HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 32346 Geotechnical Investigation �a��lv
1 � �
� � � �� INCORPORATED
' P.O. Box 231, Colton, CA 92324-0231 • 1355 E. Cooley Dr., Colton, CA 92324-3954 • Phone (909) 824-7210 • Fax 909) 824-7209
�
' November 30, 2004
,
Seraphina Development, LLC Job No. 041063-3
' 2010 65th Avenue West
Fircrest, Washington 98466
' Attention: Mr. Scott V. Carino
, Dear NIr. Carino:
' Attached herewith is the Geotechnical Investigation report prepared for the proposed residential
development, to be located northeast of the intersection of Nicolas Road and Joseph Road in ihe
, City of Temecula, in Riverside County, California.
This report was based upon a scope of services generally outlined in our proposal letter, dated
' October 20, 2004, and other written and verbal communications.
' We appreciate this opport�anity to provide geotechnical services for this project. If you have
questions or comments concerning this report, please contact this firm at your convenience.
1
, Respectfully submitted,
C.H.J., INCORPORATED
' `�����' „� (�'y�'{/�j�` �fti"7Z"t/L' �L; .
Melvinsky R�irez, taff Engir�er
'
' MR:Ujr
Distribution: Seraphina Development, LLC (6)
'
,
' SOILS ENGINEERING • GEOLOGY • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS TESTING & EVALUATION • CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
, � �
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
' PAGE
INTRODUCTION .................................................... 1
' SCOPE OF SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
' SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................. 2
FIELD INVESTIGATION 3
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
, SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
FAULTING ......................................................... 5
' HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
SEISMIC ANALYSIS ................................................. 8
, Probabilistic Hazard Analysis : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 9
Seismic Zone 9
Soil Profile Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
' Near-Source Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
GROUNDWATER AND LIQUEFACTION . 10
FLOODING AND EROSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
' SLOPE STABII.,ITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ,
CONCLUSIONS ..................................................... 11
' RECONIlvIENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Seismic Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
GeneralSite Grading ................................................ 14
t Initial Site Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Preparation of Fill Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 15
Preparation of Footing Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
' Compacted Fills .................................................... 15
Shrinkage and Subsidence 16
Slope Construction ................................................. 16
' Spread Foundation Design ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 16
Lateral Loading 1'7
Slabs-on-Grade .................................................... 18
' Post-Tensioned Slab Design : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 1 g
Concrete Flatwork 19
PotentialErosion ................................................... 20
Expansive Soils .................................................... 20
, Corrosivity Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Construchon Observation 22
LIMITATIONS ...................................................... 22
' CLOSURE .......................................................... 23
REFERENCES ....................:........................... .... 24
.,
' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS REVIEWED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
'
� �� �
' TABLE OF APPENDICES
'
ENCLOSURE
, APPENDIX "A" - GEOTECHNICAL MAPS
Index ........................................................ "A-l��
I Plat ............................................................. ��A-2"
Geologic Index Map "A-3"
Earthquake Epicenter Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "A-4"
' APPENDIX "B" - EXPLOR.ATORY LOGS
Keyto Logs ......................................... ............ ��B���lof2)
' Soil Classification Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "B" �2of2)
Explorut3^; ��:.::gs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "B-l�
� APPENDIX "C" - LABORATORY TESTING
' Test Data Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ��C-1��
Moisture-Density Test Results "C-2"
Gradation Curves .................................................. "C-3��
Consolidation Tests ................................................ "C-4"
' DirectShearTest .................................................. "C-5"
Corrosivity Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "C-6"
, APPENDIX "D" - SEISMIC DATA
' Probability of Exceedance vs. Acceleration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "D-1"
1
'
,
'
'
�
,
' � � .
� GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
' PREPARED FOR
SERAPHINA DEVELOPMENT, LLC
JOB NO. 041063-3
'
' INTRODUCTION
During November of 2004, a geotechnical investigation for the proposed 29� acre r.esidential
' development, to be constructed northeast of the intersection of Nicolas Road and Joseph R.oad in the
City of Temecula, California, was performed by this firm. The purpose of this investigation was to
/ explore and evaluate the geotechnical conditions at the subject site, and to provide appropriate
geotechnical recommendations for design of the proposed structures and infrastruc±�.z.re.
' To orient our investigation, a Tentative Tract Map, prepared by Apex Engineering, dated September
7, 2004, was furnished for our use. The Tentative Tract Map indicated the number of proposed lots,
' and their respective locations and square footage. A USGS Topographic Map for the area was also
utilized to aid our investigation. The approximate location of the site is shown on the attached Index
' Map (Enclosure "A-1").
' The results of our investigation, together w�ith our conclusions and recommendations, are pr.esented in
this report.
' SCOPE OF SERVICES
' The scope of services provided during this geotechnical investigation included the following:
' • Review of published and unpublished literature and maps
' • Review and analysis of stereoscopic aerial photographs flown in 1962 through 2000
• A geologic field reconnaissance of tha site and surrounding area
' • Logging and sampling of five exploratory borings for testing and evaluation
• Laboratory testing on selected samples
' • Evaluation of the geotechnical data to develop site-specific recommendations for site
grading, conventional static foundation design, and mitigation of potential geotechnical
' concerns and hazards
'
, � � '
' Page No. 2
Job No. 041063-3 �
' PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS
, Information furnished to this office indicates that the subject 29� acre site will be graded and developed
as a residential development. It is our understanding that the development will consist of approxi-
' mately 72 single-family residences and related infrastructure. It is anticipated that the residences will
be one- and two-story residences of wood frame and stucco-type construction. Light foundation loads
are normally associated with such structures.
'
The project grading plan was not available at the time of our investigation. However, observation of
' site topography and of adjacent developments indicates that development of this site will entail
maximum cuts arid fills on the order of 5 feet.
' SITE DESCRIPTION
' The 29� acre site (hereafter referred to as the subject site) is located in the City of Temecula, Riverside
County, California, and is bounded to the south by Santa Gertrudis Creek which is located north of
t Nicolas Road, and runs east to west. The subject site is bounded to the west by Joseph Road, to the
north by R.ita Way, Seraphina Road and Jons Place, and to the east by a branch of the California
aquaduct.
'
No structures existed on the site at the time of our investigation, with the exception of a wooden shack
' located on the northeast portion of the site. The shack had a fence surrounding it. No other evidence
of previous site development was noted during our site visit. The site is generally planar, sloping
' slightly to the �south at a gradient of approximately 1 to 2 percent. The exceptiun to the planar nature
of the site is a small hill (approximately 7 to 10 feet in height) which is located near the center of the
site. Vegetation on the site consists of a moderately dense growth of weeds and grass. Trash and
' mounds of debris and end-dump fill were observed throughout the northern portion of the subj ect site.
A wood and wire fence was observed dividing the site into two sections. The wood �nd wire fence was
' located on the north portion of the subj ect site, and extended to the west from the east to approximately
the center of the subject site, and then it turned south across the site to the creek.
' Review of aerial photographs did not indicate previous developinent or evidence that the site had been
other than undeveloped vacant land. It appears that the only significant usage of the site has been for
' dry farming.
, No other surface features pertinent to this investigation were noted.
'
' � � '
' Page No. 3
Job No. 041063-3
� FIELD INVESTIGATION
' The soil conditions underlying the subj ect site were explored by utilizing five exploratory borings. The
borings were drilled to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface with a track
�� mounted, L10T drill rig equipped for soil sampling. The approximate locations of our exploratory
borings are indicated on the attached Plat (Enclosure "A-2").
, a nd'tions as encountered within the ex lorato borin w
Continuous logs of the subsurf ce co i , p ry gs, ere
' recorded at the time of drilling by a staff engineer from this firm. Relatively undisturbed samples were
obtained by driving a split-spoon ring sampler. or a standard penetration test (SPT) sampler ahead of
' the exploratory borings at selected levels. After the required seating of the sampler, the number of
hammer blows required to advance the sampler a total of 12 inches was converted to SPT data, and
record�d on the boring logs. The blowcounts presented on the logs of the exploratory borings are the
, equivalent SPT N-values and have been corrected only for hammer type (automatic vs. manual cathead)
and sampler size (California sampler vs. SPT sampler). Undisturbed, as well as bulk samples of typical
' soil types obtained were returned to the laboratory in sealecl containers for testing and evaluation.
'
' Our explorat boring logs, together with our SPT and in-place density data, are presented in
Appendix B. The stratification lines presented on the bonng logs represent approximate boundanes
' between soil types, which may include gradual transitions.
In conjunction with the exploratoryborings, a staff geologist conducted a. geolagic field reconnaissance
t af the site and sunounding areas.
' LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
' Included in our laboratory testing program were field moisture content determinations.on all samples
returned to the laboratory and field dry densities on all undisturbed samples. The results are included
on the boring logs. An optimum moisture content - maximum dry density relationship was established
� for a typical soil type in order that the relative compaction of the subsoils might be evaluated. A direct
shear test was performed on a selected sample for soil strength evaluation for bearing capacity and
' lateral earth pressure calculations. Sieve analysis tests were performed on selected samples to aid in
soil classification. Consolidation testing was conciucted on selected samples for settlement and
' hydroconsolidation evaluations. Expansion testing (LTBC method 18-2) was performed on a selected
sample in order to evaluate the potential for distress related to soil expansion.
,
1 � e �
' Page No. 4
Job No. 041063-3 �
' il was delivered to M. J. Schiff & Associates Inc. for .'
A sample of probable foundation subgrade so , ,
soil corrosivity test.
i
Summaries of the laboratory test results appear in Appendix "C".
�
SITE GEOLOGY �ND SUBSUItFACE SOIL CONDITIONS
,
The site is located within the Temecula Basin, a portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic
� Province. The Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province is characterized by northwest-trending
mountain ranges separatP� hy northwest-trending faults.
' The Temecula Basin is a fault-boundeci sedimentary basin located between the Elsinore Trough on the
southwest and the Perris Block on the northeast. The Temecula Basin is infilled with slightly deformed
� Late Tertiary to Late Quaternary continental sediments. Young alluvial channel deposits (Holocene
and latest Pleistocene) materials, up to 30 feet in thickness, were encountered over the site. These
' channel deposits have been mapped as "Qya (Kennedy and Morton, 2003) on Enclosure "A-3". These
materials are locally derived from the underlying Pauba Formation and are therefore lithologically
� similar. However, the channel deposits are present in loose to der.se states.
, Exposed at the surface north of the site and underlying the on-site channel deposits is the Pleistocene
age Pauba Formation, mapped as "Qpfs" on Enclosure "A-3". The Pauba formation has a very shallow
northerly dip ,(less than 5 degrees) in the site area (Kennedy, 1977; Kennedy and Morton, 2003).
' Measured thickness of the Pauba formation is approximately 250 feet (Kennedy, 1977). Subjacent to
the Pauba formation are the Pleistocene-age unnamed sandstone and the Upper Pliocene-age Temecula
' Arkose. The combined maximum thickness of these moderately to well indurated, predominately
sandstones is thought to be on the order of 1,900 feet (Kennedy, 1977). An estimated depth to
' crystalline basement rock at the site of between 1,000 and 2,000 feet therefore appears reasonable.
, As encountered at the site, the Pauba formation consist of light bruwn to gray, slightly consolidated
sands, silts, clays and gravels. F3ased on SPT and rir_g density data, the Pauba Formation is generally
in place in dense to very dense states (cohesionless material) or stiff to hard conditions (cohesive
' material).
,
,
� � � .
' Page No. 5
Job Na. 041063-3
� Consolidation testing performed on selected samples of the young alluvial soils indicate that these soils
have a potential for only slight to negligible consolidation when s�abject to a surcharge load and
' saturation, or near-saturation.
� Groundwater was encountered in Exploratory Boring No. 5 at a depth of 32 feet. Groundwater was not
encountered within the remaining exploratory borings utilized for this investigation. Historic
, groundwater data indicates that free water has existed as shallow as 13 feet below the topographically
lower portions of the site.
� : F;11 wa� nnt encountered within any of our exploratory borings.
' Expansive soils (E.I. = 27) were encountered within the upper surficial soils over the site.
' Refusal to further advancement of the drilling augers was not experienced in any of the exploratory
boring utilized for this investigation.
� �
Slight to moderate caving of the borings was experienced upon removal of the augers.
� A more detailed description of the subsurface soil conditions encountered is presented on the attached
' boring logs (Appendix "B").
FAULTiNG
,
The site does not lie within or immediately adjacent to an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone,
e designated by the State of California to include traces of suspected active faulting. No active or
potentially active faults are shown on or in the immediate vicinity of the site on published geologic
maps. No evidence for active faulting on or immediately adjacent to the site v��as ohserved during the
' geologic field reconnaissance or on the aerial photographs reviewed.
' The tectonics of the Southern California area are dominated by the interaction of ti�e North American
plate and the Pacific plate, which are apparently sliding past each other in a translational manner.
' Although some of the motion may be accommodated by rotation of crustal blocks such as the western
Transverse Ranges (Dickinson, 1996), the San Andreas fault zone is thought to represent the major
' surface expression of the tectonic boundary and to be accommodating most of the translational motion.
, �
� • •
' Page No. 6
Job No. 041063-3 �
� t e North American late. However some of the late motion is ��
between the Pacific plate and h p , p
' apparently also partitioned out to the other northwest-trending, strike-slip faults that are thought to be
related to the San Andreas system, such as the San Jacinto fault and the Elsinore fault. Local
compressional or extensional strain resulting from the translational motion along this boundary is
� accommodated by left-lateral, reverse, and normal faults such as the San Jose fault, the Cucamonga
fault zone, and the Crafton Hills fault zone (Matti and others, 1992; Morton and Matti, 1993).
�
The nearly east-west-trending Murrieta Hot Springs fault is the closest known active fault to the site,
� approximately 3/4 mile north of the site. The State of California evaluated the Murrieta Hot Springs
fault but did not find it to be "sufficiently active a.nd well-defined" to warrant Aln�,;st-Priolo zanation
(Saul, 1978). The Murrieta Hot Springs fault is either cut off by, or is an eastern branch of, the
' Wildomar branch of the Elsinore fault zone (Kennedy, 1977). It is characterized by apparently normal
movement along a plane with an average dip of 80 degrees to the south (Kennedy, 1977). As with most
� occurrences of low-temperature geothermal resources in Southern California the Musrieta hot springs
owe their existence to deep circulation of groundwater associated with faulting. Fault investigations
` conducted by private consultants at the Rancho California Country Club and immediately east of
Winchester Road have reported clear evidence of Holocene activity of the Murrieta Hot Springs fault.
' Unpublished radiometric dates obtained from trenches placed on the Calvary Chapel Conference Center
by this firm showed rupture of the fault approximately 900 to 1,000 years ago.
' Numerous faults and lineaments are shown in the general site area by Kennedy (1977) and Kennedy
and Morton (2003). The closest of these features to the si�e is located approximately 1!2 mile to the
1 northeast of the site.
' The Elsinore fault zone is present approxirnately 3 3/4 miles southwest of th� site. The Elsinore fault
zone is composed of inultiple en echelon and diverging fault traces and splays into the
� Whittier and Chino faults to the north. Altliough a zone of overall right-lateral defor�naticn �onsistent
� with the regional plate tectonics, traces of the Elsinore fault zone form the graben �f the
Elsinore and Temecula Valleys. Holocene surface rupture events have been docurriented for several
' principal strands of the Elsinore fault zone (Saul, 1978; Rockwell and others, 1985; Wi11s, 1988).
'
,
' � � ,
' Page No. 7
Job No. 041063-3
' into fault zone a s stem of northwest-trendin ri t-lateral strike-sli faults is resent
The San Jac , y g, gh , p , p
' as two parallel main strands across the San Jacinto Valley northeast of the site. The western strand,
known as the Casa Loma fault, is well expressed in late Holocene alluvium in the Hemet area, but
evidence of recent activity decreases to the north. North of the San Jacinto River, Rogers (1966)
' mapped the Casa Loma fault as a buried trace that links with the Reche Canyon fault as mapped by
Morton (1978). That fault is approximately 17 miles northeast of the site. The eastern strand, or
' Claremont fault, is well expressed in the northern San Jacinto Valley at a closest distance of
approximately .19 miles. A maximum moment magnitude (Mmax) earthquake of M 6.9 is assigned
' to a rupture of the San Jacinto Valley segment of the San Jacinto fault (Petersen and others, 1996).
More large historic earthquakes have o�.curred on the San Ta�;nrn fault than any other fault in Southern
' California (Working Group on Califortiia Earthquake Probabilities, 1988). Based on the data of Matti
and others (1992), this portion of the San Jacinto fault may be accommodating mu�h of the motion
between the Pacific plate and the North American plate in this area. Matti an� others (1992) suggest
, this motion is transferred to the San Andreas fault in the Cajon Pass region by "stepping over" to
parallel fault strands which include the Glen Helen fault. The Working Group on California
1 Earthquake Probabilities (1995) tentatively assigned a 43 percent (f17 percent) probability of a major
earthquake on the San Jacinto Valley segment of the San Jacinto fault for the 30-yeax interval from '
, 1994 to 2024.
' The San Andreas fault zone is located along the southwest margin of the San Bernardino Mountains,
approximately 33 miles northeast of the site. The toe of the mountain front in the San Bernardino area
roughly demarcates the presently active trace of the San Andreas fault, which is characterized by
, youthful fault scarps, vegetational lineaments, springs, and offset drainages. The Working Group on
California Earthquake Probabilities (1995) tentatively assigned a 28 percent (� 13 percent) probability
' to a major earthquake occurring on the San Bernardino Mountains segnent of the San Andreas fault
between 1994 and 2024.
I R
HISTORICAi� EA THQUAKE�
' A. map of recorded earthquake epicenters is included as Enclos�.ue "?.-4" (Epi Soflware, ?004). This ..
map includes the Cal Tech database for earthquakes with magnitudes of 4.0 or greater from 1977
, through 2004.
'
'
1 �
' Page No. 8
Job No. 041063-3 �
'
The only large historical earthquake that can definitely be attributed to the Elsinore fault was a M 6.0 .'
, event in 1910 in the Temescal Valley area. This event caused damage to structures from Corona to
Wildomar (Weber, 1977). Since 1932, four M 4.0+ earthquakes have occuned al�on� the Elsinore fault
zone in the Santiago Peak area (Weber, 1977).
t
The San Jacinto fault is the most seismically active fault in Southern California, although it has no
� record of producing gxeat events comparable to those that occurred on the San Andreas faul± during the
Fort Tejon earthquake of 1857 and the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 (Working Group on
' California Earthquake Probabilities, 1988). Between 1899 and 1990, seven earthquakes of M 6.0 0�
greater r.ave occurred along the �?n J�c�nto fault. Two of these earthquakes, an estimated M 6.7 in
, 1899 and a M 6.8 in 1918, took place in the San Jacinto Valley, east of the site. Two others, an
estimated M 6.5 in 1899 and a M 6.2 in 1923, toolc place in the San Bernardino Valley, nortn of the site
(Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1988).
'
No large earthquakes have occurred on the S an Bernardino Mountains segment of the San Andreas fault
' within the regional historical time frame. Using dendrochronological evidenc;e, Jacoby and others
(1987) inferred that a great earthquake on December 8,, 1812 ruptured the northern reaches of this
� segment. Trenching studies have revealed evidence of rupture on the San Andreas fault at �Vrigl
occurred within this time frame (Fumal and others, 1993). Comparison of rupture events at the
, Wrightwood site and Pallett Creek, and analysis of reported intensities at the coastal missions, led
Fumal and others (1993) to conclude that the December 8, 1812 event ruptured the San Bernardino
' Mountains segment of San Andreas fault largely to the southeast of Wrightwood, possibly extending
into the San Bernardino Valley. The average recunence interval for lazge earthquakes along the
southern San Andreas fault at six paleoseismic is 182 years (Stone and others, 2002). Surface rupture
t occuned an the Mojave segment of the San Andreas fault in the great 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake. The
Coachella Valley segment of the San Andreas fault was responsible for the 1948 M 6.5 earthquake in
� the Desert Hot Springs area and for the 1986 M 5.6 earthauake in the North Palm Springs area.
t The Murrieta Hat Springs fault has no record of historical seismicity.
, SEISMIC ANALYSIS
The precise relationship between magnitude and recurrenee interval of large earthquakes for a given
' fault is not known due to the relatively short time span of recorded seismic activity. As a result, a
number of assumptions must be made to quantify the ground shaking hazard at a particular site.
'
, � �
, Page No. 9
Job No. 041063-3
' Seismic hazard evaluations can be conducted from both a probabilistic and a deterministic standpoint.
The probabilistic method is prescribed for seismic design by current building codes and was utilized
' to estimate the seismic hazard to the site during this investigation.
, PROBABILISTIC HAZARD ANALYSIS:
The probabilistic analysis of seismic hazaxd is a statistical analysis of seismicity of all known regional
' faults attenuated to a particular geographic location. The results of a probabilistic seismic hazard
analysis are presented as the annual probability of exceedance of a given strong motion parameter for
� a particular exposure time (Johnson and others, 1992).
� For this report, the probabilistic analysis computer program FRISKSP (Blake, 2000) was used to
analyze the location of the site under the criteria for NEHRP subgrade Type "D" by Boore and others
(1997) in relation to seismogenic faults within a 62-mile (100km) radius of the site. This program
� assumes that significant earthquakes occur on mappable faults, and that thz occurrence rate of
earthquakes on a fault is proport�onal to �he estimated slip rate of that fault. Maximum potential
' earthquake magnitudes are correlated to expected fault rupture areas. The ground motions of each
source are attenuated to the site as per the selected method. The probability that the resultant ground '
' motions will be exceeded is calculated. From the summation of the probabilities of exceedanc� of each
ground motion level from all the potential sources, the total average annual probability of an
' acceleration greater than each of the values requested is calculated (Blake, 2000). The resultant graph
of probability of exceedance vs. acceleration (Appendix "D") indicates that a peak ground acceleration
of 0.57g has a 10 percent probabiiity of exceedance in 50 years (statistical return periud of �75 y�ars).
' This conesponds to the Design Basis Earthquake as defined in the California Building Code
(International Conference of Building Officials, 2001).
�
SEISMIC ZONE
, Figure 16-2 presented in the 2001 California Building Code (CBC) places the site within Seismic Zone
4. Table 16-I of the 2001 CBC assigns a Seismic Zone Factor "Z" of 0.40 to Seismic Zone 4.
e SOIL PROFILE CHARACTERIZATION:
Based on the equivalent SPT-N data from the exploratory borings and the geologic setting of the site
, the soil profile at the site is classified as S stiff soil profile, according to the 2001 CBC.
' -
'
� �
' Page No. 10
Job No. 041063-3 �
� NEAR-SOURCE EFFECTS � '
The seismic hazard to the site is dominated by the Elsinore fault zone at a distance of approximately
� 3 3/4 miles southeast, and the Murrieta Hot Springs fault, approximately 3/4 mile north of the site. The
Elsinore fault is classified as a Type "A" fault by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Cao
, and others, 2003). The Murrieta Hot Springs fault is not classified by Cao and others (2003); the
appropriate classification for it is Type "B". Based on the distances to these faults and their source
� type, the site is subject to a near-source acceleration factor N of 1.30 and a near-source velocity factor
N,, of 1.60, as defined in the 2001 CBC.
' GROUN AND LI UEFACTION
t The entire site is underlain at relatively shallow depths by dense to very dense sedimentary rocks of
the Pauba Formation. The overlying alluvial soils consist of silty sands and poorly graded sands in
' loose to dense states.
� Data from State Well No. 07S/02W19C, available from Western Municipal Water District (2003),
which is located approximately 3/4 mile northwest of the site, indicates a minimum depth to
' groundwater of 13 feet in 2003. This well is topographically at approximately the same elevation as
the lowest portion of the subj ect site, and is expected to reflect the depth to groundwater within flatter
alluvial areas and/or canyon bottoms in the vicinity. This equates to an elevation of approximately
' ?,122 feet above MSL. Groundwater was encountered within Boring No. 5 at a depth of approximately
32 feet below ground surface (approximate elevation 1,108 fee± MSL j. Groundwater was not
� encountered within the remaining exploratory borings utilized far this investigation. The site's
groundwater conditions can be expected to rise somewhat following wet years. Based on the depth to
' groundwater and the proposed surface elevations, it appears that groundwater should not rise above
18 feet (elevation 1122) below lowest surface elevations.
� Based on equivalent SPT data and in-place den�ities, soils below an elevation of 1122 generally have
' a high relative density.
Liquefaction is a process in which strong ground shaking causes saturated soils to lose their strength
1 and behave as a fluid (Matti and Carson, 1991). Ground failure associated with liquefaction can result
in severe damage to structures. The geologic conditions for increased susceptibility to liquefaction are:
�
'
� � �
� Page No. 11
Job No. 041063-3
' water i.e. less than 50 feet 2 resence of unconsolidated sand alluvium
1) shallow depth to ground (, ), ) p y ,
, typically Holocene in age, and 3) strong ground shaking. All three of these conditions must be present
for liquefaction to occur. Based upon the data reviewed during tlus investigation, two of the three
geologic conditions for increased liquefaction susceptibility (strong groun�i shaking and shallow
' groundwater) are expected to exist on the site. Due to the density of alluvial s�ils and sedimentary
bedrock below the anticipated groundwater elevation, there is no potential for significa.ut liquefaction
' to occur at the site, and further evaluation of the liquefaction potential of the site is not warranted.
' FLOODING AND EROSION
' No evidence of significant historic flooding of the site was observed during our geologic field
reconnaissance or on the aerial photographs reviewed. The hazard of major flooding of the site appears
minimal.
'
A branch of the California aquaduct is located immediately east of the site. Seismically induced
, flooding may be a potential hazard, should the pipeliile rupture during a large earthquake. Therefore,
emergency drainage should be provided. '
' The upper soils encountered within the site consist of silty sands and poorly graded sands. These soils
, are moderately susceptible to erosion by wind and water. Positive drainage should be provided, and
water should not be a?lowed to pond anywhere on the site. Water should not be allowed to flow over
any graded or natural areas in such a way as to cause erosion.
�
SLOPE STABILITY
'
No significant natural slopes exist on or immediately adjacent to the site. It is anticipated that site
' development will not entail significant cut or fill slopes or slopes with inclinations in excess of 2
horizontal (h):1 vertical (v)].
I CONCLUSIONS
e On the basis of our field and laboratory investigations, it is the opinion of this firm that the proposed
development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations contained
1 in this rep�rt are implemented during grading and construction.
'
' � � '
' Page No. 12
Job No. 041063-3
� Moderate to severe seismic shaking of the site can be expected during the lifetime of the proposed `
structures.
,
No evidence of recent significant flooding of the site was observed 3uring the geologic field recon-
t naissance or on the aerial photographs reviewed. The uppf;r soils encountered within the site consist
of silty sands that are moderately susceptible to erosion by wind and water.
� '
Seismically induced flooding of the site may be a potential hazard should the California aquaduct
' rupture during a large earthquake. Emergency drainage should be provided.
Conditions conductive to landsliding are not present at the site. No significant slopes are proposed.
'
The controlling geotechnical issue for development of this site is the presence of loose, near-surface
' soils. These soils generally blanketed the site to a depth on the order of 3 feet. Based upon our field
investigation and test data, it is our opinion that the loose upper soils blanketing the site will not, in
, their present condition, provide uniform or adequate sup�ort for the proposed fills and structures.
These conditions may cause unacceptable differential and/or overall settlement upon application of the
' anticipated fill surcharges and foundation loads.
Therefore because of site conditions, it is our opinion that a minimum mandatory removal and
� recompaction of at least the upper 36 inches of original ground soil in all areas to be graded be
conducted. During the grading operation, the engineering gealogist should ��bserve the underlying soils
' so that any remaining pockets of loose soils may be identified and removed at that time and so that
these soils may be properly densified to provide support for the proposed structures and infrastructures.
' The removed soils, if free of deleterious material such as roots, etc., may be reused as compacted fill.
' To provide adequate support for the proposed structures, it is our opinion that the building pad areas
should be further subexcavated as necessary and recompacted to provide a compacted fill mat beneath
footings and slabs. A compacted fill mat should provide a dense, uniform, high-strength soil layer to
' distribute the foundation loads over the underlying soils. Conventional spread foundations, either
individual spread footings and/or continuous wall footings, may be utilized in conjunction with a
' compacted fill mat.
'
'
' � �
' Page No. 13
Job No. 041063-3
'
' The density of the deeper soils and the depth to static groundwater preclude a potential for liquefaction
or other shallow groundwater-related hazards at the site.
' Laboratory testing indicates selected sandy silt with clay on the site exhibit a"low" expansiCn potential
(E.I. =27), which can adversely affect the proposed foundation structures. These expansive conditions
' can be compensated for using either specialized geotechnical grading parameters or �esign of special
foundation/slab system. Grading of the site could be performed so that all structures will be founded
' on a minimum of 24 inches of granular non-expansive soils to mitigate the effects of such expansive
soil. If the proposed gad?no creates a minimum of 24 inches of such material Ueneath the bottom of
' foundations and slabs, conventional foundations and slabs may be utilized without compensation for
these expansive conditions. If the proposed grading establishes less than 24 inches of the granular non-
' expansive soil beneath foundation and slabs, specialized foundations such as pos�-terisioned slabs
should be designed to resist the effects of these expansive soils. This should be confirmed by the
engineering geologist prior to finish grading of the building pad.surface. As such, we are providing
, recommendations for a conventional spread foundation; as well as post-tensioned sla�s, although other
types of foundations may be designed to resist the effects of expansion. It should be noted that soils '
' with a greater expansion potential may be encountered during the grading operation, which rnay require
a non-expansive blanket of greater thickness. As an alternative, the expansive soil may be mixed with
' on-site or importPd non-expansive material to lower it's expansive inciex to less than 20.
' �ZECOMll�IEN�JATIONS
SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERA'1�'IONS:
' Severe seismic shaking of the site can be expected during the lifetime of the p�•oposed structures. �
Therefore, the proposed structures should be designed accordingly.
'
The site is subject to near-source effects of strong motion. The applicable ne�r-source acceleration
' factor N and the near-source velocity factor N,,, as defined in the 2001 California Building Code (CBC),
are 1.30 and 1.60, respectively.
' Based on the SPT N values, it is our opinion that the area of the site should be classified as S stiff soil.
�
'
1 � A �
, Page No. 14
Job No. 041063-3 �
' GENERAL SITE GRADING � �
It is imperative that no clearing and/or grading operations be performed without the presence of a
' representative of the geotechnical engineer. An on-site pre job meeting with the developer, the
contractor, and the geotechnical engineer should occur prior to all gradinb related operations.
, Qperations undertaken at the site without the geotechnical engineer present may result in exclasions
of affected areas from the final compaction report for the proj ect.
'
Crading of the subj ect site should be performed, at a minimum, in accordance with these recommenda-
tions and with applicable portions of the CBC.
'
' INITIAL SITE PREPARATION:
All areas to be graded should be stripped of significant vegetation and other deletf:rious materials. Any
existing fills encountered during constructir�n should be completely remaved and, after being cleaned
' of significant deleterious materials, may be reused as compacted fill.
' Any existing pockets of undocumented fill or loose disturbed soils encountered during construction '
should be completely removed, cleaned of significant deleterious materials, and may be reused as
' compacted fill. Any roots or other deleterious materials encountered at this time should b� removed
prior to replacing the soil.
' In order to verify the suitability of the ground to receive fill and densify t�e loose upper soils, a
mandatory subexcavation operation of all areas to be graded will need to be performed. This
' mandatory subexcavation operation should include removal of at least the upper 36 inckes of existing
soils. The depth of removal should be confirmed by the engineering geolagist during grading
� operation.
' Cavities created by removal of subsurface obstructions should be thoroughly cleaned of loose soil,
organic matter, and other deleterious materials, shaped to provide access for construction equipment,
' and backfilled as recommended for site fill.
If a conventional spread foundation is selected for the design, within the structure and slab area and 5
� feet beyond where possible, at least 24 inches of the expansive soil (E.I.>20) below the footing base
grade and slab should be completely removed prior to any grading. This subexcavation operation
' should include a minimum of the upper 12 inches of existing;naterial, even though p?anned filling will
�
' � �
� Page No. 15
Job No. 041063-3
� be sufficient to satisfy non-expansive compacted fill thickness requirements. The removal of the upper
, 12 inches of soil, regardless, is to assist in fill identification and removal of buried obstructions and
loose and disturbed soils . These expansive soils should not be reused as compacted fill in the building
or flatwork areas. Imported or on-site �anular non-expansive soils should be used as the fill material.
� As an alternative, the expansive soil may be mixed with on-site or imported non-expansive material
to lower it's E.I. to less than 20.
t If a ost-tensioned slab foundation is selected for the desi at least the u er 12 inches of existin
P �� PP g
' soil within the building pad area and 5 feet beyond where possible should be completely removed prior
to any grading. The soils should be cleaned of significant deleterious materials an�t may be reused as
' compacted fill.
PREPARATION OF FILL AREAS
, Prior to placing fill, after the mandatory subexcavation operation, observation, and approval by the
engineering geologist, the surfaces of all areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of
, approximately 12 inches. The scarified soils should be brought to between optimum moisture content
and 2 percent above and recompacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent in accordance with '
' ASTM D 1557.
' PREPARATION OF FOOTING AREAS:
All footings should rest upon at least 18 inches of properly compacted fill material. In areas where the
required thickness of compacted fill is not accomplished by the mandat�ry subexcavatic�n operation and
' by site rough grading, the footing areas should be subexcavated to a depth of at least 18 inehes belo��v
the proposed footing base. grade. The subexcavation should horizontally extend beyond the footing
' lines a minimum distance of five feet where possible. The bottom of this excavation should then be
scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, brought to between optimum moisture content and 2 perceirt
� above, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in accordance v�ith ASTM D 1557
prior to refilling the excavation to grade as properly comp�cted fiZl.
' COMPACTED FILLS:
The on-site soils should provide adequate quality fill material provided they are free from organic
' matter and other deleterious materials. Unless approved by the geotechnical engineer, rock or similar
irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches should not be buried or placed
� in fills.
�
, • �
� Page No. 16
Job No. 041063-3
e Although not anticipated, import fill should be inorganic, non-expansive granular soils free from rocks �'
or lumps greater than 8 inches in maximum dimension. Sources for import fill should be observed arid
' approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to their use.
1 Fill should be spread in near=horizontal layers, approximately 8 inches in thickness. Thicker lifts may
be approved by tr.e geotecluiical engineer if testing indicates that the grading procedures are adequate
� to achieve the Xequired compaction. Each lift shall be spread evenly, thoroughly mixed during
spreading to attain uniformity of the material and moisture in each layer, brought to between
' optimum moisture content and 2 percent above, and compacted to a minimurri relative compaction of
90 percent in accordance with A.STM D 1557.
, SHRINKAGE AND SUBSIDENCE:
Based upon the relative compaction of the soils determined during this investigation and the relative
� compaction anticipated for compacted fill soils, we estimate a compaction shrinkage of approximately
5 to 10 percent. Therefore, 1.05 cubic yards to 1.10 cubic yards of in-place soil material would be
, necessary to yield 1 cubic yard of properly compacted fill material. In addition, we would anticipate
subsidence of �approximately 0. I foot. These values are exclusive of losses due to stripping, or the
' removal of other subsurface ob�tructions, if encountered and may vary due to differing conditions
within the project boundaries and the limitations of this investigation.
' Values presented for shrinkage and subsidence are estimates only. Final grades should be adjusted,
and/or contingency plans to import or export material should be made to acco�nmodate possible
e variations in actual quantities during site grading.
, SLOPE CONS'�RUCTION:
Significant permanent cut and fill slop�s are not anticipated. If significant slopes are proposed, slopes
, should be constructed no steeper than 2(h):1(v). Our firm should be contacted to provide additional
recommendations and evaluation of any significant proposed slope. Measures should be provided to
prevent surface water from flowing over slope faces.
'
SPREAD FOUNDATION DESIGN:
' If the sites are prepared as reconunended and the site grading has created a minimum of 24 inches of
compacted granular non-expansive soil below the bottoms of the foundations or dense native non-
� expansive soils are exposed, .the proposed structures may be safely foun�3ed an conventianal spread
,
1 ! �
, Page No. 17
Job No. 041063-3
' foundations, either individual spread footings and/or continuous wall footings. Such conventional
� footings should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and should be established at a minimum depth of 12
inches below lowest adjacent final subgrade level.
' For the minimum width and depth, footings may be designed for a maximum safe soil bearing pressure
of 1,800 pounds per square foot (psfl for dead plus live loads. This allowable bearing pressure may
' be increased by 100 psf for each additional foot of width and by 300 psf for each additional foot of
depth to a maximum safe soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for dead plus live loads. The strength of
' foundation support material should be verified by the geotechnical engineer.
' These bearing values may be increased by one-third for wind or seismic loading.
If structures are to be founded on less than 24 inches of granular non-expansive soils, than a post-
� tensioned slab, or other specialized foundation system, will ne necessary to re�ist the effects of the
expansive soil conditions. Geotechnical design recommendations for post-tensioned slabs � e pravided
� in the POST-TENSIONED SLAB DESIGN section of this report.
,
' Based upon the e,�isting soil conditions and recommended grading procedures, static settlement sr.ould
not exceed 1/2 inch. Differential settlement between adjacent and similarly loaded foundations should
' not exceed 1/480 (1/4 inch over 40 feet).
' LATERAL LO�iDING:
Resistance to lateral loads will be provided by passive earth pressure and base fi For footings
bearing against compacted fill or approved native soils, passive earth pressure may be considered to
' be developed at a rate of 300 psf per foot of depth. Base friction may be computed at 0.30 times the
normal load. Base friction and passive earth pressure may be combined v��ithout reduction.
� For relimina retainin wall or shoring design purposes, a lateral active ear�h pressure developed at
P rY g
' a rate of 40 psf per foot of depth should be utilized for unrestrained conditions. For restrained
conditions, an at-rest earth pressure of 55 psf per foot of depth should be utilized. These values should
be verified prior to construction when the backfill materials and conditions have been determined and
' are applicable only to level properly drained backfill with no additional surcharge loadings. If backfills
are proposed, this firm should be contacted to develop appropriate active earth pressure parameters.
, '
e
� � � �
, Page No. 18
Job No. 041063-3 �
' Foundation concrete should be laced in neat excavations with vertical sides, or the concrete should ��
P
' be formed and the excavations properly backfilled as recommended for site fill. '
,
SLABS-ON-GRADE
� If the site is prepared as recommended, conventional slabs-on-grade may only be utilized if the site
grading has established a minimum of 24 inches of compacted granular non-expansive soils below the
� bottoms of the s�abs. The final pad surfaces should be rolled to provide smooth, dense surfaces upon
which to place the concrete. If slabs are to be founded on less than 24 inches of granular non-expansive
' soils, then a post-tensioned slab, or other. specialized foundation system, will be necessary to resist the
effects ofthe exnansive soil conditions. Geotechnical design recommendations forpost-tens�oned slabs
� are provided in the POST-TENSIONED S:LAB DESIGN section of this report.
Slabs to receive moisture-sensitive coverings should be provided with a moisture vapor barrier. This
� barrier may consist of an impermeable membrane. Two inches of sand over the membrane will reduce
punctures and aid in obtaining a satisfactory concrete cure. The sand should be moistened just prior
, to placing of concrete.
� POST-TENSIONED SLA� DESIGN:
The following recommendations are provided for foundations embedded in.to the native cohesive soils
� at the site. These values are preliminary and should be verified follo��ing the achial grading operation.
Expansion test results indicate that selected soils at the.site have an E.I. of 27, which equates to a"low"
� expansion potential. Based upon the results of the tests, we are providing the follawing parameters
requir�d for the design of post-tensioned slabs (Ch. 18, Div. III, 1997 UBC):
�
1. Allowable soil bearing pressure 1,250 psf
� 2. Edge moisture variation distance(e,,,) 2.5 feet edge lift �
5.4 feet center li.ft
, 3. Differential soil movement (y, 0.10 inch edge lift
0.78 inch. center lift
' 4. Slab-subgrade friction coefficient 0.30
'
'
� � � '
' Page No. 19
Job No. 041063-3
'
' Numbers 2 and 3 above relate to expansive soils and are based upon a Thornwaite Moisture Index of
-20, a constant suction of 3.6 pF at a depth of 3 feet, a velocity of moisture flow of 0.7 inch per month,
and predominantly montmorillonite clay soil with 30 percent clay.
�
An assumed value of subgrade modulus of 125 pci can be used t� determine the partition load
' coefficient during uniform slab thickness calculations.
For structures founded on expansive soils, consideration should be given to the connection of utilit_y
� lines. In general, connections should be flexible to allow for differential movement. Flexible pipe sucl�
as PVC should be utilized.
, CONCRETE FLATWORK:
The expansive soils conditions identified on the site may adversely affect areas of portland cement
, concrete (PCC) flatwork such as sidewalks, driveways, curbs, and other non structural pavement areas.
PCC flatwork will require special geotechnical or structural design considerations to accommodate the
' effects of expansion. For structural building slab areas, we have provided recommendations for post-
tensioned slab design; however, post-tensioned slabs may not be practical for concrete flatwork. As �
' such, we are including the following general recommendations for concrete flatwork where expansive
soils are present.
' Geotechnical Methods of Miti a� tion:
Utilizing ±he weighted expansion index outlined in the UBC, the potential effects of expansive
' soils can be incrementally decreased with greater thicknesses of granular material beneath the
flatwork. The expansive effects can be reduced to a level of insignificance by supporting the
flatwork on a minimum of 24 inches of granular material. In cases where this is impractical,
' a minimum of 12 inches of compacted granular non expansive material should be place�
beneath the flatwork.
' The expansive soils should be pre-saturated to a depth of 24 inches for the previous 7 days priar
, to placement of concrete. The pre-saturation should be to at least 5 percent abQve optimum
moisture content.
' The expansive soils should be protected from moisture fl��ctuations to the extent practical. This
may invoive such factors as providing positive drainage away from the flatwork, avoidance of
' adjacent landscaping (especially trees) requiring irrigation or perhaps placement of imperme-
able membranes. Irrigation pipes should not be placed near flatwork and must be properly
'
' � •
' Page No. 20
Job No. 041063-3
' maintained in order to avoid distress related to leaks and rupture. Landscape areas should slope �'�
away from the flatwork and structural areas by at least 5 percent. All surface water runoff must
O be diverted away from the margins of flatwor'.�c and structura: areas, and directed into paved
roadways or appropriate drainage features.
' Structural Methods of Miti a�n:
All flatwork should be designed to resist the effects of expansion. We are providing what we
� consider typical recommendations. The actual design including reinforcement should be pro-
vided by the structural or civil engineer.
' - f ex ansive soiis snoui�i be a minimum of 4 inches
A l l c o n c r e� e fl a t w o r k s u b � e c t t o t h e e f f e c t s o p
� in thickness and reinforced by utilizing a minimum of 6x6-W6xW6 steel welded wire
reinforcement (ASTM A 185-01) or #3 Bars at 14 inches each way at mid height. Curbing
should contain at least one number 4 bar continuous top and bottom.
'
Where the flatwork abuts structures or adjacent flatwork the flatwork should be d�weled into
' the adjacent structure, to avoid differential elevation. The dowels should be smooth and either
wrapped or lubricated on one end to prevent bondin� and allow for movement. Felt or similar
material should be placed between adjacent slab edges.
�
It should be cautioned that some distress to eoncrete flatwork may occur in spite of the measures taken
, to mitigate the effects. However, the distress will be lessened by incorporating as many of the above
measures as practical into the design and construction of the flatwork. Th� costs of these preventative
' measures should be weighed against the costs of future repairs and maintenance.
� POTENTIAL EROSION:
The pQtential for erosion should be mitigated by proper drainage design. Water should not be allowed
to flow over graded areas or natural areas so as to cause erosion. Graded areas should be planted or
' otherwise protected from erosion by wind or water.
, EXPANSIVE SOILS:
Clayey soil materials tested durir.g this investigation exhibited a"low" potential for expansian with an
' E.I. of 27 in accordance with UBC Standard Test Method 18-2 (2001 CBC). The results of these tests
are presented in the Test Data Summary (Enclosure "C-1"). Specialized construction procedures to
' specifically resist expinsive soil foices are therefore recommerided. Our calculation, per C�3C Chapter
�
' � � �
' Page No. 21
Job No. 041063-3
� 18 indicate that with a minimum of 24 inches of anular non-ex ansive material established beneath
, �' P
, the bottoms of the foundations, weighted expansion index will be 8.1. With such a blanket of non-
expansive matenal, conventional spread foundahon designs may be utihzed. Wrthout such a blanket
' of non-expansive material, specialized foundation systems such as post-tensioned slabs are necessary.
Geotechnical design recommendations for both types of foundation systems are provided in the
representative sections of this report. Requirements for reinforcing steel to satisfy structural criteria
' are not affected by these recommendations.
' Because of the unknowns with respect to the grading operation and the mixing and potential importing
of soils at the site, it is our recommendation ±r?± ±?:P a ading operation be closely observed hy the geo-
' technical engineer, and, near the completion of grading, that each pad area be evaluated for expansive
soils. The results of that evaluation will determine the specific type of slabs and foundations appro-
priate for the sites final gaded condition.
�
CORROSIVITY TESTING
' Selected samples of material were delivered to M. J. Schiff & Associates, Inc. for soil corrosivity tests.
Laboratory testing consisted of pH, resistivity, and major soluble salts commonly found in soils. The '
� results of the laboratory tests performed by M. J. Schiff & Associates, Inc. are attached as Enclosure
"C-6". These tests have been performed in order to screen the site for potentially corrosive soils.
� '
' Values from the soil tested are considered mildly corrosive at as-received and corrosive at saturated
moisture conditions to ferrous metals at the site.
Testing for ammonium and nitrate values indicated that the soils were not generally corrosive to copper.
�
Results of the soluble sulfate testing indicate a"negligible" anticipated exposu:e to sulfate attack, as
' indicated on the enclosed test results. Based upon the criteria from Table 4.3.4. of the American
Concrete Institute (ACI) Manual of Concrete Practice (20U0), no special. measures, such as specific
' cement types, water-cement ratios, etc., will be needed for this "negligible" exposure to sulfate attack.
Soluble chloride content of soil was not at levels high enough to be of concern with respect to corrosion
� of reinforcing steel. The results should be considered in combination with the soluble chloride content
of the hardened concrete in determining the effect of chloride on the corrosion of reinforcing steel.
�
,
' � �
' Page No. 22
Job No. 041063-3
� C.H.J., Incorporated does not practice corrosion engineering. If further information concerning the
coi osion characteristics, or interpretation of the results submitted herein, are required, then a
� competent corrosion engineer could be consulted.
�
' CONSTRUCTI�N OBSERVATION:
All� grading operations, including site clearing and stripping, should be observed by a representative
� of the jeotechnical engineer. The presence of the geotechnical engineer's field representative will be
for �the purpose of providing observation and field testing, and will not include any supervising or
diri cting of the actual work of the contractor, his employees, or agents. Neither the presence of the
' �eotPc.h engineer's field representative nor the observations an3 testing by the geotechn�ca?
I
engineer shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in his work. It is understood that
' the�igeotechnical engineer will not be responsible for job or site safety on this project, which will be tke
sol'e responsibility of the contractor.
' �
� LIMITATIONS
' ,
C.H.J., Incorporated has striven to perfortn our services within the li�nits prescribed by our client, and
' in a manner consistent with the usual thoro.ughness and competence of reputable geotechnical engineers
and engineering geologists practicing under similar circumstances. No other representation, express
, or implied, and rio warranty or guarantee is included or intended by virtue of the services performed
or reports, opinion, documents, or otherwise supplied.
� This report reflects the testing conduc�ed on the site as the site existed during the investigation, which
is the subject of this report. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the
' passage of time, due to natural processes or the ��orks of man on this or adj acent properties. Changes
in applicable or appropriate standards may also occur whether as a result of legislatien, application, or
' the broadening of knowledge. Therefore, this report is indicative of only those conditions tested at the
time of the subject investigation, and the findings of this report may be invalidated fi�lly or partially by
� changes outside of the control of C.H.J., Incorporated. This report is therefore subject to review and
should not be relied upon after a period of one year.
� The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based upon observations performed and data
collected at separate locations, and interpolation between these locations, carried out for the proj ect and
' the scope of services described. It is assumed and expected that the conditions between locations
'
' � �
1 Page No. 23
Job No. 041063-3 '
' observed and/or sampled are similar to those encountered at the individual locations where observation
' and sampling was performed. However, conditions between these locations may vary significantly.
Should conditions be encountered in the field, by the client or any firm performing services for the
client or the client's assign, that appear different than those described herein, this firm should be
, contacted immediately in order that we might evaluate their effect.
, If this report or portions thereof are provided to contractors or included in specifications, it should b�
understood by all parties that they are provided for information only and should be used as sucn.
' The report and its content� resulting from this i.nvestigation are not in±en�?�� �� r�
..� . presented to be
' suitable for reuse on extensions or modifications of the project, or for use on any other project.
CLOSURE
�
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service and trust this report provides th� information desired
� at this time. Should questions arise, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
' � p.ED G��
�� (
Respectfully subinitted, �� � i
I N ,
GH.J., INCORPORATED �� sc� �ON WILLIAMS �
N`J.75^2 •
' EX�. 1-31-05
� � ( r ��. �� �
vU 9 � �F� t,�.�'�IY�'Yli �� Cj/)'Y'li� �--'
1 CF C �L
Ben Williams, R.G. 7542 -��, 3 0 -� Melvinsky Ramir , Staf ngineer
Staff Geologist
1 '� �a GF / ; � oQROEESS/p�,ql
�c o , Q �, �� � . �a �.
� . JAY J. � �� �� ? 'J� �
�'! fiAARTlN � �, ,%. !
' � No: 152.9 � Robert J. Jo ' n G.E. 443 ;° No. 443 z rn
J J. artin, E.G. 152 � CER7IFIED .� ° y Exp. 3-3�-05 �
ce resident .k. E�c��EERING Fresideni t
d cF �'
G�OLOGIST � f * ��FCH����' ��Q'
�� Exp.8-31-06 Q' `�''
� 9T ��� CAL�FO��a � CR1.�F�� ��
`` � ��.3
� MRlBW/RJJ:bjr
�
� � � �
� Page No. 24
Job No. 041063-3
� REFERENCES
' American Concrete Institute, 2000, Manual of Concrete Practice.
Blake, T.F., 2000, FRISKSP: A compu�er program for the probabilistic estimation of peak acceleration
and uniform hazard spectra using 3-D faults as earthquake sources.
' Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1997, Equations for estimating horizontal response
spectra and peak acceleration from western North American earthquakes: A summary of recent work:
' Seismological Research Letters, v. 68, no. 1, January/Febn.�ary 1997, p. 128-153.
California Department of Water Resources, 1990, Unpublished water well data on microfiche.
' California Department of Water Resources, 2003, Ground��ater module administration
http://wdl.water.ca.gov/gw/admin/main menu gw.asp.
Cao, T., Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel, B., Branum, D., and Wills, C., 2003, The revised 2002 California
' probabilistic seismic hazard maps, June 'Z003: published on the world wide web:
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/psha/fault�arameters/pdf/2002_CA Hazard Maps.pdf.
' Dickinson, W. R., 1996, Kinematics of transrotational tectonis�ri in the California Transverse Ranges
and its contribution to cumulative slip along tr:e San Andreas transform fault sys�em: Gealogical
Society of Amenca Special Paper 305.
1 Fumal, T.E., Pezzopane, S.K., Weldon, R.J., and Schwartz, D.P., 1993, A 100-year average recurrence
interval for the San Andreas fault at VVrightwood, California: Science, v. 259, p. '
199-203.
' Epi Software, 2004 Epicenter Plotting Program
, Goter, S.K., Oppenheimer, D.H., Mo�i, J.J., Savage, M.K., and Masse, R.P., 1994, Earthquakes in
California and Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-647. Scale: 1:1,000,000.
International Conference ofBuilding Officials, 2001, CaliforniaBui?ding Code; 2001 Edition: Whittier,
1 California.
Jacoby, J.C., Sheppard, P.R., and Sieh, K.E., 1987, Irregular recurrence of large earthquakes along the
e San Andreas fault: Evidence from trees, in Earthquake geology, San Andreas fault system, Palm
Springs to Palmdale: Association of Engineering Geologists, Southern California Section, 35th Annual
Meeting, Guidebook and Reprint Volume.
, Johnson, J.A., Blake, T.F., Schmid, B.L., and Slosson, J.E., 1992, Earthquake site analysis and critical
facility siting: Short Course, Associa�ion of Engineering Geologists, .Annual Meeting, October 2-9,
1992.
' Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Recency and character of faulting along the Elsinore fault zone i� soutltern
Riverside County, California: Califor�ia Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 131.
� Kennedy, M.P., and Morton, D.M., 2003, Geologic Map of the Bachelor Mountain 7.5' Quadrangle,
Riverside County, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 03-103.
� Kennedy, M.P., and Morton, D.M., 2003, Geologic Map of the Murrieta 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside
County, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 03-189.
'
, � �
� Page No. 25
Job No. 041063-3 '
�
REFERENCES •
' Matti J.C. and Carson S.E. 1991 Li uefaction susce tibilit in the San Bernardino Valle and
q P Y Y
vicinity, southern California -�A regional evaluation: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1898.
� Matti, 7.C., Morton, D.M., and Cox, B.F., 1992, The San Andreas fault system in the vicinity of the
central Transverse Ranges province, Southern California: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report
' 92-354.
Morton, D.M. and Matti, J.C., 1993, Extension and contraction within an evolving divergent strike slip
fault complex: The San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones at their convergence in Southern
' California: in Powell, R.E. and others, The San Andreas Fault System: Palinspastic Reconstruction, and
Geologic Evolution: Geological Society of America Memoir 178.
1 Mitchell, J.K., and Katti, R.I., 1981, Soil Improvement State of the Art Report: Proceedings, Tenth
International Conference of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm, General Reports,
p. 264.
t Petersen, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., Frankel, A.D., Leinkaemper, J.J.,
McCrory, P.A., and Schwartz, D.P., 1996, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the State of
California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open-Fil� Report' 96-08.
� Rockwell, T.K„ McElwain, R.S., Millman, D.E., and Lamar, D.L., 1986, Recurrent Late Holocene
faulting on the Glen ivy North strand of the Elsinore fault at Glen ivy marsh, in Ehlig, P.L., ed.,
, Neotectonics and Faulting in Southern California, Guidebook and Volume, 82nd Annual Meeting,
Cordilleran Section, Geological Society of America.
Saul, R.,1978, Elsinore Fault Zone (South Riverside County Segment) with Description ofthe Murrieta
' Hot Springs Fault: California Division. of Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report 76.
Stone, E. L. Grant, L. B., and Arrowsmith, J. R., 20U2, Recent Rupture History of the San Andreas
, Fault, southeast of Cholame in the northern Carrizo Plain, California: Seismological Seciety ofAmerica.
Bulletin, v.92, no. 3, pp. 983-997.
Terzaghi, K., and Peck, R.B., 1967, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice: John Wiley, New York,
' 729 p., p. 347.
Weber, F.H., 1977, Seismic hazards related to geologic factors, Elsinore and Chino fault zones,
, northwestern Riverside County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File
Report 77-Q4. Scale: 1:24,Q00.
� Wills,� C.J., 1988, Ground Cracks in Wolf and Temecula Valleys, Riverside County: California
Division of Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report 195.
' Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1988, Probabilities of large earthquakes
occumng in California on the San Andreas fault: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 88-398.
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 19�5, Seismic hazards in southern California:
� Probable earthquakes, 1994 to 2024: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of �nerica, v. 85, no. 2,
p. 379-439.
�
� � �
' Page No. 26
Job No. 041063-3
' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS iZEVIEWED
� Riverside County Flood Control District, January 30,1962, Black and White Aerial Photographs,
Photograph Number 408.
� Riverside County Flood Control District, June 20, 1974, B?ack arxd White Aerial Photographs,
Photograph I�Tumbers 878 and 879.
t Riverside County Flood Control I�istrict, December 8, 1983, Black and White Aerial Photographs,
Photograph Number 398.
� Riverside County Flood Control District, January 28, 1990, Black and White Aerial Photographs,
Photograph Numbers 17-23 and 17-24.
Riverside County Flood Control District, April 1 Q, 200Q, Black and White Aerial Photographs,
' Photograph Numbers 17-23 and 17-24.
'
'
,
�
�
'
�
�
�
'
e
' � �
�
� , �
'
�
� '
APPENDIX "A"
'
GEOTECHNICAL MAPS
'
'
e .
�
�
'
'
�
�
� .
,
'
y � r�r ,dia ., L ` � f : ' "" j : {[ y.� � ���,� x''
�. 't� , ,S. ! � � � ° . `., r�' 1 . �
, t `"' �
,a ��.� � �� � � ° � � �' �ti . i 3 Q � J � . y i� , �
���:���f�r 4 . -.-( �� . � "� ! ���' , �i 5 �' �i �� r�� � — ' ._. �'s ��3'� !. ; .j',Qt��. _' � 3 P�, �.`;SS �, aa` , „ k ' .
'� '� � '` i �¢ � � � � , J / � � � � � � �� �i
' _�,! r `¢ � ! pg a .
- , . � i �' jjtt
�..i�, � �4. il,q�3�. '� + F� � �� _^. o.. �.�j�..� � t .I�fIP/
.. �,,,p�� f �y ? � k` � �„!�- j� � • � ) ��� F ' Ijp � �� ...-s�' ! i� a-=' ,�� i t ,�t'� ��� � ;f ��� } a � ' / '.,.{ �. R � -�_- �
�� "�'� j i :r � � �. ��"E , l /� ���,rJ.? __ 4 ,� _ � �:.: � F�C,i�..J ���� ..�?i 5 � Z:
� � 's7 !'� �3 4 , � } n�� ~` " � �. � t .f , � � J� ,�, � i- ,l � i �
.. � Y i '*� 1"..t; " �• � �� .� �h � ; �� . � �� � y t s r!� ��•f'i , � ( .. . _ . ..
�b� ��'� : � �'`'�,� , i :� ��� r = � 7� . �� �. � -: � �� y V
� �� t � ^'�!' r :i �� � �,, � �" �a s.� �{' i� ;''l,j_ _- - �k ;/'' -"`°�' � ,f` ..,.._ `. � � -
t._� 4 y -�.���.; �� �., ''� - ' . _��l= i _r, yt d I 9�� _ � �...:� ��,,���' � � .. . & ��d.
3 . � { :s �X � ` � � � � ' �u " "� e � ^- �. �J �1 e ygp
�� �r f p ,S"' .,� � � c.�,r ( 1 . . - `i'� . � '�...�. � ' t �` f y , ♦ c ?�� �� '":'��, f.! � . � .. _. .
� I _'�, , r� V • �.� dp .'.
i l 1 i � ( �, � . ' :. � � J:�..
' f � � � } S D � j L �° � � ` - � � �"" �, 1 e . ! �� �� '� '
.
� � ��
�-_ �4 � y,r y + ._. �� � :.: � , �:��� r � .� 4 � � .': . l38i �''s
`� • r � " 1 i' t ��.- - "�' t r .-:� � p 8n'� - . . ` . " :�
f r t l 4 {� ^ e+ ' - � yt f .� j ,�� � . � . . I � �� C4�
t y R � t . � � � � � . � £�,F �! y '°�' : G "?�J' :
�, , n � z.!'� y t. x t 1
.. t�* „,, i��' ��e a y, ^'_ r ,. 0 1",..��,:`. F�� � 3rs���°"w.. k � {�� l �`� .j:-t t ��.1f �J
� ,�'� 4, � ; i � ` J. � u �� 1 f/ � . . � .: �( A,�3
( r rn �' �1I .atae �`� f °'��. �' t } t'' �, s�`J� .�4`' \,' � �A � �" �
���� ��'� � £ �'� �� I l � �� - - � . � �� �1&1.�..f{V� � ��:� .r.'� '1 il.��,$� ;F °`.�'��.
r
�� e � � �' . � ..,, r a . y } Y �... ., . ,.� . � � r 5 1}t� �°` a �� �p � �r y „F ��
r 'r � aC �-. , � �" � � f,. 4 � 1 . t � �� . . � , � � �t. �� �Y3. ~� � r . � �' � �� �� ��` �� � f :.'y !�.
� ��'" x'� . . � , f ' .3 C ..` G'�.�.�._.�' , .. 3 , ' , f � .
k�.d f - 5 ' .. b � � t �� � �., � :� � f�L f / �'S,1 � 4 �1
�� r •
�)x� �)4 J' 1 '�1 I '"-� ). a. 1' � J ' &'t�..i� i f � f f fi � srj f�:
�`�� ��� �'� i �'� 1 f _ . � �. `� ' C r ... � .. #., �, //�� 1 '���+ � g , :,, � - t s� �e�
� r f � ' ,.� S C � � j �� � 1 . J � 4 � 7 A � . . '{k'�ti/ �- �, r ,� ' .' + . �..
/! 1 t s y 1 ;. p y�y ... F�� v. d �"'���' '�� b / C 1 tY13c
_,. , c � i Y , � z �-..i'i� - 1 � a a�� i
�.i r�,�� , t E � � , JS20Ct`�, ; ! C: r �: ='��G.-.:�`� � `� , �
;. i t r' :. �� -'' /' �; .� ���i`-'� �,.., i.�� C �• s� s j i s
�r.. . . �> r �; � s �-'_ J [ '�t.1 , - E .at `.t i .
: P� .� . ? ti;.. �rs:� ' . � �.�� �{. � -��.� 7.3 - - . .-qa. �. � _ f S .
ri �.. �
i �y �`' _ : } � � ''��� �� � �' � r ,�i;�,�,T� . .� " r �'
E�� "'i � . "' � .<y� r. G.r��'� r � �i f q _ �.. .. . ;
, Glt7 x � � � f � f y f� � a y P'4?AD y a � ., �� ,. t.
,� � —� .��� .�,� _ '� � _ �, ; < �,
� � , a� e �
,r
, . �, _ r � ° r . , ", 3,n , T�, q - / �
� �, "' � ` , f ' � ' ��� � l+t"► f, q C+` ` �,+
10BT n �,� � '. .;_. �:r,��;�j�"�i" ;.N �..� 4 "� ��,�,.e•
� �
_ �i -,. `: ` �. . `
' �-� "t f a @i ' ' � s '� t?4 4 •
c: � ,. �a --
'►'�c 4 �': t�, � . + � �-,
y �� .: § � ' 1 ; J ` , r �'� ! � IeFTB f `
- J �. .{�tp �, � �S f #�` r �" ;
_t . ntti . . .. . �� �i,�,�:, �s ..,, �� y� .
' � , '' � � � T �z� � td��4�r �' � m � � .
N0�4 , `` � E,. ' �'� � - �`
� � S.. �t136 '� �` 4 �
L '�'� ��'
' �i� `� ' �'' �:I .�.' i � ii t - } '4 "' .� t !
� 1� � , � _ ���, �,, 1 . '� �, x, '' ��3,T� e � p `;
� � `, SC, � ,�., � � y � � � ; > � s
� ,.`(! '�.!� � f( � �� f . L 1 : � . .� '. � � . '.'�.. 1 ..
' ( 1 } 1 . `.t H � �.� � !i � ; t � _� . � � ` /f� e � y . - � � C � , �i � � ; �. A�� .
; - s � ti y E � � l "'��.,„ ''� � . r c f3s
�' j � � l � . a � + � � . r , t.. f �,�ry'��,x�,t�, 4 .� j- , yf d � - � � � � iq �� :_ °.. �a .� .. .� 'i�
�.� »-- '�� � . �f"l.8/�.'.� _ � �,'+ .��. ��� � F' .s � � l� r " . � � }-. ��,� _
� . f ' i � f � y1P � '�` J` . /F� � ! � �� �
.' . F 1 k � y -� �� �.4... � .....�� ." p�F - ti �' �. - `",h"-' ° .
e � � �
r �( �.7 � �`��i � t .-.�i�.�r�= '���. �� '.t T -� '°! P ` E Z� �� �, ° i � � � 1 y� L >��.�:� � �� �i {, ..
' ,�i u a ` �.y�i�t f � � 7 � �.. _-� ` .���,�.,�•� •s �..ti, j - ��:� ���
rt ' j 7 � .�� " A�� � � ���. ��"'�- � ��. 1 .. � s . � �.� �e ����� �,,, .�
. � '" A .. �� Y
�i> ti "• . . �1 +' V! �5.� . �a�l�"+'` �� 1
�� 3 ;,��� k�� '� �� ���," � �G � J , ( f4 � r � r„� . .� e � N� y- � �p. c
' '� -" � � f . u �. �� '* t f a 7 � � ' -* -- t �
i. t` '\ `^ 5 � f .� ,� "� i �� � , ,.: _. "` ( . i l � �, . �.;. I o.r } � � i �.a ��y,.-� .� � � � 1
1 �(' � t � :�
4� �`� � r i , r � '.�',� 'd. �.� �k T 4,,��"� Y r j '� t l
t�r l t.' � l...; � �.�'t Y�''Rr�J Y.�.� 1 - � 3 i dj 5Ij a ��-( ��
,�it'' b � � � 1 ''S � � � 1 R;+ t ' �j � �(- �y J �a .�� `"�� '
� ' � � �ArWa cT'l� .. . 1 �I �� � ; .. A j � � �+ 'r ...�
� . . 4 p i w�a� � ° � I( � � . ' ;
f � � f � ' � �„� r ..� ' ; � �. ic� " +,. � � F" � � �� y � �
� ,-. rrti� z _ t ',�� pf(�4�°J= - � .��; s'a �.��`: St ✓ � 'i'
� _5 � � 1 '�+II F �.._R..,.�..—.�.
, , �
TN MN � __ -� : �—��;:-:_�=.=3-_ =`- --- --::�
, o �. ��^� �Et� i� �c _ r;; F.±.FTl
13 �.--�__� �--z_�;- --�--� 3 --t==�.�_:�_�: � � �
Map creat�d with TOFOI � m2001 Nation�l Geographic (r��,aw.xontionalgeog�iphic.comrYopo)
' 0���� ���
��O��CFiNICAL INVES°P�GA��ON ENCLOSURE
' FOR: S�I�P�`IIIVA i6 p 99
D��/��o����� ����������� ���/�������� a�
8������,S �OA� A6VD JOSEPB-� R��� _ . _ � _
���N�CUImA, CALB�OF�N�A JOB NUMBER
� DATE: I�IOVEI�BER ZO04 ���6�63�3
. __ � .�.' . ., n a..._.... _ �
. � �., . . .
r-�� ���€]��� -
� - - .�— . . . �..... _. _ ...._.,:.s .�„H:.r,_ m—..-� w....�...,.�......�... .,
� G � � � ; SINGLE FAMILY „
�; I I I I I
Q �" �. � � �,.d�,�d. � I;��t.i " ZONE: LM �
�.u,! p� k� l� '`�,�ti oasr►ioa,rowr�a�ao'� I
�. 6 I I I -..a � av.rnm-uw+rau�:E �a�err
' . �1�. � J'�5 . � y�~�, - ° �� 1 . lil
q, � JC�f�t� PL� ; �� � , � .
� ��--�. ,�—� ; r�r.. �'--;�,-
Q� Y.��.� �., ,��. _ -. �. ; �. -- � ,.; ; :_� r �� ..
' iRACi 26828-1 \ � 6d , �, • : __ _ _- ��°� , �; �
� . SINGLE FAMIL Y �� , ii' '; �'i%� i%' ' � ior ia.�'' cm-� '% -� � . - �t.j `�
�\ � k+ c ` : i �1�' •�.,. �. f .. I � - : ` f
20NE: lM p � to1� i �d�<¢ I, �,�ir �, . : � � - �
\ ' q � { r , ���M g6 �'- ',°:' �'�;� � `�
,. ��` � � _ �
` �\ ! J ' 9A�"" // P., L ]S.b�. 1 .11.1 �'Sj / � , sm�rta�aNn� j ' F �
\ �. / n I I , I I , �" . i��i i z� N� /.-ia� i��_� - iie ro ���'�j i 91SS �ir a E. mir.uu m; �I
' mmir ra wwc
j � " � ' !r i i �i � ,T,� ii ,
��� I o I I � 7� � � ��f�, £/ ,cot.'fd ,�u{� � uz.�z � ior s ��^ �� " ` � ��=_ , �.,�� ;,
tr .G3 ?. z
¢' ^-- ia 1' . .� i,*r -' �!.�� �oT eo J
� g �y
� , _ .�,g.�}.,8,_ �a' �T"� � _ ' "1TJ�,[' I J ss�uu'i I x. � , _.: ��"-� � � � � � 1 ,� 1 � � s � .,__L � ° . 4J' o I �er<. � �wra
4.St� � < �'�� � ��T '�� � ksh �� � ss' ' ia.ora ..r�+wo � ts : .� �� f .' 1D7-59 io� � I u�`ut
a � / ( Niue e2.
�� i _ veu�
S- 4 �+ � s r h��,v_ __ _.� a�+ir Y �i �_ E'^'...Y *�-� {E�E�'� �� 4 `5�.� :�� , �. 4- ,. `;." ��°'° a a'�"'a .)� �� I /J {
� � � .�..' . \ f516 � 0 " 0 )5 ` �1 9 / 4 I �� � 'I � �� u.rs 7
f � �? � �'i � � � � ' - iiT� ' i . : a � . � � 10758 L rwmu:.va'
` • p��\ F ' LOi�7 • 1Qi 8 0 lVt..9 •L0�.;0 w�.6T Il q l0T j; �/ / �� LOT IS __ l0T 1 ' i �1".°..v"°°" � 1
j - "'. ` i ._ " - ..,I . hOT�1 _ a�: + ��mo� an�
��'�;,�, �I - � yd .� , � �'r i . °. �<it ' or.t� � _ - a � �
� `\ eae vc _S ::' ~ c` 3f ' ��
""'"� � . _ . - s • �. ,�j '" �oi� �or s� � 1
�.rN . t?r- o �,wa�uT L '
4 i ��.�\ u z_a..,)..� ����?a ol ��.��_.�,r ��_� � � 1�' ' LOT I1 � d S �LOT 6 � +',' n � i, �
�3 :� � 1 ��. _-,
� � \ �.� i ��� .7 �' 6 � � � I $� y .'.. i
� � drd�� �, ,�^. �ao' .:. �ai � r�a' 1'7'"',. 4 �.%' LOT 3 �° .'�. /i. " „� ,.;",.`�.�
( �- . �.: � -. S .31 �i 6 , LOi 56 � i >.:�" i
� r � � LOT 12 �� Oi2J '^� �` l %' . � �' �`':..
FAMILY � ,�� � .LOT 4 -__ � 'Q � } � ,�A :> ��or» �` i , _ � R ....%�' ; __ •"� -
, � . ' x .. , a .,r �'. 55 g, !.
LM . � 3 . - '�- a: _ � '' *, or �2 ,�: ;, , t , � � ,� m+tr� "` �.�.
� �oT r
; ,: - tet xi � or s� � tor2 ' i� a r .� �,�� .�
� � � LOi J 4 a i �,B d � .. . -�� .�r LOi �1 i r.. I - . A ..
l JI �y ad � � � storn GsEUdi .�
1 � : � .. s t,l �.- 10T5;. ' i io� _�' . � �� p :^J� �.�c' ..�� ��vE1
iI �
I�I � ss:• '' v�E' � 0' �� �.�� � P59' t0t JO . n 1 �-F •�� ay � i J��/
ra mu run mrnmv �I ;. n � � ,, i' � s - � LUT 52 �` • � � �i - ' `� - +�. : � -
L0T_2Q �{^ LOTj I a lUT�24.i� t+� q > ii'•� 7- � �.ru � � ' �CSio@u� ' . . .
i LOi Y �� - � � - � LOi S -��` -
� �, �i - - s�_ � ;� , - .,y o� ��. y � � ` � � � ��'^ � _ '
� w° LOi I�DY 1 l 0 I _ �. ; � l0i � l07 50 ` / y� � ' i ; : -= � �
�'' I�� o �r �' 13 ' \ �
�� _ �•�'. o ' pv,a ` .i� �
" �. �_^.. � y} • '# - � °�. / �d s i/' '
__�-g J 47; , F Y)�°' _ �� \ � . 0 Z /%` Z���� .."
— ' � � d' ,,,3 '�'' . . ^ a _4 ' ' _ �s°'� .
`�""� � a°. � - 3^.�' k. r � � s�e � ` � . . . ... �
_� lOT
` � � . Q . . . � . � �I . \ / �
�r�M� i� � � . \ -+ �. 1 � �� �-a5. � .� 6y ". ' _ � ..y a� �`1 / .
�i� � a�� I � i,� . a� � � i
�ri, ��. , 07d 1 4'- ¢'I 4 7 4 07 � `� � �� r ior u � ',�� i
� �i 1� =: p . p � OT 13 `� i - �' Y � � ru ` � � � � '�
d ,' '�L.. ��- c - '� 69 .. i�� o[ �� / � '�
= �I i � � I �' � � � _ � : 5��- I 'tf �
LOi J8 f I 6y •r � ' � t � ameu % -,\ �: � . �(� j � j � �
�Y ��'. y � � eii . � a ��. _ �. a �
� � � iooY ° :. ,r,� ? �N , � W ��� s � ��' � �i�, � /� �
� . < .wr
''�� .�.� . :i["�y `� �•.' �.r�p�v�- � � ti � � .f� ��
� r . A G �... � \ _ f �
.E•.:f g� '�� �o:�w, � � • : a i �. ��
I/
�. sr �'\ !� ' � � � �% „�'p"°:.vE.-,.^%`°� � '.:��. .�i NOT OEVELOPED
��`��'i ,� �-�� ' ,�m 3 ,;° r ` i r G � �/ ZONE: VL
�- -- •!@Y� ,,� . ,�:� ��� •, ' �� jf
� i y � �" . rw . ... S. � .Y � �� R _ - -� ' i �
'/' � �� � �,�,r. .-�. l � [d51pc � .�a .� ,� � ¢�� �
; � � a d I � e � a � Cry �° � ' ytae'���t",i � ' .
��� '.� � " �`^'� y \ - .. . �.�� "�
�}���•. � � ���;� . i� } . . ,`/'. •���!'^":/ � r
� ��� ��� � � X ��� �
� � ,y W �". �� Q�yq� l �•xtu
� �L aC 4}'r� � i
` _{n �i1:.`�fi 'G� T- _—` - /
.�� e � y"`' .1+�4 �°... t'__"� % / �
..,.. g uD�� �` . �,'
.=�;*o� ��` ' . �"
-,�.� ��--- -- = '
.,t"'.:. „ '=�. : '' �
-N-
LEGEND
B-5
� - EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS
SCALE 1 "_ �20'
PLAT
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ENCLOSURE
FoR: SERAPHINA °�A-2�°
DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
NICOLAS ROAD AND JOSEPH ROAD
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA JOB NUMBER
�aTE: NOVEMBER 2004 041063-3
� ' o �' M o��9 INCORPORATED
e y�"'� >..� � �� ��,.�, .. .� �L�� � - / . . . \,� S . _ J ._ .. ..+ �_ ,... ...
��� � ��-� s��. �'�'� �" „�. 1 ' , -�' --- __ r �/i • I � ` < ��� �'`�- ,,.�i � V � ^' / l^ �
*� �� � .. -
,�� �. � � ` ') i ' � l a � ji' � �`r i`
� .�; ,�` ��� � -'%- ;� �f� ( T _ n :�1� � r 1/ : J
, . �� �_ ``�� � ��:�`� �lv-..�_-TJ ,, :r -� ; _ , .
� � F � .- , , r��.� , � --, l�..l .: :�`.:� � �` •`' -
�_; o �, , �� .: 1 ..� %�� '�� �'� �! :, �i_ _ -��. , � � r-
� � i ' .1 � ! ✓ � �- �J -%/ /� f`� c� /`�/�j' � � .: � ' � , �
��' �..� � � �'�� (] � �6- /'�i i. ���7 i'' `J. �'. V ��� � ��-___- ����}i
.�;` � � ;, ( � J � ��1' �J � Li % G } ( � I • f� .:��^,` l^ � � • r i
1 �� ° „ r L� , �`,� �c� _�� �f \ i / V �`� J la� J £. (W�\�• :\ .�--� '
�-� � �,,, _ -n=� �G��.� .:� f�� �f�_ r _ _ , - � • ��� ft f -- � „ �
� �� ��� _ � . "' � =�,;, r,s" �� ,,�-, �� ' - .� < < },
�!� 1�. ,.+ J 1 ; ° `' �0 ^` �p� .:��i Wi � r '� r ��)�'l i � `�l ��l�,n .`�`
� .r v • ! ? '�,i"�..
! � "'� ? � - , _ - -- / �1�.svG� � ; f ,� ` � --'-�j �' � / ! I �" C�-
�.! �, `�a •, �'r� . � ,: �r' ca ' �� --� � %�T . r � "� . �� � �` � c7j —�� ��
e '�` �,' r � / /i �r ''{�, L, . '' �GF y� ��/`�� +n �---�% r !'"'�,/l, ���/'') ` �.✓7`;
i '� '
� "� �r � �/ . p, , J � � � . '�, i' :�j� %� ._.��•_
'�..� �� '' il _ .. '.V `. ' l J r �`-,�..�'' "L •.� � j � � l
�` � . ,i �� ROA��: - � �l ��� �.� � % '�• .�'"'� /'--- .\�. t_.�? �_: ,
I �' ,, .'� `,, -� �.,� ��� � '- -_ �( �,�� �`' T ��.`,,".�_�
' _ :: , 4 : f '-- ; _--�' r '� �� �._= _-�- ` �? '� '� _ - `%� l %!`.
� +1 � 'a 0 \, �� . � " `�-� ti:l �` Z�'��1"�' \._� � ��-,!
pg �n� `.< � 1 o C> �--�yr� _ �' Q = �"�-' J �� �ti`_. ,r' �..
i '�-'� - • ' Jl I
- �L �f . 'n. i � . �--. . �1 � _ i� ��1 � �\ . � l.� / L ^4 �� !' �y J� � \
, � ��, Ll tf �. � � ' . 1
" � � �• � .. •' . . '..'� � ii y� . �a,.. . ' �- , r �
Y � � -
��
�T � �. ni .: � �,y - } , �'�, ' 2 ti, ~� � �U"'�� k��r--�j..
%.� 1 : -''!i'a '--'-. t\ � �. �!� � � C �.\ . ' '��,Vr �-� _
' �` - ' ) .� % -'�L. �_.._ `. . �__-„ (�� .�`_ o -�' (J CV✓v ;�- � - � - = � '�.� � _ . rr'` 't `� 1 'i_':j
; _ --1 :�:�.,.�. '� _�� _`,,`� ` ,,��, ` � � �� ��� G \ ` �� -����
��r �. _. _; -` _ .' ��- i spo.� � �// � r�,/� � - � �-•'�--�� `�-/`��
� �_. , i -�:_ ' ..., � ` � , �--�.`'� r '~� �oi..� "„=„-- ,�-' �..�J�'�- _ •• ~ ```-�..
.; ' ';l � � 7 ;' .,--�j�. ; , v . ti �, f r -�'"�-� -�,� 1` '��� `� _�, -, �v_` - 1 ���
`l .'�_ _� '` 1 / _�� � ' '' /, J .� y V'\. - o-- ` � 1. � �.
F� t =� � �; � , �-° i � � � /' � u -•- _ ,�-... `� .` -�-- ' �
` = ' � �.�_'��`` ,. `� �.__, I ' � `-�.- `---,�� ;+;� �so � - , � r
� _� _—. • ' �`-�-� �' -, - ) �-
� _' " ' f. \���7, ..._ i�- �,4 \. � �-_i �=—�t�� ` � � rC
v �, ,+� - _ - ��� , �,; �_.--_-- ` L � _ , ti=';� �
' , J , �.. ,:� ���.;:'l': ;�"�_��,= - ,�� -. • -;. , �� �. � ` � �
��� \� �r I`�:,: "�{N, f/ 1� . - )` _�' "� ;� _ �-.�\: ?� l � (- -� `
-,.�M' � U ' ,I 4 �� I� i � `-� I'r �' - L- � `. i ) 1`�1 r�.�... - - - - � `` 1 �
� �
�� I', �)�5 j �.-•�/ "`✓t��\ _ l �� - �. � \ �� -- \ -- �iC
' ✓.`I-�l . . cs . ' � - `�.:' .._: ,- ;'. - :� _ , 7.i��� , `�. _. i , � ri� _ � `� 4 �'1- � _ . : �. r, �
LEGEND
, Qya - Young alluvial channel deposits. (Holocene and latest Pleistocene)
Qpfs � Pauba Formation: Sandstone member Brown, moderately well-indurated. (Pleistocene)
QTsw � Pauba Formation: Sandstone unit Restricted here to small area along Santa Gertrudis Creek.
' (Pleistocene and Piiocene)
Kgb - Gabbro (Cretaceous)
' �YflH�OLS
° m--�°..�..� .................. Geologic contact: Dashed where approximately located
� dotted where concealed
'
' Base Map by; M.P. KENNEDY, AND D.M. MORTON, 2003
SCALE: 1: 24,000
� . _ _ ,_ _, ._ . . . � . _ . .. _..
�EOLAGIC IND�X Me4P
1 r . _ � _.._. . . � _. __ . _. . ....... _ ._ _. _,m .� .. _. ._.:_ .
FOR: SEI�+PHIR�A /'� ¢ �� p@ � g ( p ENCLOSURE
6'9����6B�91tl1'�✓/"0S� �IV tl GJ 1��S/"1���l�I 66 ,q o e999
������P���� �������TA/�L. DE��L�P���� d�a ea
� IVICOLAS ROAD AND JOSEPH RO�� __�.
_ JOB NUMBER
DATE: �������� ��Q� �������� C�►LIFORN@�► 0��0�3=�
' _ ..�.... , . _.. . _. , .. . .. .- , _ _ . . _ __ ..,. _ _ , _ _
,
� - _..,\ � � �, �
� � \
� \\ \� \� \ �`'� \ � Q M 4
�—��� �� � \\� \� � �J
_\ - --/_ � �--�
� n MS
0_�— �J
i \� � � �� � 1 �
i I � � M6
/
\, �_�� ` � Upland � San Bernardin � �v
�� � o -
�
! � \ Whittier
j �) \' \ � � Palm Springs
� U
� , � �
SITE
o � _ Temecula
�� O � C7.
� �? O °
0
O
o � � �
�
� o
�\ � San Diego �
�
� O ' O
N �
EPISoftWare2000 Seismicity 1977-2004 (Magnitude 4.0+) 100 kilometer radius.� �
SITE LOCATION: 33.557 LAT. -117.126_ LONG.
MINIMUM LOCATION QUALITY: C 0 50 100
KILOMETERS
TOTAL # OF EVENTS ON PLOT: 560
TOTAL # OF EVENTS WITHIN SEARCH RADIUS: 237
MAGNITUDE DISTRIBUTION OF SEARCH RADIUS EVENTS:
4.0-4.9 : 212
5.0- 5.9 : 22
6.0- 6.9 : 2
7.0- 7.9 : 1
8.0- 8.9 : 0
CLOSEST EVENT: 4.0 ON SUNDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1997 LOCATED APPROX. 17 KILOMETERS NORTHEAST OF THE SITE
EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ENCLOSURE
FoR: SERAPHINA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT "A-4"
DEVELOPMENT NICOLAS ROAD AND JOSEPH ROAD
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA JOB NUMBER
�ATE: NOVEMBER 2004 041063-3
� E�o�]odo9INCORPQRAI�D
' ,
'
'
'
'
�
APPENDIX "B"
'
EXPLORATORY LOGS
,
' .
e ,
'
'
�
'
e
'
'
s
,
� � �
, Enclosure "B" (1 of2)
Job No. 041063-3 '
' '.
� KEY TO LOGS
�
SAMPLE T�YPE:
� Corr. Corrosivity Test
Consol. Consolidation Test (ASTM D 2435)
' DS Direct Shear Test (aSTM D 3080)
MDC Maximum Density Optimum Moisture Determination (ASTM D 1557)
' Rin Indicates Undisturbed Rin Sample. Undisturbed Ring Samples are obtained �vith a
g
"California Sampler" (3.25' O.D. and 2.42" I.D.) driven with a 140-pound weight falling
30 inches. The blows per foot are converted to equivalent SPT values.
�
SA Sieve Analysis (ASTM C 136) �
, SPT Indicates Standard Penetration Test. The SPT —value is the number of blows required to
drive an SPT sampler 12 inches using a 140 pound weight falling 30 inches. The SPT
sampler is 2" O.D. and 1-3/8" I.D. ' �
'
' ENGINE�RING PROPERTIES FROM SPT BLOWS
� Relationshikof Penetration Resistance to Relative Densitv for Cohesionless Soils*
(After Mitchell and Katti, 1981)
e Approximate
No. of SPT Descriptive Relative
Blows bo � Relative Densitv Densit. (�,%1
� <4 Very Loose 0-15
4-10 Loose 15-35
10-30 Medium Dense 35-65
' 30-50 Dense 65-85
>50 Very Dense 85-100
' * At an effective overburden pressure of 1 ton per square foot (100 kPa)
�
' ..
S � � � � � _ � — _ � � � � _ En�usre�"�". CotL) _
Job No. 041063-3
� SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
AIA✓OR D/V/S/ONS °p11M � � TYP/CAL DESGR/PT/ONS,
s��.o� s���o� G R A DATI ON CH A RT
.:.�:;: � �
�!Y.•:� WELL-GRpDED ORAVELS� ORAVEL-SANO �
GRAVEL ►:•r:w ' GW MIxTURES, uT7LE M wo FINES
CLEAN GRAVELS �>.•.+
AND (UTTLE OR NO FIGIE9) �'��'��'
GRAVEILY � � � PAqT/CLE 9/ZE
�� � VOORLY - 6R4pED YR�VEIS � 6R�VEL- S�NO
COARSE SCILS ���� GP YIIfTUNES� UTTLE OF MO F�NES Il/f�EN/AL 8/IE �,�b�,�iE�Q UM�T. ... .. . UPPER ,I:IMIt
GRAI�JEO '•+ MIW:(,,.�,'idl114VE J'1/,,L°, MI111M11`ER ',l�� 91ZE
. 9 � ' , .
$O �ILTY ON4VElS� �p4VE�- B�Nb- 81LT
40RE THaN S0� GkAVELS WITH ' GM YI%TURES FINE .O7M M200= O•42 *�O(
oF CovASE FRnL• MEDIUM 0�2 !�0 t 2,00 �10 !
F I NES � COAR9E 200 «�0 t ••Y6 k� t
TION PETAiNED �. �^
(6VPqEC�ABLE 4MOUNT � � � �
O►iNG.a SIEVE �r �! CL4YEV 6NaVElS� OF�VEL-S4ND-GLA� Q�V��
OF FiNES) �r� CjC YIYTUFES ' fINE �.76 ~ d X � �
w� t
Cb �9� 3/�"• 782 3
•. •. .a . ,
SAND '• • we��-onaoeo SANOS, �RAVELLY 6�ND5, COBBl.E9 7'6.2 3, 30�.8 �2
CLEAN SANp '' '� Sw LITTLE OR NO FiNES _U D 304 ,8,. 12 9��.t. "
AND (LITT�E OH NO FINES) •� �� YUS 97'ANDARD • CL�AR 90UARE OPENINfi3
SANDY �
POONLV-OR4DED SaNDS, ORnvELLY
SOILS SP 9AND5, LITT�E OR NO i1NE3 � �
YONE TMAN EO% �
Of MATEM�A:.IS �
L ARO R TIIAN NO.
20091EVESIZE S , M SILTY SAND3, 94ND-HILTYIxTURES �
YO/� TMAN SO� snraos �viTH �
��°�E�k°�� F�NES ��'��'�� PLASTICITY CHART
T � P (APPRECIABL� AMOUNT
NO. 4 F.IEVE � i� S. `. CLAYEY SANDS, SAND- CI.AY MIX7URE3
OF FINES ) .
• .•"/.•'�' L/OU/O L/M17
�•��/ �� 0 �O 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO 90 �
INORGGNIG SILTS AND VERV FINE 9AND5, �"' , ,
�L � ROCK FLOUR, SILTV OR CLAYEY
FINE S�NDS OR CL�YfY SILTS
WITN SLIOHT PL�STICITY
FINE SI�TS — ---
LIOUID LIYIT INOAOANIC CLAYS OF LDW TO MEDIUY SO
GRAINED r+N� / L`L VLASTICITY� BRAVELLY ClAY3� = CH
LESS TN4N EO SaNDY CLAY3, 31LTY CL4Y5, Q �i. �
SOILS ::LAY5 1' 1 �EaN C�avs. �u k4o — o ��,\� '- -
1 I 1 ORGANIC SILTS 4ND OROANIC 61CTY �` eTi Q Z
� � �� �� CLO.Y9 OF LOW PL�STIdTY N J� ; - �
1 1 1 .
.. 1 1 1 J yl �.
u f ~ !0 --
iNGiGAN1C SILT6 U1GaGE0U5 OR . p V � C�
M H D14TOMACEOU3 �WE SAWD OR �
a�r ao�s a � a
$,, 4 xo
NORE TMAN�O�o SII..TS ry�pQ�ANIC CLA�S OF M16H PLASTICITV� �$ � MH 6i OH
OF M4TENW� IS A' LIOUID L�NIT CH F4T C�AVS
C. �" FY TwW OqEATEq TNAN 60 � p .
►a mo a�eve CLAYS ' � '
�� ` � f � � OR6AKIC Cl4iS Or YEDIUY 10 MIOM . �^ ML 8+ Ol. �
� � QH iLA3TIC�TY� OR64N�C lILT9 � �
/ /
/ / � ___—_'. p . .
`� PEAY MUMUS SwnMP SOILS WITM ^ ' �
HIGHLY ORGANIC so��s pT MIJiM ORBA/114 CONTlNTB UNIFIE✓ SOIL CLAS5IFICATION . .�Y�TEM �
ti� .
� �• � • � • � INCORPORATED _
' �LORATORY BORING � 1 �
' Date Drilled: 1]./8/04 Client: Seraphina Development
Equipment: All Access L10T Driving Weight / Drop: 1401bs/30 in ,
' Surface Elevation(ft): 1148.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to Water(ft): N/A
.�
snr�LES O o
,� O H � � Q
' � � VISUAL CLASSIFICATION ` �i U' � �
� x �x3.�Q�� �H
' p � �� r-" � � o �, �� �� C�qq v�
Q C7 � c4 Q al � W w� C� � a E
(SIv� Silty Sand, fine to coarse with gra�el to 1", dark � t tu��um
brown
, 4 12.7 121 Ring
' S
4 12.5 I15 Ring,
Consol
' medium with coarse and avel to �1.5" 7 � 3
(SP) Sand, fine to gr ,
yellow brown
, 10
34 9.6 122 Ring
�
�
15 qa, L`.1 106 ` Ring
�
� (CL) Clay, fine to medium with g? to 1", olive brown
20 33 4t.5 � 32 Ring
'
__�
(S1Vn Silt Sand, fine to medium, olive brown
� 25 -
�
0
�
' N 34 23.1 ]O1 Ring
�
0
c�
�
x
U
' � 30 �MI,� Siltstone, reducing to Silt with clay Favba
"' Formarion 43 45.6 75 Ring
� ---
o END OF BORING
' o PAUBA FC�RMATION AT 30.0', NO REFUSAL,
�; NO FILL, SLIGHT CAVING
� NO F`REE GROUNDWATER
o _
� m � ,�, � SERAPHINA DEVELOPMENT Job No. Enclosure .
�' � LI � � � TEMECULA, CALIFORI�lIA 041063-3 $-1
' �
' �LORATORY B41�.ING � 2 �
, Date Drilled: 11/8/04 Client: Seraphina Development
. Equipment: All Access L10T Driving Weight / Drop: 1401bs/30 in
Surface Elevation(ft): 1140.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to Water(ft): N/A
'
.-.
s.an��ES O o
�
�. `� � a � Q
� � � VISUAL CLASSIFICI�TION c� � �' � �
� x � � 3.� Q� � �
W c�p �W � � �W �� � � ¢w
� A c7 a r� Q aa aa .., w� Ca .� a H
(SP) Sand, fine to coarse with gravel to 2", yelluw brown A1luvium 4.4 sA .
' 9 4.0 ] Ol Rin ,
g
Consol
' S
� 16 5.� 111 Ring,
Consol
1 10 �� Sandy Silt, �.ne to medium, brown �3.2
' 26 25.8 ]04 Ring
�
� 15 (SP) Sand, fine to coarse, yellow brown 14.4
27 14.6 110 Ring
�
20 (N�,) Siltstone, red�acing to Sandy Silt with clay Paeba 47.0
' Fcrmarioo
54 39.7 81 Ring
' a 25 (SP) Sand, fine to coarse, brown
0
�
' �
0 56 37.8 82 Ring
c�
� E+]D OF EUk:II�1G
� �? 30
; PAUBA FORMATION AT 20.0'
� NO REFUSAL, rd0 FILL
° SLIGHT CAVING
, � NO FREE GROUNDWATER
J�
�
Z
�
�
� m �� � ,(� SERAPHINA I)EVELOPMENT Job No. Enclosure
� � l�Ll � ��-� � TENIECULA, CALIFORNI�A 041063-3 $-2,
,
1 �XPLORATORY BORING � 3 �
' Date Drilled: 11/8/04 Client: Seraphina Develapment
Equipment: All Access L10T Driving Weight / Drop: 1401bs/30 in ,
' Surface Elevation(ft): 1148.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to Water(ft): N/A
�
SAMPLES [� o
^ O � " � , Q
�
� v VISUAL CLASSIFICATION � W � �' � � � �
x � � � � 3 .? Q v� � �,
� a �� r� � � O �, �p ��
Q C7Ua x Q Ra �� w� (�g a
(SNn Silty Sand, fine to coarse with gravel to 1", dark �u�l�um 9.9
� brown
8 7.8 122 Ring
�
(MI,) Siltstone, reducing to Sandy Silt with clay Pauba 22.a
� Fomiation
$
33 8.0 107 Ring
'
' 1�
67 9.6 108 Ring
' .
, 1$
54i 11" 11.5 126 Ring
�
2�
55/11" I?.6 114 Ring
�
� 2S
� 38 35.1 90 Ring
�
� �
� �
x
U
' � 30
� 40 44.0 74 Ruig
0
o Ei�]D OF BORING
' J PAUBA FORMATION AT 3.U',
�,' NO REFUSAL, NO FILL, SLIGHT CAVING,
, a NO FREE GROUNDWATER
0
� m (� ,�, �� SER.APHIivA DEVELOPMENT Job No. Enclosure
��� LI � �� TEMECLTL,A, CALIFORNIA 041063-3 $-.3
'
� �LOR.ATORY BORING l�l� 4 '
� Date Drilled: 11/8/04 Client: Seraphina Development
Equipment: All Access L10T Driving Weight / Drop: 1401bs/30 in
Surface Elevation(ft): 1148.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to Water(ft): N/A
�
�
SAMPLcS � o
�
i-. �
, � U A � � H Q
� ..t�� VISUAL CLASSIFICATION � W v� � � � � �
H I> � 3.� Q� ��,
w �o � �a � °W �� � a �aw
, Q c7a c4 Q r� w" w� Q�, aH
(NII,) Sandy Silt with clay, fine to mediun�, brotivn ����� 12.i sa, tvmc,
DS, Cor
t 6 18.8 107 Ring,
Consol
� 5
� 27 y.2 124 Ring
� 10 �Sp) �and, fine to coarse with silt, red brown 4 � 8
t » ii.� io� �
,
15 �q,� Siltstone, reducing to Sandy Silt with clay Pauba 39.0
1 Formation i
Sl 12.8 103 Ring
' END OF BORING
20 PAUBA FORMATION AT 15.0'
' NO REFUSAL
NO FII,L
SLIGHT CAVIl�tG
, NO FREE GROUNDWATER
25
0
m
' �
H
�
C9
2
U
' '
? 30
�
�.
0
a
0
' �
O
��
2
�
O
� m ��� ^ n SERAPHINA DEVELOPMENT .iob No. Enclosure
���/ L1 � � e TEMECi1LA, CALIFORNIA 041063-3 $-4
�
� �LORATORY BORING 1�1s 5
Date Drilled: 1118/04 � Client: Seraphina Development
� Equipment: All Access L10T Driving Weight / Brop: 1401bs,/30 in
' Surface Elevation(ft): 1150.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to VNater(ft): 32.0
�,
s��ES �, o
y O E� � � Q
' w U � �a � a
� � VISUAL CLASSIFICATION W v� ? � � �
E.,., a ���.� Q v� � H
' Q �p W � � � °" �� �� QW
x Ca a� a� W w� A� a H
(SNn Silty Sand, fine to medium with clay, dark brown �u�i� 9.4
' . 14 12.6 116 Ring
� 5
25 �4.5 110 Ring
' SP Sand, fine to coarse witl: silt, yellow brown =���
� )
� 10
19 4.7 ] 01 Ring
�
1S '
' i 8 6.7 105 Ring
'
20
2& 13.9 98 lting
�
�
1
' � 25 (1VII.) Siltstone, reducing to Sandy Silt with clay Pauba 26.i �
� Formation 28 10.6 108 Ring
N
� O
= fN�,) Siltstone, reducing to Silt with clay, yellow brawn i3.6
U
' � 30
� 28 SPT
o �
' � Groundwate
0
z
�
0
m
� �.., � SERAPHINA DEVELOPMENT Job No. Enclosure
� � � � � `�� � TEMECLTLA, CALIFORNIA 041063-3 B-Sa
'
� �LOI2ATORY BORING � 5 '
Dute Drilled: 11/8/04 Client: Seraphina Development
, Equipment: All Access I,lOT Driving Weight / Drop: 1401bs/30 in
Surface Elevation(ft): 1150.0 Logged by: M.R. Measured Depth to Water(ft): 32.0
' �
snn�LES �, o
O "
e � � O [-�� �, (-�
� � VISUAL CLASSIFICATION � � � � �
� a � w ��
Q �a � �w � ° � wo �"� �v�
� W � — � W
c.� Q W�W w� Ca � aH
(NII,) Sandstone, yellow brown
21 SPT
(NIL,) 5iltstone, reducing to Sandy Silt, fine to medium 15
' with clay, olive brown
� 40
62/5" SPT
' (SP) Sandstone, reducing to Silty S�nd, fine to mediva�, 14.3
red brown
45
' 98/11" SPT
� �
50 3.6
� 62/4" SPT
END OF BORING
PAUBA FORMATION AT 25.0'
' NO REFUSAL
55 NO FILL I
SLIGHT CAVIIVG
' PERCHED GROTJNDWATER AT 32.0'
i
� 60
e
m i
' �
O
l7
-�i
2
U I
� a 65
�
�,
0
a
0
e�
0
J
�
Z
�
�
m
� ^ n SERAPHINA DE JELOPMENT Job No. Enclosure
� � � � � � TEMECLJLA, C.4LIFORNIA 041063-3 $-Sjj
'
� �
,
'
� ,
'
' �
APPENDIX "C"
�
LABORATORY TESTING
'
�
, ,
'
,
' ,
'
�
�
�.
�
'
� � ,
� Enclosure "C-1"
Job No. 041063-3
'
' TEST DATA SUMMARY SHEET
�
EXPAN�ION INDEX
, California Building Code Standard Test Method 18-2
' Depth of Initial Final Degree of
Bonin� Sample Moisture Moisture Sahiration Fxpansi�n Expansion
No. (ft.) % % % Index Potential
4A 1 11.8 21.5 54. 27 Low _
�
�
�
�
'
�
'
'
'
'
�
� � �
' Maximum Density Optimum Moisture Determination Test (ASTM 1557)
140 22.0 �
'
'
130 20.4
,
� — \ — �
. C s � z
�` o �
�� 120 Cs � 18.9 .�
, � ' s � �
� o
� 1 � I �,
❑ — t - �
' I
110 + 17.3
�
�
100 15.7
� 0 5 10 15 20 25
Moisture Content (°/a)
�
' Boring,# Depth(ft) Soil/Sample Type y w
. 4A 1 (ML) Sandy Silt with clay, with fine to medium 123 10.0
'
,
MOISTdlRE DEPlSITY TE�'�
� Project: SEraphina Development
Location: Northeast Corner of Nicholas Road and Joseph Road
' Job No.: 041 �163-3 Enclosure: C-2
� • � • � • INCQf�P.'�R�TED
'
�
� � _ O � � — � � 1� � � � � � � � � �
Sieve Sizes - U.S.A. Standard Series (ASTM C136)
3" 2" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 10U 200
100
i
90
80
H
_ �
� 70
�
m 60
� 5 0 � �
z i
ii. --
z 40
w
c�
� 30 �
a
20 � —
10 �
0
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SiZt i�i �IfLLifviETRtS
Cobbles & Boulders Gravel Sand Silt or Clay
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Symbol Boring Depth (ft) Classification D� (mm) D (mm) D (mm) D (mm) C„ C�
• 2A 1.0 (SP) Sand, fine to coarse grained 0.184 0.462 0.754 0.964 5.24 1.20
■ 4A 1.0 (ML) Sandy Silt, with clay, fine with medium
GRADATION CURVES
Project: Seraphina Development
C�� • CF� • ��:�.• lN�O(?!'C�f�ATE�
- Location: Northeast Corner of Nicholas Road and Joseph Road
Job Number: 0410�3-3 Enclosure: C-3
� �
' Consolidation Test (ASTNE D 2435) ,
� o
' 0.5
' 1
� o i.5
c
�� Saturate
�
�
' � 2
o I
�
�
�o
�
� U 2.5 — —
� 3
� 3.5
I .
� I
a
100 1000 10000
Normal Stress (psfl
'
' Boring # Depth(ft) SoillSample Type Y (pc� MC(%) HCS(%)
a 1 5 (SM) Silty sand, fine to coarse with grevel, dark brown 115 12.5 0.37
'
' " HCS - Hydroconsolidation strain in percent.
CONSOLIDATIaN TE�Ti
_� Project: Seraphina Development.
Location: NEC of Nicholas Rd & Joseph Rd
' Job No.: 041063-3 Enclosure: C-4a
��� • [�] � `•,� � INCQRPC.�f�AT�[�
�
�
� � � .
� , Consolidation �est (ASTM D 2435)
' 0
� 0.5
I
�
� -- —
' c
•� Saturate
�
�
, � 1.5
m �
�
�o
�
, c
0
U
2
1 �
�
2.5 --
� ,
' 3 �
100 1000 10000
Normal Stress (psfl
�
' Boring # Depth(ft) Soil/Sample Type y (�,c� MC(%) HCS(°1o)
• 2 2 (SP) Sand, fine to coarse with gravel, yellowish brown 101 4.0 0.37
�
' * HCS - Hydroconsolidation strain in percent.
CONSOLIDATION �ES'i'
' Project: Seraphina Developmenf
Location: NEC of Nicholas Rd & Joseph Rd
, Job No.: 041063-3 Enclosure: C-4b
�1�� • �� * � • 1I'�1C�RP'�}f�ATED
�
'
' � � '
' Consolidation Test (ASTM D 2435) ,
� 0
' 0.5
�. 1
1 0 — -
•� 1.5 — Saturate
m I
�
�
� �
'0 2 - - ---�-- -
�
' C .
O
U
2.5
�
� �
I
� 3 --
� 3.5
100 1000 10000
Normal Stress (ps�
,
Boring #,Depth(ft) Soil/Sample T�rpe y (pc� NiC(%) HCS(%)
� . 2 7 (SP) Sand, fine to coarse with gravel, yellowish brown 111 5.4 0.37
�
' ` HCS - Hydroconsolidation strain in percent.
CONSOLIDAT�ON TEST
, Project� Seraphina Development_
Location: NEC of Nicholas Rd & Joseph Rd
' Job No.: 041063-3 Enclosure: C-4c
�C� • �� � c��� � II`�1CC�(�P��ATFQ
'
`
' � �
O . Consolidation Test (ASTM D 2435)
' o
0.5
,
� • 1
, 0 1.5
� i Saturate
c�
�
� I
� C 'Z
� I
� I
O �
y
C
' V 2.5
I
, 3
� 3.5
� 4
100 1000 10000
Normal Stress (psfl
'
Boring # Depth(ft) Soi�/Sarnple Type y� (pcfl MC(%) HCS(%)
� • 4 2 (ML) Sandy Silt with clay, fine to medium, brown 107 18.8 0.61
,
, " HCS - Hydroconsoi�dation strain in percent.
CONSOLIDATBON TEST
, Project: Seraphina Development
Location: NEC of Nicholas Rd & Joseph Rd
� Job No.: 041063-3 Enclosure: C-4d
� - CN * ��� � lNCUR�'C�RATEQ
,
�
' � � .
�. Dir�ct Shear Test (ASTM D 3080)
' �800
1600
�
1400
�
1200
� �
�
a 1000
�
' N
N
�
�
� $��
L
' �
600
t 400
' 2Q0
' 0
0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0
' Normal Stress (psfl
� Boring # Depth(ft) Soil/Sample Type Ya (P� MC(%) C(psfl cp(°)
• 4A 1 (ML) Sandy silt with Gay, fine to medium 123 10.0 176 23
'
'
DIRECT SHE�►R TEST
' Proje�ct: Seraphina Development
Location: NEC of Nicholas Rd and Joseph Rd
� Job No.: 041063-3 Enclosure: C-5
� • [� � � • 1NCORF'�RATED
' i
�
' � � Enclosure "C-6"
Job No. 041063-3
M. J. Schiff & Associates, Inc.
� Consulting Corrosion Engi�teers - Since 1959 Phone: (909) 626-0967 Fn�: (909) 626-3316
431 W. Baseline Road E-mail lab�,mjschiff.com
Claremont, CA 91711 website: mjschiff.com
� Table 1 Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples
, Seraphine Dev.
I our #041063-3, MJS&A #04-1614LAB
I8-Nov-04
, Sample ID
4A
� ML
. -.��`��,�,: , �� . -� , � ._ , � ,,. :: .,.��,� .
� -- �
Resistivity Units
� as-received ohm-cm 1,000,000
saturated ohm-cm 1,250
P H 7.4
� Electrical
Conductivity mS/cm 033
' Chemical Analyses
Cations
calcium Ca mg/kg 148
� magnesium Mg mg/kg 58
sodium Na' mg/kg 15
Anions
' carbonate CO mg/kg ND
bicarbonate HCO mg/kg 485
chloride Cl'" mg/kg 60
' sulfate SO mg/kg 155
Other Tests
ammonium NH mg/kg 2.1
' nitrate NO mp/kg ND
sulfide S qual na
' Redox mV na
� 4.. : ,� �r �� � � ��- �---n � ��,;���
ro �. . »a o:�'? u"'..az;.�. ;� re� .�... -sx�a s..��.�Z:� _�'. . ��'��zC,����u '
� Electrical cvnductivity in millisiemens/cm and chemical analysis were inade on a 1:5 soil-to-water extract.
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million} of dry soil.
R e d o x — o x: d a t i o n- r e d u c t i o n p o t e n t i a l i n m i l l i v o l t s
ND = not detected
' na = not analyzed
'
� Page. 1 of 1
�
� � � '
�
'
�
�
�
APPENDIX "D"
�
� SEISMIC DAT�
'
,
�
'
e
�
�
0
�
�
�
� � � Enclosur,e "D-1"
Job No. 041063-3
�
� PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE �
� BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP D(250) l_
0 0
1 25 yrs 50 yrs
0 0
� ' 75 rs 100 r�
� gp
� .� 80
�
� �
` 70
� �
, -� 60
c�
� �
' ° 50
�
�
� � 40
�
� 30
' �
a�
� 20
' w
10
� ' i
0 -
� 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Acceleration (q)
�
�
�