individual faults of the Willard Fault Zone can be traced for only a kilometer or two and many for less than a few hundred meters. The faults have a complex discontinuous relationship to one another and only as a group form a through-going zone (Kennedy, 1977). The Willard Fault Zone is not classified as active by either the State or County and no known evidence of recency has been encountered. The Murrieta Hot Springs Fault Zone is composed of several faults that have an average strike of N75W and a \f> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford properties July 12, 1991 Page 7 dip of 80S (Kennedy, 1977). The Murrieta Hot springs Fault Zone has been mapped by Kennedy and others, 1977, as being nearly continuous from the southeast portion of Murrieta to Murrieta Hot Springs. The Murrieta Hot Springs Fault is not currently classified as an active faul t by state or local agencies. However, recent evidence of Holocene age activity has been recognized by state and local agencies, therefore, it is suspected that, the Murrieta Hot Springs Fault may be classified as active at a future date. The Wildomar Fault Zone is a northwest-striking, west dipping, high-angle normal fault. The Wildomar Fault, despite greater micro-seismicity (Kennedy, 1977), is assumed to have a recurrence interval of 300-450 years (Rockwell, 1986). This fault zone is presently considered active and is included within the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone. The regional geology of the site (Kennedy, 1977) is shown on Figure 2. The site is currently not located within the State Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone or in the County Subsidence Zone. 5.4 Drainaqe Drainage of the site is generally accomplished by downward surface percolation and sheetflow in a southwest direction. The southwest flowing Santa Gertrudis Creek traverses the north portion of the site. 5.5 Ground Water Based on encountered ground water depths during our subsurface investigation of the site on June 26, 1991, and well data from 9 water wells in and adjacent to the site (Department of Water Resources, Bulletin No. 91-20), the historic regional high ground water levels vary from 35~ feet below the ground surface, in the western portion of the site, to 50~ feet in the eastern portion of the project. Localized perched thickness from 2 to 4 excess of 22 feet ground water zones, varying in feet, were encountered at depths in below the ground surface during \\ I :-"r" \' '-/IU'~,,~ '''''''.~\:Y./~'' ,v \.~."~.,, ~J """' ' " g ,..JL.\'M~4;~-'_,V D - ~~~... ~~~'-OIr"J~~ I ,.",./(''\. 'l:-~ (\~:"X;<-':> t'1,,?';,{ >l"_ \-, '~~ ,-..:::::.Vt;A ..-, \ --:::-;~ - ">7-=- ",#'" I I. ,1'"\" <...,-,\ .....~- I \", .". L.y'~-7-- , \ _ \ ~j!t'i" \' \~....,_ \ ' _,.... ' ,Ii,,- f -\ ' ?o",,~ ;..---.. ~ .I~. 0 ,n:.'" I"k I.>' ,-, -0_," " , ,/,-__.;;," -- ((~-/ ,",,' '-:..~ ' ~-"> ,'I" . I :-"''::,-./;~\:::'i,\n'^'" // ,~~,'r._,//-l'l ~~ ,][".- ,-I ~,,"'\\r'Z-/ - I f~ )\\'~"'~' '.- ~V"-V,' '!(\:, '~- x.) " f/;''S. ," I -''''':1-' r?" . ,,~;I '\'~'~ ' I """-' I' A,~.I'. '''^'''''~~~ - v ~" I) l. I '-- 1~r., \ , '" ,~ '--'1\_1 '~~~'-::'.::'r\':"''-Q~' ~~-;"<( v'<(.....--:,~" .If\..' l'J-JiL/u:~~:" ......-- -'1,...:r7?~' '.-: ~/"../ A-' -0'" tj 0 ,,-~ "\ ,\,;::; \'J jfl.:; I/\;/"QQ " - ',0_ "'" ,~I)..o-, I.~ ~/J-,,~ci\ ~'f:..~ _,0..,. <::i ,1' j' 'I'~)' '-': Z\ 'c- \~~/ '\','/7 "r ,. ,!f.- - \c.< - ~ ,vC"-/,'Ij {~(, - ~ <::I~ "'\1 'I <Y ,~'" N"-j, '",,~u~ ) v r, r= {;!. <'-~ 'J~~ ..-:- /'1 _ '/' ,q.... ...../ ~,,...,,. ~ -~,~ - y- ~ ~---- ~'-..:::-/~- '_' . _~.J.:.;:::._~",:~:~~-\-,-v lij \'..-~' ---'", '{'i' '-"-...-- ~~........./.....-... 7' ,)c I,~II /" III _0 ..----.~_\ II -- *"/=:--- lie; , n"':'J::jI .\--' ~ ----- '\,l; " , -'\1 ll.:________.'----. ./,. ~ f / - H -/, --~ ",r.<' " ,," ;.:c."-" , --=-- , "-' , o. 'I ,;;;\' ,0,,1 ,to'7~,' (" I"'J ! " ,/ ,". ',-- ?~;;~. \ :te;1 4,,;,'" -- =.L I 'I \JI' '\... 7 '-,- 'l/0 ~ ". ,/ -::' =- ~~"'d~::;/\-\4'::~?;.;;V1"'~-J'~,2i\\ c !;f(;,~,';:;;' ',~:.."~i:~!/;' I) l/ic."',J....::-' <b~'--T~(;-;~:J;.;;~ ~'):-;; J - --- I (. \\ t:: I fr:6 '-"'G" .; '\ \\;,~ ,'L..Jj I / ..,,- ~ I.r....~"'~: F-:=-..A ~"//~ ..--",~,--" "I ,....,~ I )~\ 1:.>11) ,:~, "1-"? 1.(' ^-' f / / _~ ' ,,!::'f < "...'....' ~Lrg/:7~,,~.,.;;.Jr;-'/('-"' \ I, 1-\\::; \,~1~ /';':'>\"~)J '\:\ ~ --<:- -", ..'/-';}'=-"?.---_ "'- 0-3<) /~ ';f::.C":-'/.:/0,~ '-/.u-' 0" --- - ,~1 -~ '~,' \ \.---.;t \ riY /~ / /,/,-7~"'" ---- -.......($ . ~'1>"'/4Z.. " ()",' Ol'~ ~ I, ~ ---....... .J ,\\,\,,-::::'./1 \.\\, ,~ 1<;;:; ;;./...-~' ~! ' , ~:;"':t~~~<\,..':\ ) :;0, ' ~l;'-.:iL ~ ,~~~, '? ...~? ~\~0f,r j ;iiQ. \ )~~ :":~1:' ;/{ - . =.' ~<ro_ '~"'..>-"/,~.., " ;IF1, -. ,~ '-_ ,- , ':d~"m"-"'- l' '~' r.'~}:./'~'''''''-'.-/....-,..... r'. \<,::....(0-...~... -"j \',~I / r7~-' .fv_",~,',,,; r' ,.:-:~, ~~~' L :..:....~-QV~ ::;:'';~:\~,;;, ...., ~,: )r<.-,,- , d.n\,\ i' .....~~.. / ~ - -.--' :',\ !_"::')/~:>=::' _Qj, ~'./ ,\): J\'.)--~. ',' '. ...~~~-~" ~~..-,.;;-/ ~(O'Z2,,\ 1\ I \ --- \,/,)'~ ,- , ~ , ' .....-..., - ~ - \"..... "': '-' "'- "...') --"'--- '\ ~,' L. ,,_____ ==--1...--- "",>J\ \~ ..) "V;-.... .' l_...... '" 1//-;"1.(/ ~,t.......\:/'.:;...L/ "J ....- ---./' \ --" \" ~., -" (j "'. / c3-::. "::r, - ...- (' ~ "", ----, ~ --) ~,---,/ /~I) ~ ~_- ---~_-;'''''~'\'''' -' '-/ . '! "'-:' I,' - I -//....."", .~IT' E' ,,->~,--= .;.-" "v~JII;-' I' -.:'...: /j~ ... "',_,\ Ii -~,__ :(r-"'::,_.~~Ol 0 g ,..J~~( ~~~~t(v .' i~~ '-_'''':' '> -, ' ", ,; '-,oJ / ;.t . pJ- i-MJ.! . ~'-~~"i:u - ' ....:' ~ _ 'I ,.......,:,:..; .-: --- < "".:'\ ~-' '\,1 'II "h'/;:",::t---_ j -" {;:;;";--,'" ,~( - -',;' Q.....~ -....\: \ ~~ "\' '_ --"..~!'I.,^ ____...., J' _...~ // _~', ,- -" "t~r, // ~~I /l ,- \ ,...-- - ,_ \ \\.... _. ^' ~l~~ ,...; ,.."V t1,::"" ---?-. ,-- -.... " _- < -v ,J -I' r'- /;?:'. _ '_,~'" '.......'-------.:1"" -----::-~- v g, ~- 'I - ..,.,,_':-1/./ -~ -0: -,~ ~j' r,r ~/~'- ""', ,\~ '-- --=-':'""...... _'-,~~ __/'~"~---"\.. ,~r.," ~ ,- .<......~-~~l~~:: .~../,:.....~,.~,,~r' l"~;:;~/ ~::-- -. .\':::: "--- ~~'> ."""-~Z<:~ q~ -: "- f' - ,-~c,'< ~:f< ~\::: ~t& -;.:::,<--: -') L ~'..-:: - ....., . ~ ~_ _ /-..... _ _ - ''-It..... ^"'f ,;-./ _ ~~-(~..:.- IL~-:: - ~,r-:....' :....'" ---:::- - fl.J' ~_' ..., \ 0 ,_/1 "...... 1\ ,'"'(.... ....,._. _ )."-:\.'''''-';..('/C?''-'ft! r____.....-.....,. __ q, __ _ _,,,'" ...... _ . '"'_____.J""...: _, L '-;.::- ~- ....... ~~"':", ,..... ~......- ~ 0: _ ___v~_ ,.ro-----~\~~ ~.~ - _::: ___-'.... .-".1.--., ""::,-.1 ...:\. _ "OC'v: :\_ _ ., - _ \\ -....... - \ . -' ' - " ~ --'..- ~ - J ~ -,::': ~- -~~",.~ - ,--~<-\::.(\" ",'7;:""' .....:::) -:: ,~ '\ ~ . -. .::. . \:y.~' r, q'.->.- / ,'~.:. 0 ~~~"'," - .,.~ ~ /1 ~_ 'i'~ '~)' \ ,_ __ ~:--- -. - ;,;,',-. 1/;:./ ,,'.-~', ,,'- ....:,.,;;... _ ,;:).2-:, ~""J. \~'/:_ 'I I~.' ;;,::......" ~ ~,~, I .~ "C: '..- ....-"(;..r, (7'---.",,," /'r'ix{?,~:" /1\_ -,~'/_ _.-.-.-t~ UIIC \ " ..-~'*~~- ...,~___).>~;)'j, "~'l ~/-/,-~,_._~./;-::/~\.\~ ~'(F~M' - -~/ \' -1 L ~{PJ,rl: ti ~~~}"L-:,<::'.':''''. ..1:~i;' '0:/?:;'::~~'=< j<:.., ,f - ....'/I-'\." --.-" 7- '''I " F-. """,'........ ---',.~, (t.._-~"7 '< ';" ....'\ ' ~ I:. I~ _~\\~ j, \ I ,.......; ..,~ \1':_ --':J J i,,ov__.-- ,...--F, .;-.....v' ,'_J\~ ~"""-' \\d' ,"., . .,',~, -" q -.' "- "', ;::.....~ ==---_ - V --' ,\, ,) -..:../ \~(, l"\'; I... ' ,,~'/ j';', :-.....;-.,' ~I ...-;-.... . .,\-~ --,""1../;- ="1 ~ o~,.'. \ ". ~ 'II :C-" \' '~~<-..""\.' ~'. :/' 'p~ . - 0-- , ?- ~~~0~/~;-_._'~----\ \~,/ :--. ~~j \~:,...- ,,\ _.0~' ~~~~l;~':\'~/C-_\:\\_'_~-:- ~>:- ~,: ~.~"~ \'-h'(_)5~""'- -. '::'s:.:::-----'->/ ~---..'_"..,,'~,- t, '.'. J.;." \'.)i.', '-~_-~tr.,~ -,~ '-f:1-- _~" _ -", _",',~ ,/ _ _;/i __...1,<(.. :. \ ....- :--\ ;._,......_ ,~...._,- " r.<L,-' - I "':"" \j ~.- '- I....-.. I~/ ~I (- , . "\\::' \. , h, ..........~' -.-. \ "::..--. ./'~...J1___.""'-' -', - ~" "'::::5 ., ~':""'\ ,~-, .'}" " ' , \ \ V ,.~ / ';' .~~~>;:-)'1 .:'=. .'t, ~,',.;;7<...;.,.\\" o.Q.\~ ~ ......,:" \.Q.,\t'~'.' - \_' :::: ~ 1...,1"I.,'u ,,;~-e-:.'.,~< '~\ _ --. ,)-..... ;~;\ ~\.---(~~~r'_....~:- .~G :::;-\\\ ___ )~" ~ I '\~;-- ~/,,:~.~/:-J!i\.~.'.~ ,'[~ _... \ \ ~.' '/" -'" ") ::::.. -'---,0\\\'"" '->,' . ---"' '-....' --- -- - - ~""'" .- 1'--_ J)--" --.. '\:' V! _ _ ,::: r - \..~'-'...-:. ~ \\,~'::; ~ 1.--:-' -.; V-')~"o#' -, '\ ,'.-'r<" ; :,&".,- "C)~ \"","1_." ,'/<-0':!'-, ,L '-'. ,"(',- \- (/p:--",~. ?,.... ~'I/C' 0~~T-:- --c.i;<:;i'~-\.7~~\\~'+Y::Jl '1' (~... -/\., )\_ ;/~ :;:-'~&~_=-J ... ,,(] C/ U ., 'l.j,'c-O. 1",\ .'1t.''J.\ ., ."", ""''''\ " ~<-j -- -. \ ,:/-0 _ ,\ "":--) _ ,\\<1'6~_ ~,' '__~ \ '\ ,\,>__;..\,.r' ,,..7~/ . \_ :r::'00 1\." ~..:. lI./ f" :~'~~;",r( ,,' ~,\'~ f':'~? i- ---Co I. ~\ '-..... c. (~(\\' I ('I' ,~) l' I_s~ ....< '\---'""~'- VIJ~V . ~--- .L "I . A ;I:~'" "C::--~ v L;i, :-/ -?s..~\-f:...'/ ;!~)l';~" ~:'O"""._,~'~-:: ~r~ '......... ...~l V ;,,'):/\2 ~,i l'"~ , I' , . 1 . ---...1- (/.. -f /" '\' r -1/,' ;~ ~,.~_.t:'\I~~....'-))'~. ---,.'y--.;,~~('(..::~' I"~ ...I-(.#-\ ...l~'~/lg ''--.) '~""'''''I} ...._ "'\' ..., '" _ -r r' ,- I "'I -~.-;;.~-" t/ "" {L.---,,': ~\hl.~r"_ ~:~~>~_=--~;P"~""~",: 2/~ ~--.. -(~ 0_ /".,00' ~.~ ~ '~~-~ . - -, Uh / '.~')I -' '-..\\ ....".. ;",-.,-,'\-- ~/!- ~ LEGEND: ~~~:~::::~~~0~=:=:~'~~~_ ===- "c:,:;o __;~ .v, i=-?Jlt ~~~~~.,~~ ItL.i1earT"""",ap/ly I) . \ - -:,- Q - - - GeOIogk: ContaCt L"'"A',-! n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ;or ---, \.r' I Reference: Kennedy, 1977 o ?f""C() 4= feet SC~L;: I REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP BEDFORD I '11.0, NO: 019107.00 JATO:: JULY,1991 FIGURE: 2 GEOTECl-NCAL & ENVIROt-.MENTAL ENGN:ERS, INC. \~ I I I I I I I I n n I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 8 previous investigations of the site by Highland Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1989. 6.0 SEISMICITY 6.l Reqional Seismicitv The site is located in a region of generally high seismicity, as is all of southern California. During its design life, the site is expected to experience ground motions from earthquakes on regional and/or local causative faults. We have utilized a computer program titled EQFAULT, prepared by Blake (1989), to evaluate potential ground shaking as a result of the maximum anticipated earthquake that may occur along local and/or regional faults. This program provides deterministic site pgrameters in terms of ground shaking for causative events along regional faults within a 100-mile radius about the site. Figure 3 shows the geographic locations of these faults in relation to the site. Figure 4 compares the distance of the causative faults and the peak horizontal acceleration that could be produced at the site during a seismic event. A list of deterministic site parameters for the known seismically active faults within a 100 mile radius of the site is presented in Appendix D. Based on the Deterministic seismic Parameters listed in Appendix D, the Wildomar Fault Zone is considered the causative fault, located approximately 1.0 mile southwest of the site. A maximum probable earthquake of magnitude 6.75 along the wildomar Fault Zone near the site could produce a peak horizontal acceleration on the order of .61g (Idriss,1987). The duration of strong motion is expected to exceed 26 seconds (Bolt, 1973). Peak acceleration is not, however, always representative of the accelerations for which structures are actually designed (Ploessel and Slosson, 1974). Repeatable high ground,acceleration from a 6.75 magnitude earthquake on the Elsinore Fault Zone are estimated to be on the order of . 40g. The design of structures should comply with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions and standard practices of the Structural Engineers Association of California. \7 I I I I I ~ I ( I '\ 0 50 100 / I I I I SCALE (M;[o.) n n ,SAN FRANC[SCO I n I U U ~O "b, I SITE LOCATION (+): '" ~ ------------ Latitude - 33.5030 N I Longitude - 117,1380 W MARGARITA MEADOWSBUSINESS PARK I CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP m wo: 019107:00 Figure 3 I \A., I I I 5: Cf) 0 0 w 0 ex) ..,. :::C 0 <( ~ n ~ CI) I ::) ('-.. ... 0 ~ :r: ~ Cl I- 0 u:: (}:: XX I x~x x 0 I L5 X xx;t< X X W X ~ X e- X X X 0 X E >< X X ::) ><< X ----- W l- I ....J oW 0 Ul CO ~() z W <( z 0 ~ CO ~ ..J 0 U1 I <( (}:: 0 =:J 0... X a 2 z I I ::) I- 0 2 n 0:::: 0 <C x to <( " ,. 0 . o . . . . . " ci n W 2 e- n n 0 0 0 c:i 0 2 (5) c:i W =:J NOll'i~3l388'i l'ilNOZI~OH >llf3d ! I 0 2 ::) I- - l- X <l: I <( --' 2 Cf) 0 0 w 0 :::C - U LL <( 0 ::) 0 Z :r: 0 I- x~:~X'fo'" X 0 I 0 (}:: x x x x x XX <( ~ Ul X X W XXXx E - 0 ----- 0:::: w oW n <( ....J ~u ~ 0.. CO Z <l: 2 0 I- W (f) n 0 (}:: 0 U u X 0 2 0 I ::) ,...: 2 0 ... x 0) <( ~ ... . o . . o _ . , . - . ci 0 n 2 ~ ci 0 0 ~ ci 0 ci (5) NOll'iCl3l:D8'i l'ilNOZIClOH >I\f.3d I I . \~ I I I U U H U I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 199,1 Page 9 other regional faults are not expected to have a greater impact on the site during a seismic event due to either their further distance to the site or improbability to produce large magnitude events. 6.2 Ground Rupture Breaking of the ground due to active faulting is unlikely at this site due to the absence of know active faulting within the site bounds. Our investigation found no evidence of active or potentially active faulting within the site bpunds. 6.3 Ground Surface Crackinq Based on review of investigation of the subsidence cracking unlikely due to the significant geOlogic the referenced reports and our site, the potential for ground due to tectonic mechanisms is absence of known faUlting and/or contact zones in the project. 6.4 Liauefaction soil liquefaction is the loss of soil strength due to increased pore water pressures caused by a significant seismic event. It occurs primarily in loose to medium dense cohesionless soils occurring near and within the ground water zone. It consists of the re-arrangement of the soil particles into a denser condition resulting, in this case, in localized areas of settlement, sand boils, and flow failures. Based on our review of the referenced reports and the soils encountered during our subsurface exploration of the site on June 26, 1991, the liquefaction potential in the majority of the site is unlikely. However, in the western portion of the site, liquefaction may be considered as likely due to the occurrence of ground water within 40 feet of the ground surface and the ex.istence of loose to medium dense alluvium within the ground, water zone. It is our opinion, that liquefaction mitigation should be implemented in the western portion of the,site. This liquefaction prone area is outlined on the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1, included in Appendix. F. It is also our opinion that within areas of the observed perched ground water zones, liquefaction is \fo I I I I n I I n u I I I U U U I I I m Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 10 likely to occur, however, due to the relatively thin zones of saturated soils and the depths of the observed perched groundwater, in excess of 20 feet, it is unlikely that surface deformation due to liquefaction will occur. Provided the site is graded as recommended in section 9.0 of this report, it is our opinion that adverse affects due to liquefaction in the western portion of the site would be reduced to acceptable limits. 6.5 Potential for Earthquake Induced Floodinq and Seiches The current area designated as the laO-year floodplain for the Temecula Creek exceeds the inundation area that would result during instantaneous failure of Skinner or Vail Reservoirs. Therefore, it is our opinion that the project site has a low potential for earthquake-induced flooding or seiches. 7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is generally underlain by 20 to 40 feet of loose to medium dense alluvial deposits which are underlain by dense to very dense older alluvium of the Pauba Formation. These materials should exhibit very low to low expansion potential and moderate strength characteristics when used as engineered fill materials as recommended in this report. Ground Mater in the site varies in depth from 35~ feet below the existing ground surface in the western portion of the site, to 50~ feet below the existing ground surface in the eastern portion of the project. 8.0 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH LINEAMENT STUDy The purpose of this portion of the investigation was to identify potential fault related features within or near the property based on lineaments observed from the referenced aerial photographs and from the referenced reports. Kennedy, 1977, mapped two linear topographic features which may suggest surficial faulting projecting toward the site. These two mapped linear features and two additional lineaments identified by our aerial photograph analysis are shown on Plate 3 and, are summarized as follows: \1- I I I I I I I I n I I I U U I I I I m Mr. Gary Kat:z Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 11 Lineament Map SYmbol L-1 L-2 Remarks This is a weak, discontinuous lineament consisting of possible ridge offsets and in- line drainages. This lineament has been mapped by Kennedy, 1977, as a linear topographic surficial fault feature, trending' approximately N69W and 3000 feet in length. This lineament is observed in the Pleistocene age Pauba Formation sediments northwest of the ,project site. We did not observe it on aerial photos to project southeast across the Recent age alluvium on the site. Trench FT-1 was excavated across the trace of L-1. We observed a calcareous fracture zone, approximately three feet wide at station 1+41. This fracture zone strikes approximately N20W, dipping nearly vertical, and extends from the plow zone to a depth of six feet. continuous Pauba strata underlie the fracture zone and are not displaced by it. These fractures may have been caused by ancient earthquake shaking, subsequently infiltrated by surface water precipitating CaC03. A zone of locally increased moisture was observed at station 0+25. We deepened the trench to ten feet and found continuous, unbroken pauba beds below the moisture zone. Based on our trenching and site observations it is our opinion that L-1 is not fault related. Its orientation is within the range of regional bedding and is probably controlled by the underlying bedrock structure. This lineament consists of very weak, discontinuous drainage alignments. This lineament has been mapped by Kennedy, 1977, as a linear topographic surficial fault feature, trending approximately N25W and 6000 feet in length. This lineament is observed in the Pauba Formation northwest of the site. We did not observe it projecting to the southeast across the alluvium on the site. Trench FT-3 was excavated across the trace of L-2. We observed two calcareous lined fractures at \% I I U I I I I n I I U I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page l2 L-3 stations 1+21 and 1+31, both striking N5E, dipping vertical. Both fractures extend from the base of the Bt Soil Horizon to a depth of 2.5 feet, where they die out in Pauba Formation and are underlain by continuous, unbroken Pauba beds. The strike of these fractures does not correspond to the trend of L-2. We observed a contact between Colluvium and the underlying Bt Soil Horizon at station 1+05, which corresponds closely to the alignment of L-2 as mapped by Kennedy, 1977. Based on trenching and site observations, we conclude that L-2 is not fault related. Its trend is within the range of regional bedding and is probably controlled by the underlying bedrock structure. This lineament consists of a weak, discontinuous alignment of topographic saddles and contrasting vegetation, trending approximately N41W and 600 feet in length. This lineament is observed in the pauba Formation northwest of the site. We did not observe it projecting to the southeast across the site. Trench FT-2 was excavated across the trend of L-3. We observed a calcareous lined fracture at station 1+60. The strike of this fracture is N32W, dipping vertical. This fracture has a similar trend and is in close proximity to L-3, however we did not observe fault displacement of the Pauba beds and overlying Bt Soil Horizon along this fracture. The Bt Soil Horizon occurs on the underlying Pauba Formation. This soil dates a relict geomorphic surface at least 35,000 years old based upon the soil reddening, blocky to prismatic structure, moderately thick and continuous clay films on pad faces and regional correlation. The contact between the Bt Soil Horizon and the underlying Pauba Formation is continuous and unbroken. Based on trenching and site observations we conclude that L-3 is not fault related, however, it may correspond to an ancient, short, discontinuous, fracture. We do not consider it to be hazardous to human occupancy \ C\,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 199,1 Page 13 structures. The exploratory trench logs are shown on Plate 3, Appendix F. L-4 This lineament consists of a weak, discontinuous alignment of topographic saddles and contrasting vegetation, trending approximately N32W and 500 feet in length. This lineament is observed in the pauba Formation northwest of the site. We did not observe it projecting to the southeast across the site. Trench FT-2 was excavated across the trend of L-4. We observed two calcareous iined fractures at stations 0+18 and 0+21. Their strikes are N70W, dipping 66N, and N10E, dipping vertical. We did not observe fault displacement of the Pauba Formation along these fractures nor did we observe displacement of the overlying Bt soil Horizon. Based on trenching and site observations, we conclude that L-4 is not fault related, however, it may correspond to a short, discontinuous fracture zone. We do not consider it to be hazardous to human occupancy structures. Our exploratory trench logs are presented as Plate 4. 9.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9.1 General Based on the results of our investigation, the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations contained in this report are implemented during planning, design and construction. Recommendations for site grading and design of building foundations, pavements, and slabs are presented in the following sections of this report. Suggested specifications for site grading are included in Appendix E. A summary of our findings is contained in the "Executive Summary", section 2.0. 1.fJ I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I m I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 14 9.2 Gradinq and Earthwork 9..2 .1 9.2.2 site Clearinq Prior to grading, the site should be cleared of existing vegetation and any miscellaneous debris. Holes resulting from the removal of trees, brush, buried obstructions, or other undesirable materials, which would extend below finished site grades, should be backfilled with properly compacted fill soil approved by the project Geotechnical Consultant. The cleared and stripped materials should not be incorporated in fills, but should be removed from the site or used in landscape areas as approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. Preparation of Existinq Soils/Alluvial Removals Due to the loose nature of the near surface soils, alluvial removals will be necessary. The depths of the existing alluvial removals in the majority of the site is anticipated to be on the order of 3 to 5 feet below the existing grade or below the proposed bottom of footing elevations, whichever is greater. The actual depths of removal should be established in the field by inspection and density testing during grading. The overexcavation and compacted fill placement should extend laterally a minimum of 5 feet beyond the outer edges of exterior footings. The overexcavated soils may be used for compacted fill provided they are free of decomposable organic materials and fragments greater than l2-inches in diameter. FOllowing overexcavation, the exposed soils/bedrock should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 in, brought to near-optimum moisture content, and compacted to a least 90% of the maximum laboratory dry density, as v.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 15 9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5 determined 'by ASTM Standard Test Method D 1557, prior to overlying fill placement. Artificial Fill Removals Complete artificial fill removals beneath building pad areas are recommended. Artificial fill removals beneath site improvements should be recommended on an individual basis depending on the type of improvement. Fill Placement Fill soils should be placed in 6 to 8 in thick loose lifts, brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Fill imported from off-site areas should have low to very low expansion potential. Imported soils should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to use. At least two working days notice should be allowed for approval. If laboratory testing is necessary to obtain approval of the import source, an additional 1 to 2 days should be allowed. Suggested "Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications" are provided in Appendix E. Subdrainaqe Due to the apparent medium to high permeabilities of the in site materials and the relatively flat nature of the site, subdrains are not anticipated. 9.3 Earthwork And Settlement Considerations 9.3.1 Shrinkaqe and Subsidence of Natural Ground The estimated shrinkage of the near on-site alluvial materials is 12 percent. surface to 15 tP I I I I I I I I I I U I D n U I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 16 The amount of shrinkage will depend on the existing in-place densities and moisture contents of these materials and grading methods. Subsidence of natural ground, due to the movement of construction equipment, is expected to be approximately 0.2 feet. 9.3.2 Foundations Provided the site is graded as recommended by this report, total and differential settlements of footings supported on the recommended zone of properly compacted fill are not expected to exceed 3/4 and 1/2 inch, respectively. These settlements should occur primarily during construction. 9.4 Surface and Subqrade Drainaqe Surface runoff onto down-slope areas should be minimized to prevent saturation of underlying soils. In no case should water be diverted from a graded pad or street area onto a constructed or natural slope in an uncontrolled manner. To enhance future performance in the building pad areas, it: is recommended that all pad drainage and runoff from roof drains be collected and directed away from proposed structures to proper disposal areas. In soil areas, we recommend that a minimum 2% gradient away from footings be maintained; 1% gradient for improved swales. It, is important that drainage patterns be established at the time of fine grading and maintained throughout the life of the project. It should be understood that lateral drainage patterns, landscaping, planters and other tmprovements, as well as irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall, all affect subsurface moisture conditions which, in turn, could affect structural performance. 9.5 Foundation and Slab Recommendations 9.5.1 General The on-site soils, when used as compacted fill materials, are expected to have very low to low expansion potential. This expansion "j.:!:1 I I I I I I I I I I I B I I I I I I I 11r. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 17 9.5.2 9.5.3 9.5.4 potential should be confirmed at the conclusion of rough grading. A #4 reinforcing bar placed at the top and bottom of continuous footings are considered the minimum reinforcement for continuous footings to resist differential support of the foundation system. A structural Engineer should evaluate configurations and reinforcement requirements for structural loadings, shrinkage and temperature stresses. Our recommendations are considered generally consistent with the Standards of Practice. The potential for favorable foundation performance can be further enhanced by maintaining uniform moisture conditions during and after construction. Foundations Continuous and spread footings founded on the recommended zone of properly compacted fill may be designed at a preliminary allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf. We have assumed a minimum footing depth of 18 inches below grade. The above recommendations are preliminary in nature and are subject to change subsequent to review of specific grading and development plans. Concrete Slabs Concrete slab-on-grades should be supported on a properly compacted subgrade as recommended under Section 9.2, "Grading and Earthwork". Additionally, a vapor barrier consisting of a 6 mil polyethylene sheeting overlain by 2 inches of clean sand base should be placed between the bottom of the floor slabs and subgrade soils or bedrock. Lateral Load Resistance Lateral loads against building foundations may be resisted by friction between the bottom of tA I I I I I I I I I I I n I I I D I I . Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 18 9.5.5 9.5.6 footings and the supporting soils or bedrock. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.35 is recommended for soil and bedrock areas. As an alternative, and provided the footings are cast neatly against compacted soils or bedrock, an allowable lateral bearing pressure equal to 300 lb/ft2/ft of depth may be used, but the maximum lateral bearing should be limited to 2000 lbjft2. A combination of friction and lateral bearing pressure may be used provided the latter is reduced by l/3. Flatwork Concrete flatwork in exterior building areas should be designed according to the expected soil conditions and anticipated usage. The recommendations given in section 9.5.3, "Concrete Slabs", should be applied where pertinent. In addition, construction joints should be provided to reduce the effects of any possible soil movement and concrete shrinkage. Buildinq and Footinq Setbacks Buildings located adjacent to the top or toe of a slope should be set back 1/3 the height of the slope at a minimum of 5 ft and a maximum of 40 ft. This distance should be measured horizontally from the face of the slope to the closest element of the structures. 9.6 Slope Stabilitv The relatively flat nature of the proposed development is not conducive to slope instability. In the event that slopes. in the site are designed at slope heights greater than 10 feet, or at slope ratios in excess of 2: 1 (horizontal:vertical), a slope stability evaluation should. be performed. 9.7 Soil Sulfate Content Implications Based ,upon our laboratory test results on near surface soils encountered on this site, Type II Portland Cement may be used in the construction of concrete foundations 15 I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties \July 12, 1991 :Page 19 or slabs in contact with subgrade soils. This condition should be confirmed by additional sulfate testing at the completion of rough grading. 9.8 utility Trench Backfill It is our opinion that utility trench backfill consisting of the on-site soils can be best placed by mechanical compaction. This backfill should be placed at a minimum of 90% (relative compaction) of the maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557, or as otherwise specified. If utility:contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, we recommend the utilization of light-weight mechanical equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean granular material which could be thoroughly jetted in-place about the conduit prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer at the time of construction. Suggested guidelines for trench backfill specifications are included in Appendix E. Trenches deeper than 5 ft in depth should be laid back or shored in accordance with California and Federal OSHA requirements. 9.9 Retaininq Walls Where retaining walls or subsurface structural walls are planned, they should be designed in accordance with the following criteria: unrestrained Walls Backfill Soil Tvpe Level Backfill (Active/Passive) 2:1 Sloping Backfill (Active/Passive) On-Site Silty Sands/ Sands 33psf/482psf 46psf/337psf If restrained walls are to be used, the appropriate active pressures should be derived during the grading plan review when wall heights and restraint conditions are known. tJo I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 199.1 Page 20 Walls subject to surcharge loads should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to l/3 of the indicated active pressure for unrestrained walls. The wall backfill should be well-drained to relieve possible hydrostatic pressures on the wall. Wall footings should be designed as recommended under Section 9.5, "Foundation and Slab Recommendations". Backfill behind retaining walls should be compacted as mentioned previously under Section 9.2, "Grading and Earthwork"! and as specified in Appendix D. 9.10 Pavement Desiqn Areas, to be paved with asphaltic concrete should be scarif,ied and moistened to near optimum conditions and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction to within 12-inches of sUbgrade elevations. Recommended pavement sections should be based on laboratory testing of the actual subgrade soils. 9.1l Gradinq and Foundation Plan Review As foundation and grading plans are completed, they should be forwarded to the Geotechnical Engineer for review for conformance with the intentions of the recommendations contained in this report. 9.12 Construction Monitorinq Continuous observation and testing under the direction of a Geotechnical Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist during, grading is essential to verify compliance with our recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions found are consistent with these investigations. The test borings, fault trenches and laboratory test data a:r;e believed representative of the project site; however, soil and bedrock conditions can vary significantly between test locations. As in most major projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If these conditions occur, the possible variations must be evaluated by the Project z.1 I I I I I I I I I I I I U U I I I m I Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties July 12, 1991 Page 21 Geotechnical Engineer and/or Geologist and designs adjusted as required or alternate designs recommended. 10.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. . The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the entire project; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between exploratory locations. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance. with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and Geologist and designs adjusted as required or alternate designs recommended. This report is issued with the uri~erstanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or bis representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out stich recommendations in the field. This firm does not practice or consult in the field or safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify .the ,owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'Mr. Gary Katz Bedford Properties J.uly 11, 1991 Page 22 The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the p<;lssage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. This opportunity, to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, , N..l~ l. 'YV\.t""'.......y Robert C. Manning Senior Geologist Anthony B. Brown, CEG #901 Registration Expires 6/30/92 W R R ;t'\, I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I ! I , I II I I I ! I ! I APPENDIX A References ?;P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REFERENCES Biehler, S., Kovach, R.L., and Allen, C.R., 1964, Geophysical framework of northern end of Gulf of California structural province in van Andel, T.H. and Shor, G.G., Jr., editors, Marine Geology of the Gulf of California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 3, p. 126-l43; Blake, Thomas, F., July 1989, Computer Services and Software, 1989, A computer ,Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults, EQFAULT; Bolt, B.A., ,1973, Duration of Strong Motion: Proc. Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 292, Rome; Committee on Earthquake Engineering, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, National Research Council, 1985, Liquefaction of Soils During Earthquakes. Department Of Water ,Resources, State of California, 1971, Water Weils and Springs in 'the Western Part of the Upper Santa Margarita River Watershed, Bulletin No. 91-20, Prepared by the U.S.G.S.; English, W.A., 1926, Geology Region, Southern California: pp; and Oil Resources of the Puente Hills U.S. Geology Survey Bulletin 768, 110 Hart, E.W., 1980, Gault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, California Division of Mines and Geology special Publication 42; Kennedy, K.P., 1977, Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 131; Rockwell, T.K., Lamar, D.C., et. al., 1986, An Overview of the Tectonics of the Elsinore Fault Zone, Neotectonics and Faulting in Southern California, Guidebook; Mann, J.J., Jr.,l955, Geology of a Portion of the Elsinore Fault Zone, California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 43; Ploessel, M.R., Slosson, J.E., September 1974, Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from Earthquakes, California Geology; Real, C.R., et. al., 1978, Earthquake Epicenter Map of California, 1900-1974; California Division of Mines and Geology Map Sheet 39; Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motion and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Nomograph; Weber, F.H., Jr., 1963, Geology and Mineral Resources of San Diego County, California, Division of Mines and Geology, County Report 3,309. }\ I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UNPUBLISHED REFERENCES Highland Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., January 27, 1989, G.eotechnical Fe~sibility Investigation, 1050~ Acres Rancho California, Commerce Center, Rancho California, Riverside County, California; Converse Consultants Inland Empire, October 8, 1990, Geotechnical Investigation, Tentative Tracts 25321 Through 25324 and 25464, Winchester Hill Residential Development, Temecula, California; RANPAC Soils, Inc., November I, 1990, Preliminary G.eotechnical Investigation, Margarita Meadows Commercial Center, winchester and Margarita Road, Temecula, Califonia. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS County Flight, 5-4-80 County Flight, 12-8-83 county Flight, 1-28-90 Photos: Photos: Photos: 905, 906 359, 360, 398, 399 17-(21-23) ?jP I I i II I I I I , II I I I I I II I I II I I II I I APPENDIX B Exploratory Test pit (Trench) and Boring Logs (Geotechnical and Environmental Engineers, Inc., 1991) Exploratory Boring and Cone Penetration Tests Logs (Highland Geotechnical Consultants, 1989) ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DAT]~ OBSERVED: 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R.D, ~ 0 .... ....... w o~ 0 W t-t11. II ...." 1/1 1/1 II t: en ~ z :> :> ID ~ W~ "'~ :>.... ....Z 1/1., H.... Oz "0 o 6,9 13.3 117 I Q d "0 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe TRENCH LOG NO. T-1 See Geotechnical Map Sheet I of I DESCRIPTION Silty sand - Dark gray, dry, loose 92 Sand - Yellowish-brown, slightly moist, fine to medium, medium dense SOIL TEST Maximum density !GEOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERSll" GROUND ELEVATION: 1066,0 LOCATION: )-~ ",II. 00 II. .,~ 0)- II.... .J... 11.1/1 Zz H" o Sandy silt - Brown, moist Total Depth = 7.0' No Ground Water Encountered B-1 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DkTE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R.D, ~ Cl 0 .. .... H .... .. -' .. r~ .... 0 OJ.. a. .. ,..<t 0 "- :I:~ "- "'-, " y " :Ja. <t a. ., '" ...." '" :J: '"'", :l "'<t :< .... '" u, 0 8'" a. OJ", -' -' .. a. OJ z :J 0 .. :J OJ 0 - - s- - MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe TRENCH LOG NO. T-2 See Geotechnical Map ~ wX ",y :J.... ....z "'.. H.... Oz "0 o GROUND ELEVATION: 1066,0 LOCATION: )-~ ","- 00 a. ..y 0)- '"'.... -'.. a.", Zz .... o Sheet 1 of I DESCRIPTION Silty Sand - Light brown, slightly moist, silty sand Sand - Light brown, moist, medium to coarse, noncohesive ,---------------------------_.' 3.7 104 Silty Sand - Brown, moist, medium dense to dense 5.3 100 Total Depth = 7' No Ground Water Encountered SOIL TEST I dUB t:~ihoo IIGEOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! B-2 I' 1/;) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R,D. ~ co 0 UJ I- ., I- W 01- 0 UJ .J UJ H<: 0 tIlUJ CL "- J:I- "- "'.J '" ~ CLZ .... ::lCL ([ o;UJ f/I 1-", f/I J: a:~ :3 f/I<: '"' I- 0 ::If/l CL "'0: .J .J UJ Q, tIl Z ::l 0 w ::l tIl 0 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe See Geotechnical Map GROUND ELEVATION: 1071.0 LOCATION: >-~ ","- cO CL UJ~ 0>- ([I- .JH CLf/I ZZ HUJ C ~ wX "'~ ::ll- I-z f/lW HI- cz "'0 o 2.4 107 5- - 4.7 107 - 7,2 102 TRENCH LOG NO. T-3 Sheet 1 of 1 SOIL TEST DESCRIPTION Sandy Silt - Light brown, dry, low density I Maximum density I , \ ----------------------------. , Silty Sand - Gray-brown, slightly moist, i .'\ low density /. II II .___________________________d ',Sand and Gravel - Gray-brown, moist, / I I coarse I \ I I... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ --. \ Silty Sand - Dark gray-brown, moist, \ low density Total Depth = 8' No Ground Water Encountered I I JUts dWihoo IK;EOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! B-3 ?P -, _.._.,._.,'"~-'- ~......... -- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED; 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R,D. ^ 0 0 OJ l- I. I- W 01- 0 ol -, ol ... '" '0::: en 3 "'([ '" I- :CJ ~~ 0 ~'" -, a. ..J z ::> ol tL III " III 0 ol 0 - - - 5- MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe See Geotechnical Map ^ w~ o:V "I- I-z "'ol "'1- Oz "0 o GROUND ELEVATION: 1080.0 LOCATION: >-~ 0:11. 00 a. OlV 0>- ([I- ..J... a.", zz ...ol o TRENCH LOG NO. T-4 Sheet 1 of 1 SOIL TEST DESCRIPTION Silty Sand - Light brown, dry, fine, 7.5 123 medium dense Silty Sand - Brown, dry, fine, dense Total Depth = 6' No Ground Water Encountered JUt AWi117 nn I~EOTECHNICAL " ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERs! B-4 ~\. I II I I I I I I I I . I . '. I I I I I DATE OBSERVED; 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R.D. ~ 0 0 ~, .. I~ .. III o!i 0 III -, III 0 III III Q. "- ...... "- "'.J ~: ~ :I:z , :l", <[ "'Ill fJl .." UJ :I: <IfJl :3 fJl<I ~: .. "'Ill 0 8fJl '" Clo: .J -, III 11. III Z =. 0 III :l U, 0 GROUND ELEVATION: 1074.0 LOCATION: ,.~ ","- 00 '" Ill~ 0,. <I.. .J.... "'fJl Zz ....Ill o ~ w~ "'~ :l.. "z fJllll ...... Oz "0 o - - 2.8 5- 9,8 117 6.4 100 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe See Geotechnical Map TRENCH LOG NO. T-5 Sheet I of I PEseR I PTI PN Silty Sand - Light brown, slightly moist, \ fine, low density I ~--------------------------_! Sand - Brown, slightly moist, coarse, low density \ ----------------------------, Sand - Brown, moist, coarse, medium \ dense ,. ~--------------------------_: Silty Sand - Dark brown, moist, medium dense Total Depth = 7' No Ground Water Encountered SOIL TEST 'lH.: B-5 JUB ~:?ihnn ~EOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER;::,j -_-c,=:::.::n"_~-..----. ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I II DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe , LOGGED BY: R.D. GROUND ELEVATION: 1074,0 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ D 0 Ol ~ >-~ .... H .... Ol -' WX ",IL TRENCH LOG NO. T-6 Ol 0.... D mOl a. 00 Ol H([ 0 ",v a. IL ".... IL "'-, I: ::I.... OlV v "- ::Ia. <t ~>- Sheet I of I a.z ....I: '" ....z SOIL TEST <<~ '" "'Ol " :3 "'<t '" H.... -'.... .... "'Ol 0 ::l'" DZ a.H a. a", -' -' I:o '" OESCRIPTION Z ::I ZZ Ol a. m ::I m 0 0 Ol ..Ol 0 0 Silty Sand - Light brown, dry to slightly - moist, medium dense - 5.3 109 ----------------------------- - Sand and Silt, Gray-brown, moist, 5- 6.3 liS coarse, medium dense, non-cohesive - Total Depth = 7' No Ground Water Encountered · JUHrfjlfi117 nn K;EOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERs! : B-6 ~ , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 LOGGED BY: R.D. ~ 0 I- ... I- W or- 0 W ,...<1: 0 "-, :cl- "- OJ u.Z , J: q:~ (I) I- O:w 5 Q, CJa: .J w l1. OJ o al o - . 5- C W W .J OJ W l1. "'.J :E: ::Jl1. -~ ","- CO l1. w~ 0>- <II- .J... l1.Ul zZ ...w C TRENCH LOG NO. T-7 Sheet I of 1 DESCR:IPTION Silty Sand - Tan-brown, slightly moist, low density Silt and Sand - Brown, moist, coarse, 6.4 I 1 I medium dense 4.1 101 -sand = Yenow-oi'o-wn: moisf, -coarse: - - - - - - gravelly, low density, non-cohesive Total Depth = 8' No Ground Water Encountered SOIL TEST JUJSriI~i~7 no !kiEOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERs! FIGURE: B-7 h(J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe LOGGED BY: R,D. GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 w ~ >-~ l- ... I- W J UJ~ ",IL TRENCH LOG NO. T-8 W ul- 0 IIlw .. Ou W 0 "'~ .. ...'" >:: IL ",l- lL "'J :::ll- w~ ~ , :::llL " u>- Sheet I of I lLZ " I-z SOIL TEST ",w III 1->:: IIlw "'I- J: ",Ill :3 Ill", '" "'1- J... l- "'W 0 ::llll J Oz lLlIl a. '" J Z :l >::0 zz DESCRIPTION w lL III :::l III U ...w 0 w 0 0 Sand - Brown, dry, low density "S"ilfYSaDiF -:B'rown,-slightry-riiolsl; - - - - -- - coarse, well graded, non-cohesive - 4.3 108 . 5- Maximum density, sieve, - sand equivalent Total Depth = 7' No Ground Water Encountered JUl. ~~ih7 nn IGEOTECHNICAL " ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERSfF!GUKli: B-8 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe LOGGED BY: R.D. GROUND ELEVATION: 1081.0 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map " 0 0 UJ " ,." ~. ... .... ",u. TRENCH lOG NO. T-9 UI u.... 0 UJ .J w~ oU UI ...<t 0 IDUJ 0. "'~ 0. U. l:.... U. "'.J '" =>.... UJ~ " , =>0. <t u,. Sheet I of I D.z ....'" '" ....z SOIL TEST <tUJ '" "'UJ <t.... l: ",'" 3 "'<t " ....... .J... .... coUJ 0 ::;'" .J Oz D.", 0. '" .J Z => "'0 Zz DESCRIPTION UI 0. ID => ID U Cl UJ ...UJ 0 0 Silty Sand - Dark brown, slightly moist, . medium density , - \ I ----------------------------, - Silty Sand - Gray-brown, moist, coarse, .- 3.7 105 low density, non-cohesive 5- Total Depth = 7' No Ground Water Encountered , , I JUl. Oi~%700 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! : B-9 ~7r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-28-91 MFTHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe LOGGED BY: R.D. GROUND ELEVATION: 1081.0 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 UJ ~ ,.~ ~ H ~ 0:11. TRENCH LOG NO. T -10 W u~ 0 UJ ...I WX CU 111 H :Cc zz DESCRIPTION III .. OJ ;j " u 0 "' HW 0 0 Silty Sand - Brown, slightly moist, well - graded, low density, non-cohesive - - ----------------------------- 5- Silty Sand - Brown, moist, medium dense to dense Total Depth = 6' No Ground Water Encountered , I 'dUI, Ol9il1700 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERSI" : B-IO A?1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , 6-28-91 John Deere Backhoe DATE OBSERVED: MRTHOD OF EXCAVATION: LOGGED BY: R,D, GROUND ELEVATION: 1068,0 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 ., ~ ,.~ .... ... .... .."- TRENCH LOG NO. T-11 ., 0.... 0 ., ..J wX' 00 ., ...<t 0 Ill., tl ..~ tl "- ::I:t; "- "..J >: ;:).... .,~ ~ " =>tl <t 0,. Sheet I of I tl"- ....>: 00 ....z SOIL TEST :<IUJ 00 00., <t.... x .." 3 "<t " ....... ..J... .... ",UJ 0 ::;00 ..J Oz tloo tl .. ..J Z ;:) >:0 zZ DESCRIPTION ., "- III ;:) III 0 ...UJ 0 UJ 0 0 Silty Sand - Gray-brown, slightly moist, - coarse, low density, non-cohesive ----------------------------- . Silty Clayey Sand - Dark brown, - saturated, low density 5 Total Depth - 5' Ground Water Seepage Encountered , , . . . . , , I!JOI. tI~ jh7 nn GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERs! t. : B-ll bl\- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-2S-91 LOGGED BY: R.D. ~ 0 0 11.I I- .... I- 11.I 01- 0 11.I _J 11.I H([ 0 III 11.I 0, IL x.... IL "'-, !: ~ aZ , :la << ([11.I '" ....:1: OJ X ",'" 3 "': I- ",11.I 0 8'" a -' _J '" Z :. 11.I a III :I 01 0 11.I 0 5- - I JOI, O~~ ii1700 METHOD OF EXCAVATION: John Deere Backhoe ~ w~ "'~ :II- I-z "'11.I HI- Oz :1:0 o GROUND ELEVATION: 1070,0 LOCATION: ,,~ ",IL 00 a II.I~ 0" <I.... -'H a", Zz HII.I o TRENCH LOG NO. T -12 See Geotechnical Map Sheet I of I DESCRIPTION Silty Sand - Dark brown, moist, fine, with trace of clay '._-------------------------_.' Silty Sand - Dark brown, moist to very moist, fine, with a trace of clay, medium dense Total Depth = 7' Ground Water Seepage Encountered SOIL TEST IGEOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! :B-121 A.-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: R,D, GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~, 0 0 w ~ ,.~ I- '" I- ",II. LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 w ul- 0 W -' UJX OU W "'([ 0 "w IL ",v IL 11., II- II. "'-, E ::II- Wv ([ 2 v ILZ , ::Ill III I-z u,. Sheet I of SOIL TEST ([w III 1-", "'w ([l- X ",Ill " 1Il([ " "'I- -'", I- ,C1~ 0 8 III -' Oz IL", IL -' Z :) "'0 zZ DESCRIPTION W IL ., ::I ID U ",w 0 w 0 0 Alluvium (Oal) - Silty Sand - Light brown, dry to slightly - moist, loose E ----------------------------- " Light brown, dry to slightly moist, loose , - 3.2 105 , , to medium dense I 5- I I ~---------------------------, 9 T Sand - Light brown, slightly moist, fine 5.0 to medium, loose - -Silt: -Brown, -molst,- with trace -of clay - - - - 17-'= ----------------------------- 10- 19.3 104 Sandy Silt - Brown, moist to wet, medium dense - ----------------------------- 14 LL Silty Sand - Dark greenish - brown, moist, - - medium dense 15- - 10 1. ----------------------------- - Sand and Silt - Reddish-brown, moist, - interbedded, loose to medium dense . 20- - -.L ----------------------------- 6 Sandy Silt - Dark brown to black, wet, - - loose 25- - -= ----------------------------- 12 Sandy Silt - Dark brown to black, wet, with trace of clay, loose to medium , dense 30~ Pauba Formation (Op) - Silt - Dark green, wet to saturated, with - trace of clay, stiff - 35- . ~ . 12 IT - - I JUIl Jj~ ii17.o0 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! HliURE:B_131 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DAiTE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 LOGGED BY: R.D. ~ 0 0 W I- H I- W .1 W 01- 0 "w IL W H'" 0 II. II- II. "'.1 '" ~ Q.tJ , ::JIL '" III 1-", III I '" ., :3 Ill", '" I- "'W 0 ::;1Il IL OJ", .1 .1 W IL ., Z ::J 0 W ::J ., :-40 45- 36 T - . . , , . , IJUB NU,;., . Ol91u7,OO METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ w~ "'~ ::JI- I-z IIlW HI- OZ "'0 o GROUND ELEVATION: }-~ ",II. 00 IL w~ o}- "'I- .1H ILIIl Zz ....w o LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 Sheet 2 of 2 SOIL TEST OESCRIPTION Silt - Dark green, saturated, with trace of clay, stiff , I \ \ ----------------------------, Sand - Light brown, saturated, fine to medium, with trace gravels, dense Total Depth = 46.5' Ground Water Encountered at 36' K;EOTECHNICAL " ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! Hl;URE:B_14 ~\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 LOGG D BY: R,D, ~ 0 0 w .... H .... W u.... 0 W ..J W H" 0 tIlw a. IL :r~ IL "'..J x: ~ " :I a. <I a.w '" ....x: '" :r <I", :3 "'<I " .... "'UJ 0 l:;'" a. 0", ..J ..J W a. tIl z :I C W :I tIl 0 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger GROUND ELEVATION: ,..~ ",IL OU a. w~ u,.. <I.... ..JH 11.", ZZ HW C 5 ~ UJX "'~ :I.... ....z "'w H.... Oz X:o u 2.2 4.8 100 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map lOG OF BORING NO. B-2 Sheet I of 2 OESCRrPTrON Alluvium (Oal) Silty Sand - Brown, dry, loose 104 Sand - Reddish-brown, dry to slightly moist, fine to medium, medium dense, non-cohesive 10 -silty-Sana -- """DarK gfay,-moist~ wltf11face- -- 15.2 100 of gravel, medium dense EOTECHNICAl & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER 15 20 25 30- 35 2.9 4.8 Sand - Light gray, slightly moist, medium to coarse, medium dense Sand - Light gray, dry to slightly moist, medium, medium dense Gravels at 31' Pauba Formation (00) Silt - Light green, saturated, with trace of clay -&mdi~fi:-D~kgmy:mWr~ed,------- medium dense to dense sorL TEST Maximum density, optimum moisture, direct shear, sieve, expansion, sand equivalent, sulfate Perched water at 32' RE: B-15 Ah I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 LOGGED BY: R.D. ~: :::... 0 W W 01- 0 Ww [ W H([ 0 D::.J I: 11. :c I- 11. ~ <I ..... n.z " - D.. <Iw (I) ... I: lI'J :z:: 0:::(1) :3 fJ) <t ~ .... "ILl", 0.J ~ (fJ ..J ~ n. ID Z :J f-4~ w :J OJ - ,- - 45- - 25 T f-L- , METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger ~ WX "'~ :JI- I-z "w ....1- Oz 1:0 o GROUND ELEVATION: >-~ ",11. 00 IL w~ 0>- <II- .J.... IL., Zz ....w o LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map LOG OF BORING NO. B-2 Sheet 2 of 2 SOIL TEST DESCRIPTION ----------------------------- Silty Sand - Brown, saturated, medium dense Total Depth = 49,5" Ground Water encountered at 32' IIJUB tI~ii17 on IGEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! FIuURE:B_16 ~Ot..t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGG D BY: R.D. GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ^ 0 0 w ^ >-^ " ... .... "," LOG OF BORING NO. B-3 ., 0.... 0 W .J w~ 00 W ...'" 0 mw o. "'~ a. o. :1:.... o. "'.J EO ::l.... w~ ~ , ::la. '" 0>- Sheet I of 2 a.z '" ....z "'w '" ....>: "'w "'.... SOIL TEST I: ",'" " "'", '" ....... .J... .... lOw 0 ~'" .J Oz a.", a. '" .J Z ::l >:0 Zz DESCRIPTION w a. m ::l m 0 HW CI W 0 0 Silty Sand - Brown, dry, loose II -SiThfaha-sandS,-Slx--to-eigbf-1Il"cTl- - - - - -- layers, interbedded, medium dense Sand - Brown, slightly moist, loose 5 12 10.6 -S"illYsa:na -- Jrrown, -sIiglltry-rii6ist,- - - - - - - III medium dense 10 II 17.0 Sand - Brown, moist, medium, medium dense, non-cohesive 17 15 -~dyS"ill~LJ~Kgrny;w~;fuo~to----- medium dense 12 20 21 25 -saiidfSifi -- "lfl<fcT<; wet~ foose-to -meaiuni - - dense, lueustrine(fluvial 10 Sandy Silts and Sands - Four- to six-inch layers, interbedded, medium dense 30 25 35 EQTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER 'B-I7 ~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D~TE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: R,D, GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 w ~ >-~ I- H I- ","- LOG OF BORING NO. B-3 , w "I- 0 W .J w~ 0" ! W ",<C 0 mw "- "'~ "- "- J:I- "- "'.J >: "I- w~ i ~ " ",,- <C ">- Sheet 2 of 2 I1.ffi 1->: ., I-z SOIL TEST ., "w <CI- J: <C., :3 "<C '" "'0- .J", I- ",W 0 :;l., Oz "-., "- CIa: .J .J DESCRIPTION Z " >:0 Zz W "- m " m " ",w -48 ., 0 - ----------------------------- . 24 T Sand - Reddish brown, moist, silty, fine, medium dense f \ Total Depth = 44' . No Ground Water Encountered . , , j , i , Ii JOB J1~ ilnoo GEOTECHNICAL" ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! FIGURE:B_18 "5\ I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger ~ 0 0 0' l- I-< I- W 01- 0 W -, W H'" 0 IIIW II. IL ;Cl- IL "'.J I: ~ II.Z "- :JII. 0: ",W ., 1->: ., ;C "," 3 ":0 o 3.5 99 LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map LOG OF BORING NO. B-4 Sheet I of 2 DESCRIPTION Sandy Silt - Light brown, dry Sand - Light brown, dry, medium, with trace of gravel, loose to medium dense, non-cohesive Sand - Brown, moist, medium to coarse, medium dense, non-cohesive Sand - Light gray, slightly moist, medium to coarse, with trace of gravel, dense, non-cohesive Silty Sand - Brown, moist, medium dense Silty Sands and Sands - 1-6" lenses, moist, medium dense Sandy Silt - Brown. moist, medium dense EOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER SOIL TEST 'B-19 11; I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D~TE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: R.D, GROUND ELEV~TION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map .- 0 0 w " )-" I- ... I- ","- LOG OF BORING NO. B-4 1Il 01- 0 W -' 11J~ 00 1Il ...<J: 0 Inw a. "'~ a. IL :1:1- "- "'-, " ::ll- w~ ~ o.Z "- ::lo. <[ I-z 0)- Sheet 2 of 2 <J:1Il '" 1-" '" "'w <J:.. SOIL TEST :t ",'" :3 "'<J: '" ..... -'... .. ",w 0 8'" -' Oz A.'" lL '" -' Z ::l "0 zZ DESCRIPTION 1Il a. In ::l In 0 f.4~ w ...w 0 Total Depth = 40.5' No Ground Water Encountered Jon JWii17,no IGEOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! HljURE:B_20 ?~ i DAiTE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 i LQGG D BY: R.D, ^ ~I-c 1U ti ... 0 IlJ ..J W o(t 0 ED W a. u. HI- IL a::.J 1: v l:Z " :In. <I ~ W 0') t; 1: (f) :I: a:rn 3 H <I :::.::: I- ClUJ 0 C (f) ...J n. ~..J Z ~ ~ ~i CD::J ID o GROUND ELEVATION: }-~ ","- CO D. Ol~ o}- <II- .JH D.", zZ HOl C I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5 10 15 20 ~ w:-':: "'~ "I- I-z "'Ol HI- Oz >=0 o 4.9 3.4 4.4 95 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map lOG OF BORING NO. 8-5 Sheet I of 2 SOIL TEST OESCRIPTION Silty Sand - Light brown, dry, medium dense -sand = llTown~ sligl1TIy mo'is'f,-riiedlum - - -- 103 grained, medium dense Silty Sand - Light brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense Sand - Brown, slightly moist, dense EOTECHNICAl &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER 'B-21 '.5t\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED; 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Au~er LOGGFD BY: R.D, GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 W ~ )-~ l- t-< I- ","- LOG OF BORING NO. B-5 ,W 01- 0 W ..J WX 00 W H<I: 0 tIIw a. "'~ a. "- J:I- "- "'..J " :JI- w~ ~ " :Jo. <I: 0)- Sheet 2 of 2 o.Z '" 1-" '" I-z SOIL TEST :<rW "'W <1:1- J: ",'" :> "'<I: " "'I- ..J", I- OW 0 ~'" ..J Oz a.'" a. '" ..J Z :J "0 Zz DESCRIPTION W I:L tII 0 OJ :J tII 0 ",W 0 Total Depth = 39.5' No Ground Water Encountered , , . , . , r JOHJf~ 'ih7/)() IGEOTECHNICAL" ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERs! FIGURE:B_22 ~-5 --'--T~-~'-~--"_______'________'_""_.'_",_"" .-.' ~".' ,- -'~'-.---.---'. ~-.-_- "._~-=--_--"'---'-""'-"---'_~ ~~--____'__~___~ .......~~________"__._ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGG D BY: R,D, GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map ~ 0 0 UJ ~ >-~ ~, H I- 1I:u. LOG OF BORING NO. B-6 OJ 0.... 0 UJ .J WX 00 OJ 'H~ 0 IlIw a. II:~ 0. IL. U. II:.J >: :J.... UJ~ ~ 1:z "- :Jo. << 0>- Sheet I of 2 o.UJ '" 1->: '" ....z SOIL TEST 1: <<", 3 "'<< "'UJ <<.... " HI- .JH .... II:UJ 0 8'" Oz D.'" 0. "'II: .J _J "0 DESCRIPTION OJ 0. III Z :> Zz 0 w :J OJ 0 HW 0 0 Silty Sand - Brown, dry, loose to medium Maximum density, dense optimum moisture, direct shear, sieve, 10 expansion, sand 4.2 equivalent, sulfate 5 25 -saiidy-S"ill-:' -YelliiwiSfi-bi'o-wn~ afy~ - - - - - - 10.1 107 slightly pourous (rootlets), medium dense 19 ----------------------------- 10 17.5 105 Silty Sand - Brown, moist, medium dense 19 Silty Sand - Brown, moist, medium dense 15 Sandy Silt - Yellowish-brown, moist, with trace of clay, stiff to very stiff Sand - Yellowish-brown, moist, medium grained, medium to very dense Total De th = 39.5' EOTECHNICAL &. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER RE: B-23 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE OBSERVED: 6-26-91 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGFD BY: R.D. GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Map " 0 0 w )-" >, .... .... " ",u. LOG OF BORING NO. B-6 w 0.... 0 W ..J WX 00 W ....'" 0 IIIW II. "," "- U. :1:.... U. "'..J " =>.... w" " , =>,,- '" 0)- Sheet 2 of 2 "-z m ....z "'w m ...." mw "'.... SOIL TEST r. ",m :3 m", '" ........ ..J.... .... "'W 0 8m ..J Oz "-m a, '" ..J Z ::> "0 ZZ OESCRIPTION "' "- III => III 0 ....w CI W 0 No Ground Water Encountered I.fi"I1 ~~7 nn IGEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS! FIl>URE:B_24 ?\ ~"~~'-r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. 1 I II I. il DATE OBSERVED: 1-\3-89 -_--=:.:." '::.' METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: RCM GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical MaD 5 10 19 2 16 II 10 25 19 15 22 20 22 25 45 30 35 96 SAND: yellowish brown, fine to ' medium, slightly moist, loose ~LA'7d..:i11?-OO-OO HIGHLAr.JD GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS. INC. 114 - sIi: IT SAND: yello;'[sh -b;o-;n~ moist, - - - - trace gravels and cobbles, medium dense -SAND: -d~lrYirai. -fine to' coarse,- - - - - - -- moist, medium dense 105 ----------------------------- SAND: yellowish brown, fine to coarse, moist, medium dense PAUBA FORMATION CLA YEY SANDY SILT: greenish brown, moist, very stiff ----------------------------- SANDY SILT: greenish gray, moist, medium dense ----------------------------- SILTY SAND: gray, moist, dense Total Depth ~ 29,5' No Groundwater Encountered ?~ B-15 - I ATE) OBSERVED: 1-13-89 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: RCM GROUND ELEVATION: LOCATION: See Geotechnical Mac ~. w UJ ,.. >-u.. ~. .....__.-........ _.._~...__...' -.. ~z 8 ~ ~ 1l1::: 15li LOG OF BORING 12 Jooi 0 1L l- 1: :)_~ w'oJ' ~~ ~ LU ~ tiz ~"'I- <<~ C3 i ~- Hut ~H c5~ C:L ...J ~~ D..lI) iI ~ i 8. z ffi "'0 '2 '"108 8 107 5 108 19 26 o 'Sheet I of 2 .- -.--...-.-- ."..-.. .... '. -. "=.':.,:.'-.:c:.::. .:.:"::~'='~-..::'"',- - - . .,,,",,.: .-. .. - .- -.' --~'. , , _~ DESCRIPTION ._," "'.'__ '-. 0- ... -- ..-.-.----.... ----- - .-------...--. :-i~':':" .... ALLUVIUM ,_".:c..:__~", ._"""~ .- :., . SILTY SAND:bio~~ sllghtiymoist, .. l~~sej~ ,T.e~~~m,~,~~~e~;,~ ZL;:".,. .. _ .?~:\'~:;;\~~;~~~~'_:~::::;~~:;-;_~~~c"'.:~;_~~:' :_:~~~_::~;.' . .=.~ '."":;:''';'''',",,~;''::;;c;;c,;:,:;;";,~,o,:~.:,'l{c-:: . 1>: ',' :;'';7 ,._. _.._ ..~:_._~_'_. ._.___._..___.......____~.. ._h.___.._____.___ ~~~.'~:::. -:: ~::~.il~::-~~:::~'~~:~'~.~:;~~~..~.~ _ _ -~'_ ~.:~ SOIL TEST . . . - -~... . . --..- ... . -... ._--- ..._- - -'. ~.._,- _h _ _ _ _,__,,__.,~ -.-.~,., .-- . :.._ - ..~ :."'f:,;:.".-~,-{. . -_. ---- -.- . --- - ". -.... . -~'.' -'- -. - - ." , ~-.:~~?::'~---=- ,-.=~~:::~.::~;_~~~;;.~LY:::= - ;:~;{r .._'7'~-~:~': '~-;':.,' -.,;:t:.:..; ':.-.:-:.:t ....~.~-~-. .............- ....,.---......--. -","-' , HIGHLAND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS. INC. SILTY SAND: light brown,"slightIy moist, medium dense - .. .. ;;":"- ._- .....:. -' - -,-. r'" ..- ----------------------------- . ' . SAND: gray, fine io coarse::': slightly moist,Cmedium' dense SILTY SAND: light brown, moist, . medium dense \ ~---------------------------, SAND: gray, fine to coarse, moist, medium dense -sli:TYSAND: brown: moist- .. - - - - .. .. .. - - SAND: gray, fine to coarse, moist, medium dense SILTY SAND: dark brown to black, moist, to wet, medium dense B-16 'iIi& I) 11 r" , " \ '~\ , !~ " It , P .:', Ii -.. :::: Ii .,:.,! _"I I. '. I, '.::' I' ...': I ." II ii" Ii .1"i. I, ~~; ': : ~I'. I . "j, , II _.-... ~I' I ' "..., I' :~,',:.::" . " ~"I I ,-- :', i~i i . '. ~,:i I ~~nill' \<,'111 [ .-.-..", I ," , '.'1 '. l"1 '''--,,'f ~I j : ilil 1111 ,. i"11 -.;. iil. i li,llj; :\! (I i tl 'II! ,1,1 1" 'I ill II , I , I I . i 'II I I II!! 'I' 'I' P II L I! ;!i/I ~ tl , , Iii:: ':11: '11:: : Iii il il; I'" iii! 1111 'I" Iii: ill '::", Ii:' , ;): : 'I"" !::::. 1"1,' Ii::,: \\\\:; "": T' Ln:i"I', 7"1'" IU ,"' [,." ~1 I- III III ~ >-.. .. , IZ 0 Il. ...J LUX O:u LOG OF BORING 12 "0 0 >- Il. o:~ Oil. ...... .. l- I: =>1- Ill~ - of 2 "' Il. '" "'1- ...J... ,. idH 0 I: ...J oz Il.", ...J <l: => I:O ZZ .. DESCRIPTION III '" III u ...Ul -.. - 0 -~- ---------- .. ----~ ~ ,.,=11,,.,...- .. I ..,=-:. ""..,1-, ....."... ... 8" Hollow Stem Auger METHOD OF DRILLING: ATE OBSERVED: 1-13-89 See Geotechnical Mao OGGED BY: ReM GROUND ELEVATION:- LOCATION: PAUBA FORMATION" - SILTY CLA Y: greenish gray;C . saturated from 45' to 47:~.-: :< . ':~~:~;.: i!::.:~':'_ - ~~~ :..~.:-:::~-:_.c7.-.::]._~,."-~~,;:..-,-,,:~ -"-', ~.-- _"'.-~.~T~~~-~~~'-~- =>.....,,-,-.....:...., .--- ... ~~ :;:- = .. --" -_._.;~ ----------------------------- SAND: yellowish brown; fine to coarse, slightly moist, medium 150 I 24 Total Depth = 50' Perced Groundwater Encountered @45-47' I 55 I I I I 60 65 I I 70 I I I 75 ~U;,7,d.:il17-00-00 I+JIGHLAND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS. INC. <:J I; II ii \', 1,\ ! I; ." I: I,' Iii ,.. - i!: " '" i i .,. I' __:::" I" II j; " , ii; I p. .,1 . --' i\i:, -I::: I . ~~- \ii' I ,. ''''Iii; I "." '-~'!t;: : , n, II ,. [, i;" " I:. - I" I; I, - t" I, I', \1 ! ,I (,p B-17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX C Laboratory Test Results 14\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E. F" G. LABORATORY TESTING ].. Classification Soils were ~lassified, visually, according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classification was supplemented by index tests, such as particle size analysis, moisture content, and sand equivalent tests. B. Particle Size Determination Particle size determination, consisting of mechanical analyses (sieve) was performed on representative samples of the on-site soils in accordance with ASTM D 422-63. Test results are shown on Figures C-1 through C-7. c. Maximum Densitv/Optimum Moisture Content Maximum density/optimum moisture content relationships were determined for typical samples of the on-site soils. The laboratory l?tandard used was ASTM D 1557-78. The test results are summarized on Figure C-10, Table I. D. Expansion Expansion tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soils remolded and tested under a surcharge of 144 lb/ft2 in a~cordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard No. 29-2. ,The test results are summarized on Figure C-10, Table II. Sulfate Sulfate tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soils. The laboratory standard used was California 417A. The ~est results are presented on Figure C-10, Table III. Sand Equivalent Sand equivalent tests were performed on representative samples of the subsurface soils to supplement visual classifications and mechanical analysis. The laboratory standard used was ASTM D 2419-74. The test results are presented on Figure C- lO, Table IV. Direct Shear Test Direct shear strength tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soils remolded to 90% relative compaction (ASTM D 1557). To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the test specimens were saturated prior to shearing. A saturating device was used which permitted the samples to absorb moisture while preventing volume change. The test results are presented on Figures C-8 and C-9. ~'Z-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100.00 75.00 ~ Z (f1 (f1 <( 0.. f- 50,00 Z w U IY W 0.. 25,00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S, STANDARD 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 200 I , I I I I I 0,00 - " - 1\ - - - - - - - - 100 10 0,01 0,1 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-1 WORK ORDER NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 37-38.5 FEET FIGURE: C-1 (,.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100,00 75.00 Cl Z Vi VJ -< 0. f- 50.00 Z W U 0:: w 0. 25.00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S. STANDARD 3/B ... 10 20 40 100 200 I I I I I I I 0.00 - - ~ I'\. - \ \ - - - - \ - \ - 1\ - 100 10 0,1 0.01 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-2 WORK ORDER NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 1 -5' FEET FIGURE: C-2 ~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100,00 75,00 (? Z If) If) <( 0. f- 50.00 z w U 0:: W 0. 25,00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S. STANDARD 3/8 ... 10 20 <40 100 200 I I I I I I I 0,00 - - - - \ - - \ - - - - 1\ - [, - " - - - 100 10 0,1 0,01 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-2 WORK ORDER NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 31-32,5' FEET FIGURE: C-3 ~-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100.00 75,00 " z U1 U1 <: Q.. I- 50.00 z w u 0::: w Q.. 25,00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S, STANDARD 3/B 4 10 20 40 100 200 I I I I 1 I I 0,00 - -- - - - - 1\ - - - - - - - \ - \ - - - - 100 0.01 10 0,1 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-2 WORK ORDER NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 38-39.5' FEET FIGURE: C-4 ~ I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100,00 75.00 0 Z ()l ()l -< CL J-- 50,00 Z W U Cl::: w CL 25,00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S. STANDARD 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 .200 I I I t I I I 0,00 - - 1\ - - - - - - ~ - \ - - - - - - - - - 100 0,01 10 0,1 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B~4 WORK ORDER NO: 019107,00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 49-50.5 FEET FIGURE: C-5 ~\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100,00 75,00 0 Z Vi (/) <( CL f- 50,00 Z W U 0:: w CL 25,00 0.00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U.S. STANDARD 3/B 4 10 20 40 100 200 I t I I I I I - ..... - ........... - - - - 1\ - \ - - \ - - - - - - - - - 100 0,01 10 0,1 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: 8-6 WORK ORDER NO: 019107,00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 1 -5' FEET FIGURE: C-6 ~lb I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100,00 75.00 (.') Z (f1 VJ <l: 0... f- 50,00 Z W U a::: w 0... 25,00 SIEVE ANALYSIS SIEVE SIZES - U,S. STANDARD 3/B ... 10 20 40 100 .:100 t I I I I I , 0,00 - - \ - \ - \ - - \ - - - - - - - - - 1\ ['\ - ----- - 100 10 0,1 0,01 PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm) RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT; BEDFORD LOCATION: T-8 WORK ORDER NO; 019107,00 DATE; 7-10-91 DEPTH: 5-7' FEET FIGURE; C- 7 ~<\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5000,00 r--, LL U) 4000,00 Q. '--.... :r: I- () z 3000,00 lLJ . 0:: I- U) c:) 2000,00 Z 0:: <( W :r: (J) 1000,00 0.00 0,00 DIRECT SHEAR - - - - - 1/ - - / - ./ - /' - / - / - - ~ - ./ - ../ - / / . - - - / - , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1000,00 2000.00 3000,00 4000,00 5000,00 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) PHI = 36 DEGREES C = 240 psf RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-2 WORK ORDER. NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 1 -5' FEET FIGURE: C-8 '"\.D .-....,.._~c.."..--..c -__,_.._..__ _..:.~__,,::,"'-~,~'''''''''__C"'-:_~":.._u. "_u. "'-______ __... _____,__"...._ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5000,00 r-.. W. Ul 4000,00 CL '-" J: f- ~ 3000,00 w Ck: f- Ul o 2000,00 Z Ck: ~ J: Ul 1000,00 0.00 0,00 DIRECT SHEAR - - - - - - - V - /' - / - - V - /' - ~ - - V - /' - / :f - - V - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1000,00 2000,00 3000,00 4000,00 5000,00 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) PHI 34 DEGREES C = 230 psf RANPAC SOILS, INC. CLIENT: BEDFORD LOCATION: B-6 WORK ORDER NO: 019107.00 DATE: 7-10-91 DEPTH: 1-5' FEET FIGURE: C-9 ~\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE I MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP (ASTM D 1557-78) Test Location T-1 @3-5' T-3 @ ,1-3' T-8 @ '5-7' B-2 @0-5' B-6 @ ,1-5' Test Location B-2 @0-5' B-6 @ ,1-5' Test Location B-2 @0-5' B-6 @ 1-5' Test Location T-8 @ '5-7' B-2 @ 0-5' B-6 @ 1-5' Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 121. 8 121. 8 117.9 128.5 127.4 TABLE II RESULTS OF EXPANSION TESTS (U.B.C. 29-2) Expansion Index o 5 TABLE III RESULTS OF SULFATE TESTING Sulfate Content (PPM) 11 8 TABLE IV RESULTS OF SAND EQUIVALENT TESTS (ASTM D 2419) Wor]c Order No. 019107.00 Optimum Moisture (%) 9.5 10.0 11.9 8.0 9.5 Expansion Potential Very Low Very Low Relative Content Low Low Sand Equivalent 47 26 14 Figure C-10 ,-z.., ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX D Deterministic site Parameters "r? I I rTE:, I I I I Monday, June 24, 1991 ************************************* * * * E Q F A U L T * * * * Ver. 1.01 * * * * Licensed to: RANPAC SOIL, INC. * * * * *,* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults) BEDFORD PROPERTIES if ARCH PERFORMED FOR: 1m WJMBER: 00000 liB NAME: MARGARITA MEADOWSBUSINESS PARK SITE:COORDINATES: ~TITUDE: 33.503 N I LONGITUDE: 117.,138 W SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi LTENUATION RELATION: IDRISS , . soil ~OMPUTE (1987) - mean Conditions: Rock/Stiff Soil PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION IrULT-DATA FILE USED: CALIFLT.DAT I I I I ,I I 16.. I II I I Page DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS 1 MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. PROBABLE EVENT APPROX. DISTANCE mi (km) ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME MAX. CRED. MAG. PEAK SITE ACC. g SITE INTENS MM MAX. PROB. MAG. PEAK SITE ACC. g SITE INTENS MM 99 (159) 7.00 0.020 -------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ III IV 6.25 0.009 ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ 58 (93) 7.00 0.041 V 6.25 0.021 IV -------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ ORREGO MTN. (San Jacinto) 59 (95) 6.50 0.025 V 6.25 0.020 IV 80 (128) 7.00 0.027 ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ III V 6.25 0.012 ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ 73 (118) 7.50 0.048 ----.--------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ VI 6.00 0.010 III ASA,LOMA-CLARK (S.Jacin.) 2l (34) 7.50 0.180 VIII 7.00 0.138 VIII ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ HINO 31 (49) 7.00 0.091 VII 4.75 0.014 III -------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ LEGHORN 54 (86) 6.50 0.029 V 6.25 0.024 IV ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ COYOTE CREEK (San Jacinto) 35 (57) 7.50 0.109 VII 6.00 0.034 V ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ UC~ONGA 50 (80) 7.00 0.050 VI 6.75 0.042 VI LSINORE 1 ( 2) 7.50 0.647 -------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ X ---T--------------------- LN.HELEN-LYTLE CR-CLREMNT 23 ( 38) 7.50 0.164 9fi (154) 7.00 0.020 X VIII IV 6.75 0.60l 7.00 0.l24 5.75 0.005 VII II 57 (92) 7.50 0.064 ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ IV VI 6.25 0.02l ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ . ' OT S-BUCK RDG.(S.Jacinto) 24 (39) 7.50 0.160 VIII 6.25 0.076 VII 99 (160) 7.50 0.033 ---------.---------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ IV V 7.00 0.019 66 (107) 7.25 0.045 ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ III VI 6.00 0.012 -------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ 94 (152) 7.50 0.035 V 6.00 0.007 II ------------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ II 97 (156) 7.50 0.034 ----~--------------------- --------- 90 (144) 7.50 0.037 ---T--------------------- --------- MOJAVE RIVER (Ord Mtn.) 56 ( 90) 7.00 0.043 V V VI 6.00 0.006 5.00 0.002 6.25 0.022 IV .,.-r I I pie ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I , FAULT NAME IL---~-------------------- --------- ----- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------ i IL---~-------------------- NEWPORT- INGLEWOOD It~----------------------- ~RTHRIDGE HILLS (FSHORE ZONE OF DEFORM. ~-;S~~-~;;~~~~--------- 40 ( 65) 91 (147) 29 ( 47) 64 (103) 7.50 0.095 VII III VIII V DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS 2 ABBREVIATED PALOS: VERDES HILLS It------------------------ IFNTO:MOUNTAIN - MORONGO -----~-------------------- IE;;~~=-~~~~:~~---------- II>SE CANYON ~---~-------------------- SAN ~DREAS (Mojave) 1[:----------------------- ~ ~DREAS (Southern) -------------------------- ED HILLS ---~-------------------- C~EMENTE ~ GABRIEL ---~-------------------- , , SAN GORGONIO - BANNING E----------------------- TAiMONICA - HOLLYWOOD ____L____________________ SANTA: SUSANA 1_----------------------- ERRA MADRE-SAN FERNANDO IPER?TITION HLS.(S.Jacin) ---~-----------------~-- S PERSTITION MTN.(S.Jacin) -------------------------- &RDUGO It________________________ WHITTIER - NORTH ELSINORE I APPROX. DISTANCE ,.mi (kID) 50 ( 80) 47 ( 76) 81 (131) 67 (108) 30 ( 48) 57 ( 93) 4l ( 66) 83 (134) 8l (130) 72 (116) 34 ( 55) 76 (123) 94 (l5l) 58 ( 94) 82 (131) 77 (l24) 72 (116) 29 ( 47) 6.50 0.013 7.50 0.132 7.00 0.036 MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. CRED. MAG. PEAK SITE ACC. g 7.00 0.050 7.50 0.080 7.00 0.026 7.50 0.053 7.50 0.130 8.50 0.135 8.00 0.129 8.00 0.064 7.50 0.043 7.50 0.049 8.00 0.154 7.50 0.046 7.00 0.021 7.50 0.063 7.00 0.026 7.00 0.028 7.00 0.03l 7.50 0.134 SITE INTENS MM VI VII V VI VIII VIII VIII VI VI VI VIII VI IV VI V V V VIII 6.50 4.00 6.00 5.75 0.044 0.001 0.045 0.010 VI VI III MAX. PROBABLE EVENT MAX. PROB. MAG. 5.50 6.00 6.25 5.50 6.25 8.25 7.25 7.00 6.25 6.25 7.00 6.00 6.50 6.50 5.75 6.00 4.50 6.25 PEAK SITE ACC. g 0.012 0.022 0.012 0.007 0.057 0.117 0.081 0.025 0.Ol2 0.015 0.081 0.010 0.012 0.026 0.007 0.009 0.002 0.059 SITE INTENS MM III IV III II VI VII VII V III IV VII III III V II III VI 1(P I~---~--------------------I---------I-----I------I------11-----1------1------1 I ***************************************************************************** -~D OF SEARCH- 43 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. T~E ELSINORE FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IllS ABOUT 1.1 MILES AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE'SITE ACCELERATION: ~GEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.647 g 0.601 g I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX E standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications \~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS 'These specifications present RANPAC Soils, Inc., standard recommendations for grading and earthwork. ,No deviation from these specifications should be permitted unless specifically superseded in the geotechnical report of the project or by written communication signed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Evaluations performed by the Geotechnical Consultant ,during the course of grading may result in subsequent recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 The Geotechnical Consultant is the Owner's or Developer's representative on the project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the Geotechnical Consultant include observations by the Soils Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Engineering Geologist, and those performed by persons employed by and responsible to the Geotechnical Consultant. 1.2 All clearing, site preparation, or earthwork performed on the project shall be conducted and directed by the Contractor under the supervision of the Geotechnical Consultant. l.3 The Contractor should be responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading. During grading, the Contractor shall remain accessible. 1.4 Prior to the commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall be employed for the purpose of providing field, laboratory, and office services for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Consultant provide adequate testing and observations so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Geotechnical Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. 1.5 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, agency ordinances, these specifications, and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are 1~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I il II I I Standard Grading and Earthwork specifications Page T'"o resulting in a quality of work less than required in these ,specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 1.6 It iS,the Contractor's responsibility to provide access to the Geotechnical Consultant for testing and/or grading observation purposes. This may require the excavation of test pits and/or the relocation of grading equipment. 1.7 A final report shall be issued by the Geotechnical Consultant attesting to the Contractor's conformance with these specifications. 2.0 SITE PREPARATION 2.1 All vegetation and deleterious material shall be disposed of off-site. This removal shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant and concluded prior to fill placement. 2.2 Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Geotechnical Consultant as being unsuitable for placement in compacted fills shall be removed from the site or used in open areas as determined by the Geotechnical Consultant. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by the Geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. 2.3 After' the ground surface to receive fill has been cleared, it shall be scarified, disced, or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction. The scarified ground surface shall then be brought to optimum moisture, mixed as required, and compacted as specified. If the scarified zone is greater than twelve inches in depth, the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts not to exceed six inchesor less. Prior to placing fill, the ground surface to receive fill shall be observed, tested, and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. io I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications Page Three 2.4 Any underground structures or cavities such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipe lines, or others are to be removed or treated in a manner prescribed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 2.5 In cut-fill transition lots and where cut lots are partially in soil, colluvium or unweathered bedrock materials, in order to provide uniform bearing conditions, the bedrock portion of the lot extending a minimum of 5 feet outside of building lines shall be overexcavated a minimum of 3 feet and replaced with compacted fill. Greater overexcavation couldbe required as determined by Geotechnical Consultant where deep fill: of 20+ feet transitions to bedrock over a short distance. Typical details are given on Figure D- 1. 3.0 COMPACTED FILLS 3.1 Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated by Geotechnical Consultant or shall be mixed with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material, as directed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.2 Rock fragments less than twelve inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided: 1. They are not placed in concentrated pockets. 2. There is a minimum of 75% overall of fine grained material to surround the rocks. 3. The distribution of rocks is supervised by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.3 Rocks greater than twelve inches in diameter shall be taken off-site, or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. (A typical detail for Rock Disposal is given in Figure 0-2. ~\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications 'Page Four 3.4 Material that is spongy, subject to decay, or otherJise considered unsuitable shall not be used in the compacted fill. 3.5 Representative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the laboratory of the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, the appropriate analysis of this material shall be conducted by the Geotechnical Consultant as soon as possible. 3.6 Material used in the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill shall be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherJise approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.7 If the moisture content or relative compaction varies from that required by the Geotechnical Consultant, the Contractor shall rework the fill until it is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.8 Each layer shall be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the contrOlling governmental agency or ASTM 1557-70, whichever applies. If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized by the controlling governmental agency because of a specific land use or expansive soil condition, the area to receive fill compacted to less than 90 percent shall either be delineated on the grading plan or appropriate reference made to the area in the geotechnical report. 3.9 All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil, colluvium alluvium, or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of five horizontal to one vertical, in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.10 The key for side hill fills shall be a minimum width of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials, unless otherJise specified in the geotechnical report. (See detail on Figure D-3.) f6V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications Page Five 3.11 Subdrainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency, or with the recommendations of the Geo.technical Consul,tant. (Typical Canyo.n Subdrain details are given in Fi~re D-4.) 3.12 The contractor will be required to obtain a minimum relative compactio.n of 90 percent out to the finish slope ~ace of fill slopes, buttresses, and stabilization fills. This may be achieved by either over building the slope and cutting back to. the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment, or by any other procedure which produces the required compaction approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.13 Al,l fill slopes should be planted ar protected from erosion by other methods specified in the Geotechnical report. 3.14 Fill-over-cut slopes shall be properly keyed through topsail, calluvium or creep material into rack or firm materials, and the transition shall be stripped of all soil prior to placing fill. (See detail on Figure D- 3. ) 4.0 CUT SLOPES 4.1 The Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect all cut slopes at vertical intervals not exceeding ten feet. 4.2 If any conditions not anticipated in the geotechnical report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or canfined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavo.rably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes encountered during grading, these conditio.ns shall be analyzed by the Geotechnical Consultant, and recammendations shall be made to. mitigate these problems. (Typical details far stabilization af a portion af a cut slope are given in Figures D-3a and D- 5. ) 4.3 Cut slapes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be pratected from slape wash by a non-eradible interceptor swale placed at the tope of the slope. ~o . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I standard Grading and Earthwork specifications Page Six 4.4 Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. 4.5 Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies, or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. . 5.:0 TRENCH BACKFILLS 5.1 Trench excavations for utility pipes shall be backfilled:under the supervision of the Geotechnical consultant. 5.2 After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand backfill shall be uniformly jetted into place before the controlled backfill is placed over the sand. 5.3 The on-site materials, or other soils approved by the Geotechnical consultant shall be watered and mixed as necessary prior to placement in lifts over the sand backfill. 5.4 The controlled backfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density as determined by the ASTI D1557-70 or the controlling governmental agency. 5.5 Fieldldensity tests and inspection of the backfill procedures shall be made by the GeoteChnical Consultant during backfilling to see that proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained. The contractor shall provide test holes and exploratory pits as required by the Geotechnical consultant to enable sampling and testing. ,6.0 GRADING CONTROL 6.1 Inspection of the fill placement shall be provided by the Geotechnical consultant during the progress of grading. 2A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Standard Grading and Earthwork Specifications Page Seven 6.2 In general, density tests should be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 500 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the job. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests shall be made to verify that the required compaction is being achieved. 6.3 Density tests should also be made on the surface mate~ial to receive fill as required by the Geotechnical Consultant. 6.4 All cleanout, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, subdrains, and rock disposals should be inspected and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing any fill. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Consultant when such areas are ready for inspection. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 Erosion control measures, when necessary, shall be provided by the Contractor during grading and prior to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls. 7.2 Upon completion of grading and termination of inspections by the Geotechnical Consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings foundations, large tree wells, retaining walls, or other features shall be performed without the approval of the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.3 Care shall be taken by the Contractor during final grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales, or other devices of permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. ~ . _-::===~~COMP ACTED -:::===-::=::: _--=-=-~=-:=-::-~.f!..L.!- :...~.::::-:::-:-:. ---------------- -- --. ---------------~---------------::--...::""""....:-::::------~ --------~~------ --- _ __:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:__.:=:: ~ ~_::"_~_c::'_"": ~'" -----------~----j ~' ----------~-----~ ~?~ iPROJECTE~ PLANE . _-_-:::::-=-=-.=--:_:;:::-Z-::.::::=---::.;F--- I'to 1 maximum fro:,", ,oe __--=-_-_-_-_-;.;-z_-_-_-_-_-Z'-[ '-,"",;N . of slope to approvea ground --..:-----::?:-.?-..-------;..?::'"---~-k '\ _ --------..;::----------I! 'A-'f." REMOVE '- ---2-..;::.:::-------:;::...----~ UN~UITA8Lc " -~ -----~---~ ....- NATUHAL . ~~-=-=-:::-=_:;:::-~ .- ~ MATERIAL IROU,ND \ -_- _~____..:="'__::-::=- I 4' MIN. ~ '\. " I '-=-/_-..:;~------------- ~ 8 BENCH ,,,. ^ --1-- _-::--=---------------..: I EN.CH HEIGHT _'-_-..:_-2% MIN.:...----- (typical) VARIES I T -:;--~--:: 2' MIN. I 15' MIN. I I KEY rLOWEST BENCH-, DEPTH (KEY) I I I I I I --~~ I I I I . I I I I I BENCH I NG DETAILS FILL SLOPE _-: COMP ACTED ::--:-:-:::=::-:- ---:'=::::~:_t~~~~~~-:;:~ --:-=~-~:-:-_-=-=--- .:-,;,:::" _-_-_--::-..~_-_-_-_~-~-__(I' I --~----------- . IREMOVE, NATURAL -:?~-=-:-=-::.:~ ,....,,-\ UNSUITABLE GROUND =-<"-----------~ ~ l'i1ATERI.AL \ . __ ~ - _-=-_-..;::.--c-_- .... L 4' MIN: BENCH __ -- __-..;::.-~_-_-___ r BENC HEIGHT , __ __ -- ~.:_-:2%tv'IN._:: (typical) VARIES __ T -: - _ _ - -- - - -- -I :~:W~~ITM~~N~>1 FILL! OVER CUT SLOPE CUT FACE To be constructed prior to fill plccement :A> NOTES: LOWEST BENCH: Depth and width subject to field change based C:'l consultant's inspection. S~!!DRAI:JAGE:, E:-::-k .::-:.:.,_ m::y be required at the jiscretlon of the geotechnical con3ultont. ibID - NATURAL", __-- GROUND >-- -- ---- -- -- .-- .-- ...... .-- ...... .-- ...... ./ ...... "" ./ "" "" ./ "" ...... ....... AND RECOMPACT ' "" " (REPLACEMENT FILL) ----- 1:=:=:~==-=7=~- L . . . ... ., .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. IOVERBURDEN - -=.;...---...: I" UviiNY::::?- ',,' , Pad overex~avatic,n.~nd reco~pcctiC(1 OR UNSUITABLE ,_-_-=-=r-~...:_-'-~.:..:." " shall be per.ormea If deter:n':,ed to MA T:ER IAL -=-_-_-_-. _-IT_='':-:.7. be necessary by the geotecnn [cal I . --===?-X~-=:- LSENCHING consultant. /". '. :::-=..:x:, =:- - 7 -? UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR J "m. .r- MATERIAL APPROVED BY ---I I r THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT . I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I SIDE HILL CUT PAD DETAIL - FINISHED CUT PAD OVER EXCAVATE - SUSDRAIN AND KEY WIDTH REOUIREMENTS DETERMINED 8ASED ON EXPOSED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN ~1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TRANSITION LOT DETAILS CUT-FILL LOT NATURAL GROUND I ' T_ --- -- - - - --- -- --- J' ,,~ UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR J ,- MATERIAL APPROVED BY __J , THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT CUT LOT - . _.. - NATURAL GROUND 1- -- --- ------.-- -- -- -' --- -- --- _ ~ REMOVE ..... --- _ _ _ _ UNSUITABLE _____ _ - 5' I, ...-;..- 'MATERIAL _ MIN. It ~_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_:::::?:-~-------------r----------- :-----------: 30" ,V,IN. '., _. ________~- drY/,' V\ /^ ~ -r-- : .COMPACTED ::--~---~--~~ \ ' :':::";.J?.t:-';":~~-l ,..." OVER EXCAVATE AND RECOM?ACT -- - UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR f ,- MATERIAL APPROVED BY r THE GEOTECHN leAL CONSULTANT NOTE: Deeper overexcavotion and recomooction sholl be performed if de!ermined .0 be necesscry by the geotec~"icc! consultant. ~co I I I I .1 I 2' MIN.' I I I I I IOTES I I I I i I SLOPE BUTTRES::; REPLACEMENT UK FILL DETAIL OUTLET PIPES 4" fJ I'Jonperforated Pipe, lOa' Max. O.C. J-!orizontally, 30' Max. O.C. Vertically ! 15' I I......-...\IN.I , / --~--~---_. _-_-=====:~=~~~ mL BLANKo -~------ "0" MIN --- -----..L": ... . _-_~~~-=-=-- BACK CUT _-=-====:::-:::.::==: ~--;<--'-A I: I OR FLA HEr ---------- BENCHING ---~ -20, --------~- - - - - .0- - - -_ - SU60RAIN SEE AL HoRNA TES A &. _-=-=-E-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-~ ---1:---------- ----- --------- ----- --------- ------ -------- ------ ------- -------=;E------- -------- ------- -------- _-=-=~==~=====~===1:------ -_-_-J: ------------~ V ... -----....:-----------20. :------T---~---..l': ""~------ ,0 _ . - -t- .,"'" .. '- ~. - ~ E :.A:__ -----------m .________ ClI.. .. _______ . _______2,0 MI!;:,_____ ;z: I . ECUIP'''2'li~:ii- ~~~~IJi Y IS rc.::T ., T-CaN:~:T~~~~~~~~.C~'~~' : 0.1..,,, '. "0 r". S%.'.ArN.__ .~:"j I 0"" - -- . /, 'JJJ;"~ _- -.- - --"1:1' ?\9E. /. '.~ t -out\..- PER-FeR). ,;:J P!P'S ". .V.t.~. 4"l)M1N. AL TERNA TE A 6" MIN. OVE?!..A.? 'POSITIVE SC:)"L~ f SHOUt..O 3e '",J' ~Y l~" I~IN. PROVIOeiJ '. /.d% Gi1:AV;!.. OA AT TkE JO..'4T t7:'."~ Ai'?ROVe.::) 59; MtN . I .""~ ;,:urJ..l.LSNT . ---...., ~ . . OUTL=~' .....~-:::. .._~ ?t?E~_'" ) MlfU,;:'i t40 FIL.":'E::I FA-SRle OR APPRovao EQUIV..l.LENT TE~.1POAARY I FlU. LE.Va!... --'-'--:~1' - =' ""COMPAc.eo FILL .;::-...:..=: IILf'= =, -..~~-:= -.... Q"~'.\lN. SEL::CT aEDOING ._- - .-L BACKFILL '-4.. 'J M:....J. NONPE::lFCAA T~O PIP; DETAIL A.,.A' AL TERNA TE 8 Fill blanket, back cut, key width and key depth are subject to field change, perl repcrt Iplcns. Key heel subcrain, blcnket drain, or ve~ticd:1 drain mcy be required at the dis!,=reticn of the geotechnical consultant. SUBORAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain pip,e sholl be instollee with perforations down or, at Icccticnsdesignated by the geotechnical consultant, sholl be nOQperforated pipe. SUBORAIN TYPE - Subdrain type shall be ASl'M CS08 Asbestos Cement Pipe (ACIP) or ASTM 02751, SOR 23.S or ASTM C t 527, Schedule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Sryrene (ASS) or ,~STM 03034 SOR 23.5 or AST.\\ 0 1785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl rhl"",.';r:u. Pr....<;:..;..- (p\lr'n"n~",.. f1r-f1rr-I'.Ipr! , - ',-' , ..-. --'--,' '-"'" . FILTER MATERIAL: Filter material sholl be Closs 2 permecble material per State of Cclifcrnia Standard Spe<:ificoticns, or approved alternate. Closs 2 grading as follews: PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE 100 90 -1 00 40-100 25-40 18-33 S-15 'J-7 0-3 I" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No. 8 No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 re,llIv - CANYON SUBORAIN DETAIL BENCHING REMOVE . ,. UNSUITABLE ~ = ---------- - ----;? MATERIAL - ~ --------------------------- -- -- - -=::~-==E===3t==~COMPASi~3:!1~(:f=====?-=-~ / -~-~~--------------------~ ' , -- ---.......-----------------'/"'"----~d --- --~---------------~--~- . t[---=::--::---------=---7l .~ -=-S~==::~-:-:~~~-=-s===:=:=Z--J' . _-_-__,_-_=-:-::=-=-_~-:=--...;r----- . ~<:;';;:';:------~"^ , -_-_~_..",:__=_:.:::.-j-~ ~SUBDRAJN TRENCH , . ":R::;rT SEE AL TERNA TES A&B SUBORAIN AL lIERNA TE A: Perfora.ted Pipe Surrounded With Filter Material F[L TER MATERIAL: Filter materioJ shall be Closs 2 permeable material per State of California $tondQrd Specificotions. or approved olrernQte~ CIcs.s 2 grodir"9 os follows: FILTER MATERIAL 9 ft. 31ft. /. 4,}i;', . .' .:....:~-: /~' . . '. ~ , .' . 0.". . _. .." o. SIEVE SIZE PE:=<CENT PASSING COVER 6"MIN.~ I" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No.8 No. 30 No. SO No. 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 Alternate A-1 BEDDING + 'J'-~ ,. 4" Mli'l. Alternate A-2 ..... PERFORATED PIPE 6" (JMIN. SU8DRAIN AL TERNA TE 8: 1 1/2" .Gravel Wrapped in Filter Fabric NOTE: In addition to the wrapped gravel, outlet portion of the subdrain should be equipped with a minimum of 10 feet long perforated pipe con- nected to a nonpedorated pipe having a minimum or 5 feet in length inside the wrcpped grcvel. I I I ~6"jvilN. OVERLAP ~ ~fY /. ~ Ar- Alternate :r-,::-.\ Q "g 0 MIRAFI 140 FILTER 0 0 60 FA8RIC OR ~ 0" ~ " o a 'd ,APPROVED " , EQUIVALENT '-'-"VI/'I/' I y," MIN. GRAVEL OR ~Jternate 8-2 APPROVED EQUWALENT 9 ft. 3/ ft . .' SUBORAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, at: Iccations designated by the geotechnical consultant, shall be nonperforated pipe. . SUeORAIN TYPE - 5ubdrain type shall be ASTM C508 Asbestos Cement Pipe (ACP) or ASTM 02751, S::)? ::.5 or AS,:.-. :::1527, Sc!'-,e::ule 40 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (,"'BS) or ASTM 0303-.::':":::. 23.:' .:Jr ",5-:-:..1 ~': 785, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (?VCl pipe or approved equivalent. qo III v I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL FINISH GRADE --~-=-=~-=-:-~=(i-;-~~=~======~= ~~~P~~E-D-==:::=::: . _-=-==:::~~t~IP~~;~~~l:~~~~=~~~~[~i~=:~=~r --------~---~-------~---------~- _-_ ==~=~=~=~==~~=====~~=~~=~=fi=~=~~~~=~====--~~~===~~:-:- --:r------:r---ll---:::::::l:::~_:---- - n _u _-_-=jcr-itI II'J..:---~-:-=~-::--------~-=- -;- - - -_-1=-=-:.-------=---::r_-_-_=:=;,-=:--- . _-_-_-_-_--,-;:,:..:::------------------------=4 MIN. --t.:...-15' MIN ~--_. =:. -..--- .--,--- - -- - --~v n -- ----- ---- -- --- -1-------- +- J~!~~fi!~i~~~:*~~!!!~~~~ti:==::~:::::::~:=:===~-=c---~- ;: =::.7----------------...: OVERSIZE,,- --- WINDROWl SLOPE FACE GRANULAR SOIL' ,To TilT voids, densified by flooding PROFILE ALONG WINDROW ,- <lv,