HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3646 Lot 4 Geotechnical Report �
_ _
i�, � _ _ iP P _
, Ea��R :, l� � �,��
� September 13, 2016 ' Project No. 161329-10A
! i
'� Mr.Jason Sims
i , 32564 Via Destelio
Temecula, CA 92592
�
I !
ii
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Single Family Residence,
(� Assessor's Parcel Number 922-190-015, Tract Number 3646, Lot Number 4, Located
� ; at 29370 Vallejo Avenue, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California
n
( � Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report
for the proposed single family residence, Assessor's Parcel Number 922-190-015, Tract Number 3646,
n Lot Number 4, located at 29370 Vallejo Avenue in the city of Temecula, Riverside County, California. This
� ,� work was performed in accordance with the scope of work described in our proposal, dated July 25,
2016. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties, and
�� geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development.
li
U
Earth Strata Geotechnical Services appreciates the opportunity to offer our consultation and advice on
�� this project. In the event that you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned
l � at your earliest convenience.
I I Respectfully submitted,
u
]EA](�'1C1H[ S'7['][�1#'7C1� iG'�]E�'7C]E�CIHf't�l[�1#L �]E]�VI[�E� �NG�NEER�NG
r � �O ON G, �,1, G�,
u Q�OFESSIOpq ��� qY'� �pQ ���
Q�O ��,ICHqF� �Fy W No. 2550
i i � y a� No.892 o z : V Exp. 6130/(� —�i
�J u+ ExP• o m �l *
r � Ytf� � *� �j` �__ ��
C�P
� i *J'j. cC4;et�G QJT 9T�, Q��
�; Stephen M. Poole, PE, GE qTFoF CA��FO� Aaro G.Wood, PG, CEG �fi CAL�F
Principal Engineer ---.---� Pri cipal Geologist
t !
' I
U
ti
U �.
� � SMP/snj/mw
Ii
�_�
Distribution: (2) Addressee
r �
i
EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES,INC.•42217 RIO NEDO RD,STE A-201,TEMECULA CA 92590•OFFICE(951)397-8315
I , BETTER PEOPLE•BETTER SERVICE•BETTER RESULTS
i
�
�'
�
, ,
I ; TABLE OF CONTENTS
r� i n Paee
� i
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................1
i-' SITE DESCRIPTION...............................................................................................................................................1
f ; PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING.................................................................................................1
FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING......................................................................................3
i� Field Exploration..............................................................................................................................................3
LaboratoryTesting.........................................................................................................................................3
FINDINGS...............................................................................................................................................................3
l Regional Geology..............................................................................................................................................3
�� Local Geology....................................................................................................................................................4
Landslides..........................................................................................................................................................6
ri CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................................7
l � General...............................................................................................................................................................7
Earthwork..........................................................................................................................................................7
I� Earthwork and Grading..............................................................................................................................7
. 1 ClearingandGrubbing................................................................................................................................7
ExcavationCharacteristics.........................................................................................................................7
r� Groundwater.................................................................................................................................................7
� � Ground Preparation for Fill Areas............................................................................................................8
OversizeRock ...............................................................................................................................................8
rI � Compacted Fill Placement..........................................................................................................................8
L� Import Earth Materials...............................................................................................................................8
Cut/Fill Transitions .....................................................................................................................................9
CutAreas......................................................................................................................................................10
C_' Shrinkage,Bulking and Subsidence.......................................................................................................10
Geotechnical Observations ......................................................................................................................10
, Post Grading Considerations.......................................................................................................................11
J Slope Landscaping and Maintenance.....................................................................................................1 l
SiteDrainage...............................................................................................................................................1 l
UtilityTrenches..........................................................................................................................................11
II SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................................12
v Ground Motions..............................................................................................................................................12
( Secondary Seismic Hazards .........................................................................................................................13
l� Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading...........................................................................................................13
General.............................................................................................................................................................14
� � Allowable Bearing Values.............................................................................................................................14
LSettlement........................................................................................................................................................14
LateralResistance..........................................................................................................................................14
� Structural Setbacks and Building Clearance ............................................................................................15
I '
_, Foundation Observations.............................................................................................................................16
ExpansiveSoil Considerations ....................................................................................................................16
I Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less)......................................................16
l� Footings..................................................................................................................16
BuildingFloor Slabs...................................................................................................................................16
IPost Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations...............................................................17
i
�; EAI�'7[']Hf 57C1[�1t'1['.', �'�E�'7C]E�C1H[l�i][�CA]L S]EI[��][�CES Page i September 13, 2016
Project No. 161329-10A
� I
u
il
�
� � Corrosivity.......................................................................................................................................................19
RETAININGWALLS.............................................................................................................................................20
� Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures............................................................................................................20
� i Subdrain System.............................................................................................................................................20
TemporaryExcavations................................................................................................................................21
� Retaining Wall Backfill .................................................................................................................................21
� ; CONCRETE FLATWORK.....................................................................................................................................21
Thicknessand Joint Spacing........................................................................................................................21
� Subgrade Preparation...................................................................................................................................21
I I GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES .........................................................................22
REPORTLIMITAT[ONS......................................................................................................................................22
� !
l ; Attachments:
Figure 1 -Vicinity Map (Page 2)
( � Figure 2 - Regional Geologic Map (Page 5)
f ', APPENDIX A- References (Rear of Text)
APPENDIX B - Exploratory Logs (Rear of Text)
�j APPENDIX C - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text)
l i APPENDIX D - Seismicity(Rear of Text)
APPENDIX E- Liquefaction Analysis (Rear of Text)
� i APPENDIX F- General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text)
� ; Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (In Pocket)
�
l ��
1
fl
�
( '
I ,'
lJ
II
1
J
� �'
U
I � ]EAl[�'1['lEII S'II'][�A'7C1# �'�E�'7['E�]HI't�d][�AIL�El[�'V]f�CE� Page ii September 13, 2016
�,
Project No. 161329-10A
��.
Il
�� WTRODUCTION
Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report
� for the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nature, distribution,
engineering properties, and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed
development, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations based on
I the plans you provided. The general location of the subject property is indicated on the Vicinity Map,
Figure 1. The plans you provided were used as the base map to show geologic conditions within the
(� subject site, see Geotechnical Map, Plate L
� �
ii SITE DESCRIPTION
,
The subject property is located at 29370 Vallejo Ave city of Temecula of Riverside County, California. The
�, approximate location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1.
i
,
The subject property is comprised of approximately 3 acres of undeveloped land. Topographic relief at
r; the subject property is relatively low with the terrain being generally flat. Elevations at the site range
l � from approximately 1,005 to 1,015 feet above mean sea level (msl), for a difference of about ±10 feet
across the entire site. Drainage within the subject property generally flows to the southwest.
C; The site is currently bordered by single family residence. Most of the vegetation on the site consists of
sparse amounts of annual weeds/grasses.
CI
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING
LThe proposed residential development is expected to consist of concrete, wood or steel framed one-
and/or two-story structures utilizing slab on grade construction with associated streets, landscape areas,
and utilities. The current development plans include one (1) building pad positioned throughout the site.
l I The plans provided by you were utilized in our exploration and form the base for our Geotechnical Map,
Plate 1.
L
( '
J
�
I '
��
� ,
�
II- �All�'7t'1H[ �'][']�R.'1CA �GdE�']CE�]H[1�][�C1#L S]E]�V][�lE� 1 September 13, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
IJ
I
I I Figure 1
Vicinity Map
li
�
� l
l �
�
�
Il
l_l
�I
�
LJ
l__;
,
( �i
�_�
LI
L
� i
� �
�
fl
I�! �A.l[8']C]H[ �']C]�A'7['A. ����']['��]H[I�I][�AL S]EI�V][�CE� 2 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
��
�
� 8' . �� �.o � r : yq �� � e w� ,� �� j y�t � F nL �.
� � 9 L (lytaR PVEN �2' �� �P ^ �� Q: �Q �� � �`iy'}�/`�- U�4�
,�,o� ' �,, R �« �����`��, "L��Io��/ 1 t �(���� s� ,��.y��� ��'�� ����
� � �Y P y� V��m tl��l�/����� �'�T S�� Yi // LO0. S NOM��� ���
V �� �`4 �� e P y�� c.:. z /"' ti� i
� a� e � � �j�
� �F��! � s �< . a�' �l �/ :�^�^p' �8'"���`
" 3 \ � �-x���i XPS . ��OM1Y \CO�� � �� �1 'tC(Y /�
"�� �. � .rdp . �`�'�� �l ��d/'.�� � r � . ���� /�,�.:
� � ��rS S �� , :
� � .�>� wc /�c.�'a'.�� e // ��
ONO
ti� � t S'[�"P4 �'P.' r�� �ILLN ��f/'�'
g� � :� _ �..—�o_ : ��
€'; �_w.p a e��..J ) " , ���Q , � �\�, ,
�w ' � Fba�� �\L� .3 a° e yian �. `° �4'�� '9`���.
� � qw ��� r .��;��� ���q �� ,:: � �,�� � ���;:
. . t�✓ GU�` fifer�� E/" x .. � 1 'f lmrzre exsn �t3 Q;
r i �r�� ,.^��` `J���T ��.� .�a '�p \gq� o . �.z$ R, � ���$ ���%�'�, �g�)"���
I x , ; ' ... �"ca R _ , scNye�°" .'-..` C°,4« :�� �' )90 ,�, �°4. \..�
� �� @.<.
� �y �� 161329-10A Vallejo Avenue�� $. ; }- � �r. ��
� �'�. � e Approwmate Site Location °`w^ �, � �6
�a � �� ,�/,
� ,
I � � ' C . °9 �a � �� r 4
� � �
`�. � � R� �._' �� ' � . '�� .°o�� � ��.x
�.o� 4 w�io g
R
��� � �. � � S \ �� � � F
(� � /
�
I aP�� � �� /.:..�
L - � � �� ?
, o
����, � �� �� � �¢,��� �
,�
\ J a E a �e'/k /\ vu .V d xc W $,.,��� 2T> u/'�a
1 s�A Ir : 0� 3 . � . �,
I � ^
' �_ �� � \. _��/jj� �1ID6TM�eo � �. � v' �v.i �l`� -/�..
� \ _S�I o_[smH m / % F � �ut�e�enuv �3��'����.j ��'—,S
� �� ,'' � � �- F"
r nn
� �`O/ ff 1�8J �� l'\ . .� Qy,.�-'�. . � °�� aa�
( —�+5 . � c ����s �v�''' g �. ��$i� '_....� �e
LI6 GFH� � � � � � /
a A ` � . $ ✓� \� ? . ...Gp
�/`\ `+as � . cC\ a• .
L s$ll l �p qa ����m f' ��E C a . °� � ` G�
d �4.
t � '& . o,qJP s. �
€ . ��9 � p x�^�/o?�5.
°D < � ��6
� � �� �� �� � �
�- 5 � '�
lr.a ��
i �
�� � e � ��4
P �. _ �s�"% "
o y
L � - �� �
����° � / ��
�Q � -
L � � o "��
_.; —�,_ „ 1 �
. � ;� s��
� $ �
I I' ���� G
�
`J "OO 2007 DeLorme(www.delorme.com)Topo USA�"'.
�� ���� ING VALLEJOAVENUE 161329-10A
�jeotechnica�,�nvironmenta�, VICINITY MAP SCALE 1:40,625
( I and Matoria�sT�stingConsu�tants SEPT 2016 FIGURE 1
U
ll
� I
FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
'�I
� 1 Field Exnloration
Subsurface exploration within the subject site was performed on September 1, 2016 for the exploratory
�� excavations. A truck mounted hollow-stem-auger drill rig was utilized to drill borings throughout the site
to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet. An underground utilities clearance was obtained from Underground
i Service Alert of Southern California, prior to the subsurface exploration.
I Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with
�I the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D
! i 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions may have been
reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487.
�
i
1 Associated with the subsurface exploration was the collection of bulk (disturbed) samples and relatively
undisturbed samples of earth materials for laboratory testing and analysis. The relatively undisturbed
� samples were obtained with a 3 inch outside diameter modified California split-spoon sampler lined with
�_ 1-inch-high brass rings. Samples obtained using a hollow stem auger drill rig, were mechanically driven
with successive 30 inch drops of a 140-pound automatic trip safety hammer. The blow count per one-
�' foot increment was recorded in the boring logs. The central portions of the driven samples were placed
� J in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. The approximate
exploratory locations are shown on Plate 1 and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B.
LLaboratory Testin�
j� Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, sieve analysis, expansion potenrial, pH, resistivity,
i J sulfate content, chloride content, and in-situ density/moisture content were determined for selected
undisturbed and bulk samples of earth materials, considered representative of those encountered. An
L evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this
report. A brief description of laboratory test criteria and summaries of test data are presented in
Appendix C.
[J FINDINGS
( I Reeional Geoloev
�
Regionally, the site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The
L Peninsular Ranges are characterized by northwest trending steep mountain ranges separated by
sediment filled elongated valleys. The dominant structural geologic features reflect the northwest trend
of the province. Associated with and subparallel to the San Andreas Fault are the San Jacinto Fault,
;I Newport-Inglewood, and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. The Santa Ana Mountains abut the west side of the
Elsinore Fault while the Perris Block forms the other side of the fault zone to the east. The Perris Block is
bounded to the east by the San Jacinto Fault. The northern perimeter of the Los Angeles basin forms part
L of a northerly dipping blind thrust fault at the boundary between the Peninsular Ranges Province and the
Transverse Range Province.
L,I 1EAlE8.'7C1H[ �']['1�1�'1['.� ����"]CE�]H('l�d][�R.L �]El�'V]f�C]ES 3 September 12, 2016
Project IVumber 161329-10A
LI
Il
I � The mountainous regions within the Peninsular Ranges Province are comprised of Pre-Cretaceous,
metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks along with Cretaceous plutonic rocks of the Southern
I�, California Batholith. The low lying areas are primarily comprised of Tertiary and Quaternary non-marine
� 1 alluvial sediments consisting of alluvial deposits, sandstones, claystones, siltstones, conglomerates, and
occasional volcanic units. A map illustrating the regional geology is presented on the Regional Geologic
� Map, Figure 2.
� �
LocalGeoloev
Ii
l � The earth materials on the site are primarily comprised of topsoil and Quaternary alluvial materials. A
general description of the dominant earth materials observed on the site is provided below:
I 1 . �soil [no ma�s,�� Residual topsoil, encountered in the upper 1 foot, blankets the site and
underlying bedrock. These materials were noted to be generally light brown to light grayish
�j brown,silty sand which were very porous, dry and in a loose state.
Ii
. Ouaternary Youn� Alluvial Valley Deposits (map svmbol Qyvl: Quaternary young alluvial valley
(� deposits were encountered directly from the surface within the topographically low portions of
�� the site to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet. These young alluvial valley deposits consist
predominately of interlayered light grayish brown to brown, fine to coarse grained silty sand,
f clayey sand, and poorly graded sand. These deposits were generally noted to be in a dry to wet,
L� medium dense to very dense state.
Ll
l.�
L
( I
U
l�i
L�I
,
�
�i
U
Ii
� E1#]�'1C]H[ �'JCI[�1#']['A. K'i�E�'1[']E�CIH[I�][�A]L�E][8\/]f�CE� 4 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
J
w���� ;���1�, � �.�� ?����� � � � � � �� ip����i ' ii �
x z t � i-J � ' � (!�� i
�.v' . � ��� I�, `'� �� • • • ��� �°"' 1 �I ��� ��� -.:�I
�' �"" �`1�,. �p �[�„ I �l � ,� i, 1 �-"' � � � ., � ��
� e �U /
� , F�4� a o �,1 1f '-�-L,�h�'y v�m�� � � � � � � � � � ��,�� r tl > 1 . ,�li { �
r 'l. '} �T Yt. p n � '� r�v�-�
J��. '� �1���� ,kSli r�:�,L�L7 � �._�I�._,� � o ��I � :ltc���-� ��I�� i
� aq ��� `,� 3�, v �����,�:�� ���� ��n !,-
" � CJI�-�a ' �Ev,. �,l �t g�.lt�e � �� � �ti�.�+81 .i
� 4.y �n�S p ��`-i (�l� , �3T+-
�� � ,,�aC l a 1� �
� ��� �� ' � ������, , _
l�.�L �"' ����� �����°� .�����r� �.�- _�_r.�_�.
�.,�° � ' p�.�� .N �a�i�
' ���� ,���� '�tf�� �['' „ � i,�J � ' _� ��
wi �( 5��� � a �� � �.�� c, ��
�;u(� ,��\,s�t� •f 4 � �-, �v� ��;
� � ,� —���� r����1� '` �j :
/�n ;�yy{^� � � �' r����,���y�ff��� � a.� �'
w"�(r::Jk'o ���-�,..i ���1'�1Q�1�1S�J4 ���aC: � . ���q��_.."__
�
i����€f_� y �� ;.•g�'�r � '��1 i�q ,_� �� �v _—•v
)) ���--� � �
�~ �r�, s� I Jt������,Y ��� ���/.�
/` i�d,r�
�'1
���1� I � �%/�L l �%"�Li�41��� `��1 � - l
6 �,�� ��� .���F '. i f� � 4 -'1^
��Z��^'�� ���4l� �� 5��," , if� 1�� ��, 1
t� � �f� g .
"3Yd3rk.�,. �.� /S��I��� 1Q'�������'i�l1�� ���Gi:' .41����tY� ��i.
'r el q �U ( S"1 j �pS ���7/�df/ ,4�" q�yp����S�-P- h .
� r ` i : �✓�✓I�'� �!� gy�'1��P��Q,fj11�� � � � ��� ��``+��,.���
��,�'� ��a'� ,�` ��,� �'��'` "���� � '��� ���'r ��``�-'� �
C�a�,��1�E_._�f;t�i� %��' i�':,�,� . `�1�� �✓p 41�,�, �<<���� �>,��z�:
r� �4 ^� u �y q V ° r � 1 ��.
;�_r-�.,. ,i V�U(���� ��1_�r"�l ��'`;�b`�� ���'���'���C� G �ad!.���'z M�
�1❑ o�.� , r��a��h�� .a. c }�. .4. lto.
� �/ •��,��"'�'- S8°�E���� � f�'� tryAK� t'� � :^e"�����5����'�1�7' ��
��` ����-..��-�G����� � � ��`��t,,� ,F �y���,,�;.. ��� 0 •P �: al
`� � ' (fy' 9 r� �ti,y�%'�.� � �y'� ff�,, �� tr e � �
�/'�� '�s+��' ���'}Nro�rr�� l��tS���f' ���Jp�������j,�� �'��������'���11.
��:J�� e. ➢s
6' �#��°`3���-�6 �;°��"�,"�.��������'��'�t��' �`�;lp���;� �}���•���`��'�i
� � �'�(4 � r � t $ l �t �.,i'.q &d i L''.��]�° 1��'�P2F
������` �"�" ���✓���'� `�i � �� � �f������������� �o� ��.,�'
1 �`/�� �U ��4��� �F</����0�f ii����� p �XA4��9�1�#4�'q�'f:"Y a�s�5��i��9"�.�$ � `� �B A? Q6 h��
1 pp
/ �1 //(��
� � ]1� J �� �1 �. �� � +t! � 1S.5 �"�"try,`��� � '� �. )/j�' �°1
� �r�l ���t pO��� �� � " l��'J��� l ��� � � i � � ��'�, 3 `Y'+���+� � � � � ��46 �
`�,'� a!r t � �,
�� 4 ,� a��'s�> !��,� p��a,� � � '� .�;,S�F J ��
...� N-,,r +ri�k+ 9 "�+ ..17�,� k=r'��Lff},1��:4k�fs�a`�',"`���:�.J�'��.�:��'���%���f'g,���� �'`,�
� ,��9��z r�����,f�j�����`� t� n � �d�� qtn/�� aY {�y��� ���J t�,.��lT�������
� i �6)b�,. ��•i';�� �iAqA��r �� t F a � �ic �y�411�Y, 3f f�� 5* A`�j�� ���yy{^^ "}�F.
,t '� �" �B �3"�����. �� �� �s a''l11���a ��j:���)r'�lr�n��(r 4�� V�
"�(��,����r.v\ . ��� �� �'�, � � ����,..�t ��'P� ��r..S` r�a.��E `L�v'A��i`1�4cY4v �r�ld���
� ��G�\�^,..nhUy� ��''+�AQ�`i.�����'.�a��°j ��i %'m '` 1�.._`u� ' ��Y��G��t r��i:;:
����� �y ! Y � p Fr`�`'� t' � Y + ° 1 ti t�� + s� �
�%� ���� ����, �� !�����9��� .���6�:< ���������;��,����qk �� ��
,b � � � �- ° , �,� � t � � u � � +a�
° ^� i, � 'a C'` „3 k� �� N„,c q�,q'� �, l ��
� a ,. � ��'/. � ,�� Ii,L,-'�'-��--�-^�v,��Y� ..i'�ir� '-��S'li�e t" r�r��� �4��a�y�"���
� � i�-, �� // ;�+,�xb���" �� " �r � ��� �� ,��a�f�p�,', ��A��
�6� : aRll �_�—���fl 1 � �t y,`Y�J��c:�����.�'i �..,` i.. � :��x.rt r�.'.:-" �H h�`�..4L.�
� t s� .
• � - j " / � ' ��'i� ` p ��,'l'r ;�Q�e t��;a�2 a �-`< ,.
' + 4 �g��� ' �
, �� o.,- ��d�. ���� �6'�� I _c���l� � ���� a
� _ _ _ �„ . _ � . . • - � .� • .
- ' •,.- . , ' '
O �� �-
� � � � • � �
� • . . . � � � � � •
' _ _ � � • �
�
I� �''' Faultine
�� The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely
�� ; impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire
southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas
`'i Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative
i i motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system
include the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults.
�-
i ,' No active faults are known to project through the site and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone, established by the State of California to restrict the construction of new habitable
I�� structures across identifiable traces of known active faults. An active fault is defined by the State of
; i California as having surface displacement within the past 11,000 years or during the Holocene geologic
time period. Based on our mapping of the subject site, review of current and historical aerial imagery,
' lack of lineaments indicative of active faulting, and the data compiled during the preparation of this
� J report, it is our interpretation that the potential for surface rupture to adversely impact the proposed
structures is very low to remote.
,
� ; Based on our review of regional geologic maps and applicable computer programs (USGS 2008
[nteractive Deaggregation, Caltrans ARS online, and USGS Earthquake Hazard Programs), the Elsinore
�I ', Fault with an approximate source to site distance of 0.77 kilometers is the closest known active fault
L ; anticipated to produce the highest ground accelerations, with an anticipated maximum modal magnitude
of 7.7. A list of faults as well as a list of significant historical seismic events within a 100km radius of the
; 1 subject site are included in Appendix D.
� i
Landslides
( �
� ; Landslide debris was not observed during our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are
known to exist on the site. No landslides are known to exist, or have been mapped, in the vicinity of the
� ', site. Geologic mapping of the site conducted during our investigation, and review of aerial imagery of the
�J site, reveal no geomorphic expressions indicative of landsliding.
(� '
� :
� '
�;
r
ul
� �
i
�I
( �'
L ]EAl[�"]['1H[ S'1C]�A'1['A �G�IE��']C]E�C]H[Rr][�CA]L 5EI[L'Vl[cC1E5 6 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
L.�'
�
I ;
l 1 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
�1 n rl
From geotechnical and engineering geologic points of view, the subject property is considered suitable
��, for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are
incorporated into the plans and are implemented during construction.
�� Earthwork
i
Earthwork and Gradine
1
i J The provisions of the 2013 California Building Code (CBC), including the General Earthwork and
Grading Specifications in the ]ast Appendix of this report, should be applied to all earthwork and
��, grading operations, as well as in accordance with all applicable grading codes and requirements of
f l the appropriate reviewing agency. Unless specifically revised or amended herein, grading
operations should also be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of our General
i , Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report.
lJ
Clearin�and Grubbine
(_j Vegetation including trees, grasses, weeds, brush, shrubs, or any other debris should be stripped
from the areas to be graded and properly disposed of offsite. In addition, laborers should be
( � utilized to remove any roots,branches, or other deleterious materials during grading operations.
l__I
Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should be notified at the appropriate times to provide
[ � observation and testing services during Clearing and Grubbing operations. Any buried structures
�� or unanticipated conditions should be brought to our immediate attention.
� �, Excavation Characteristics
L�
Based on the results of our exploration and experience with similar projects in similar settings,the
� near surface earth materials,will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment.
��
Groundwater
L,' Groundwater was observed in Boring 3 at a depth of 32 feet below existing grade. It should be
noted that localized groundwater could be encountered during grading due to the limited number
( of exploratory locations or other factors.
L ;i
Subdrain systems should be installed in all canyon areas, buttresses, fill over cut slopes, and/or
� � stabilization fills. The subdrain systems should be installed with a minimum of 10 feet of cover.
l !, All subdrain systems should be constructed per the specific guidelines provided within the
General Earthwork and Grading Specifications found in the last appendix of this report.
i
�I.
L' �1#]�7CIH[ �'7['][�.n6.'7C'A ��E�"1['E�]Hf'N1f�11.3. S]E][S�]fiCES� 7 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
[ '�
i;
li
�
� 1 Ground Preparation for Fill Areas
�� For each area to receive compacted fill, the removal of low density, compressible earth materials,
� ! such as topsoil, upper alluvial materials, and undocumented artificial fill, should continue until
firm competent alluvium is encountered. Removal excavations are subject to verification by the
(�� project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing compacted fills, the exposed
� bottom in each removal area should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air
dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and then compacted to a
�1 minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557.
� l
The intent of remedial grading is to diminish the potential for hydro-consolidation, slope
(� instability, and/or settlement. Remedial grading should extend beyond the perimeter of the
� i proposed structures a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation or a minimum of 5 feet,
whichever is greater. For cursory purposes the anticipated removal depths are shown on the
(�, enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 3
I i to 5 feet below existing grade.
l I Wet Removals
Wet alluvial materials will probably not be encountered within the low lying areas of the site. If
( � removals of wet alluvial materials are required, special grading equipment and procedures can
L_� greatly reduce overall costs. Careful planning by an experienced grading contractor can reduce
the need for special equipment, such as swamp cats, draglines, excavators, pumps,and top loading
( i earthmovers. Possible solutions may include the placement of imported angular rock and/or
_, geotextile ground reinforcement. More specific recommendations can be provided based on the
actual conditions encountered. Drying or mixing of wet materials with dry materials will be
[� needed to bring the wet materials to near optimum moisture prior to placing wet materials into
_; compacted fills.
( Oversize Rock
l_J
Oversize rock is not expected to be encountered during grading. Oversize rock that is encountered
� � (i.e., rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 12 inches) should be disposed of offsite or
� stockpiled onsite and crushed for future use. The disposal of oversize rock is discussed in greater
detail in General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report.
I' Compacted Fill Placement
( � Compacted fiil materials should be placed in 6 to 8 inch maximum [uncompacted) lifts, watered or
lJ� air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content and then compacted to
a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557.
��
Import Earth Materials
� � Should import earth materials be needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import
�! materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the
project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery onsite.
Lj �.�1�'][']H[ �7['1I�P.'ll'A. �'�E�']C]E�C]H['�T1f�1t�.SEl[E'V](�CES� 8 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
L
il
�' Fill Slones
(, When properly constructed, fill slopes up to 10 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are
i ; considered to be grossly stable. Keyways are required at the toe of all fill slopes higher than 5 feet
and steeper than 5:1 (h:v). Keyways should be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 2 feet into
� competent earth materials, as measured on the downhill side. In order to establish keyway
� � removals, backcuts should be cut no steeper than 1:1 or as recommended by the geotechnical
engineer or engineering geologist. Compacted fill should be benched into competent earth
n materials.
� l
Cut Slopes
i ,' When properly constructed, cut slopes into older alluvium up to 10 feet high with inclinations of
2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered grossly stable. Cut slopes should be observed by the engineering
i i geologist or his representative during grading,but are anticipated to be stable.
I1
Stabilization Fills
�I I
1_J Currentiy, stabilization fills will not be required for cut slopes in the alluvium. Our engineering
geologist or his representative should be called to evaluate all slopes during grading. In the event
L that unfavorable geologic conditions are encountered, recommendations for stabilization fills or
flatter slopes will be provided.
L1 Fi110ver Cut Slopes
J
The fill portion of fill over cut slopes should not be constructed until the cut portion of the slope
(� has been cut to finish grade. The earth materials and geologic structure exposed along the cut
� slope should be evaluated with regard to suitability for compacted fills or foundations and for
stability. If the cut materials are determined to be competent,then the construction of the keyway
(j and subdrain system may commence or additional remedial recommendations will be provided.
L
Temporary Backcuts
L�i
It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to follow all Cal-OSHA requirements with regard
to excavation safety. Where existing developments are upslope, adequate slope stability to protect
f j those developments must be maintained. Temporary backcuts will be required to accomplish
I i removals of unsuitable materials and possibly, to perform canyon removals, stabilization fills,
and/or keyways. Backcuts should be excavated at a gradient of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter. Flatter
� • backcuts may be required where geologic structure or earth materials are unfavorable. It is
�f imperative that grading schedules minimize the exposure time of the unsupported excavations.
All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation.
LJ Cut/Fill Transitions
Cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed
(I within the"fill"portion exceeds proposed footing depths. This is to diminish distress to structures
resulting from excessive differential settlement. The entire foundation of each structure should be
I �
LI �n���r�� ��r»�r� ��]E�7[']E�]HfT�][�AY.S�I�V][�E� 9 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
U
�
I ' founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the "cut"
portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Refer to the following
n table for recommended depths of overexcavation.
� I
��'TH UF FPLL "�fill" or[ion DE�P1'H OF O.�RE•XCAYATION "�cu[" or,�Gion
� U to 5 feet E ual De th
I 1' 5 to 10 feet 5 feet
Greater than 10 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the"fill"portion
�i 10 feet maximum
,
Overexcavation of the "cut" portion should extend beyond the building perimeter a horizontal
I distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or a minimum of 5 feet,whichever is greater.
�� Cut Areas
1
In cut areas, an area a minimum of 5 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures should
� overexcavated until; competent bottoms are achieved; to a minimum 3 feet below the proposed
l J foundations; or per the Overexcavation Table above; (whichever is greater) and replaced with
compacted fill. Final determination of areas that require overexcavation should be determined in
' the field by a representative of Earth Strata Geotechnical Services.
�_�
Shrinka�e.Bulkin�and Subsidence
�,
� ,I Volumetric changes in earth material quantities will occur when poorly consolidated earth
materials are replaced with properly compacted fill. Estimates of the percent shrinkage/bulking
C� factors for the various geologic units observed on the subject properry are based on in-place
� densities and on the estimated average percent of relative compaction achieved during grading.
CJ � fE�OLIDWGIC UNI7' '�'�' � .�''°` ���� `°SHRI'NiKfAGE I�a_/o5� �'
Topsoil 10 to 15
Alluvium 5 to 10
L-� Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces is expected to be
negligible to approximately 0.01 foot.
I� The estimates of shrinkage/bulking and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in
determining earthwork quantities. Since many variables can affect the accuracy of these
I 1 estimates, they should be used with caution and contingency plans should be in place for
balancing the project.
f ; GeotechnicalObservations
LJ
Clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading procedures should be
LI, observed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. No compacted fill should be
placed without observations by the geotechnical consultant or his representative to verify the
adequacy of the removals.
I I EA][8'IC'IH[ �'7t']�A']['I# �'�]E�'7['��C1H[I�1[�CI#H. �]EI�V][�]ES 10 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
��
II
�
The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should be present to observe grading
operations and to check that minimum compaction requirements and proper lift thicknesses are
� being met, as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein.
� Post Grading Considerations
�
Slope Landscapin�and Maintenance
I I Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject
site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage
(� provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Engineered slopes should be landscaped
� � with deep rooted, drought tolerant maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the
projectlandscape architect.
I_ 1 Site Drainagg
f� Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Roof gutters are
recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and
transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by
n the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on
l ; the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to flow
uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be
�' sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to structures should
� be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing
and maintenance to remain effective.
[] At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the CBC.
To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should also be
C� graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC.
��
Utili Trenches
�,I All utility trench backfill should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90
percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00. For utility
trench backfill within pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be
�I compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. This
includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways
and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in
L approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro-
hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches
L� should be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum
compaction requirements are obtained.
L In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should
be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they undercut the
perimeter foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior
L, lE.�.][�'][']H[ S'7[']�i']['1# �'�]E�'1['lE�C1H[T�T][�Cl�]L �lE]EL'V]f�CE� 11 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
U
�I
�
I J and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward
from the outside bottom edge of the footing.
l I SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
I� Ground Motions
Structures are required to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as
provided in the 2013 California Building Code Section 1613. The design is dependent on the site class,
,I occupancy category I, II, III, or IV, mapped spectral accelerations for short periods [Ss), and mapped
spectral acceleration for a 1-second period(Si).
I 1 In order for structural design to comply with the 2013 CBC, the USGS "US Seismic Design Maps" online
tool was used to compile spectral accelerations for the subject property based on data and maps jointly
�' compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geologicai Survey (CGS). The
� 1� data found in the following table is based on the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with 5%
damped ground motions having a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,475 year return
�'i period).
� 1
The seismic design coefficients were determined by a combination of the site class, mapped spectral
`� accelerations, and occupancy category. The following seismic design coefficients should be implemented
�! during design of the proposed structures. Summaries of the Seismic Hazard Deaggregation graphs and
test data are presented in Appendix D.
� 20 3 CBC FACTUR
Site Location Latitude: 33.477837"(North)
r 1 Lan itude: -117.130628" West
l�l Site Class D
Mapped Spectral Accelerations for short periods,Ss 1.878
(� Mapped Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second Period,Si 0.767
U Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 1 8�8
Acceleration for Short Periods,Sms
Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 1.150
�,I Acceleration for 1-Second Period,Smi
Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short
Periods,Sns 1.252
L' Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second 0.767
Period,S�i
f Seismic Design Category E
I I Importance Factor Based on Occupancy Category II
lJ
� We performed the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site in accordance with the 2013 CBC,
Section 1805.5.11 and 1803.5.12. The probabilistic seismic hazard maps and data files were jointly
prepared by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS) and
��', can be found at the CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. Actual ground
shaking intensities at the site may be substantially higher or lower based on complex variables such as
L the near source directivity effects, depth and consistency of earth materials, topography, geologic
El#1[�']C]H[ S"]['][8A']CA �dE�'][']E�C]H[1�][cCA]L S]E][�Vl[�]ES 12 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
LI
�i
�'
' structure, direction of fault rupture, and seismic wave reflection, refraction, and attenuation rates. The
mean peak ground acceleration was calculated to be 0.774g.
--,
Secondary Seismic Hazards
rl Secondary effects of seismic shaking considered as potential hazards include several types of ground
i ; failure as well as induced flooding. Different types of ground failure,which could occur as a consequence
of severe ground shaking at the site, include landslides, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and
Ir' liquefaction/lateral spreading. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on
i the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, the state of subsurface earth materials,
groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our experience, subsurface exploration, and
f ' laboratory testing, all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely.
II
Seismically induced flooding is normally a consequence of a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche (i.e., a
IrI wave-like oscillation of surface water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake)
i ; or failure of a major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site. Since the site is at an elevation
of more than 1,000 feet above mean sea level and is located more than 20 miles inland from the nearest
I coastline of the Pacific Ocean, the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunami is
l I considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to or up gradient of the site, the
likelihood for induced flooding due to a dam failure or a seiche overcoming the dam's freeboard is
Ir i considered nonexistent.
Liauefaction and Lateral Spreading
( _I� Liquefaction occurs as a result of a substantial loss of shear strength or shearing resistance in loose,
saturated, cohesionless earth materials subjected to earthquake induced ground shaking. Potential
f l impacts from liquefaction include loss of bearing capacity, liquefaction related settlement, lateral
L ,� movements, and surface manifestation such as sand boils. Seismically induced settlement occurs when
loose sandy soils become denser when subjected to shaking during an earthquake. The three factors
� i determining whether a site is likely to be subject to liquefaction include seismic shaking, type and
� I consistency of earth materials, and groundwater level. The proposed structures will be supported by
compacted fill and competent alluvium, with groundwater at a depth of approximately 32 feet. As such,
f the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction and lateral spreading beneath the proposed structures
I;JI is considered very low to remote due to the recommended compacted fill, relatively low groundwater
level, and the dense nature of the deeper onsite earth materials.
i�l, A liquefaction analysis was performed for the existing un-graded (in-situ) conditions, using a
conservative groundwater level of 5 feet to represent the historic high groundwater level. According to
� I Ishihara (1995) liquefaction should not manifest itself at the surface, due to the recommended grading,
i , the density of earth materiais at depth, and the volume of overburden materials above the potentially
liquefiable zone. We'estimate that dynamic settlement of sands due to liquefaction will be approximately
i � 0 inches. The liquefaction potential and dynamic settlement of sands analyses are included within the
� appendices of this report.
� I
,I ]E1#]�'7[']H[ §7[']�.'Il'A �'�]E�'7[']E�C]H[Tdl[�1#]L S]El[�'Vl[�CE� 13 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
LJ
�I
�
I I'� TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
��' n rI
Provided grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, shallow
' foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structures. Tentative foundation
. ; recommendations are provided herein and graphic presentations of relevant recommendations may also
be included on the enclosed map.
r-;
i �I Allowable Bearing Values
� i An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (ps� is recommended for design of 24-inch
� , square pad footings and 12-inch-wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches
below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional
r; 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 ps£ Recommended allowable bearing values
� I include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing
for short duration wind or seismic forces.
C1 SeYtlement
[ l Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the
_; anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than
approximately 3/a inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about 'h inch over a horizontal distance
r� of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the
I _i settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading.
LThe above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction are
� performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project
geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations.
� ,
�_; �.ateral Resistance
� � Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to
�, establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. For areas coved with hardscape, passive earth pressure
may be taken from the surface. For areas without hardscape, the first 3 feet of the soil profile must be
� , neglected when calculating passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load
�_f forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding
resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or
; , seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should
� ' be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for
�;
clay, sandy clay, sandy silty clay, silty clay,and clayey silt.
fj
I � The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly
against either compacted fill or competent alluvium.
�
�� 'i
�;
i '
I lE1*]�'1C1H1 �']C][�1�'1CI# ��]E�']C]E�C]H('1�T1[�,�4.]L S�IE]�VI[�]ES 14 September 12, 2016
Project IVumber 161329-10A
� �
I ;
U
i
�
� - Structural Setbacks and Buildin�Clearance
�� Structural setbacks are required per the 2013 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural
� '- setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements
constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time,be
� affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement.
l ! As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the
influence ofthese processes.
� i�
i ; For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded
to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1808.7 as illustrated in the following
i 'I, Foundation Clearances from Slopes diagram.
FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES
r�
I
il
"� '�"" �^� 'i' '°" ��s 2013 CALIFORNIA BUILDIN6 CODE
I - �+� c BUILDING SETBACK DIMENSIONS
,.�.�
� i r�,u�� M ��, .
� � �.rr�e�sne�rrwawxn.rnw�ean
�i
i
�
I r,uEarr
�_)
� �� � �
�i HIJWTIEEDNorro i/ \
D6ffDtlftETl1AX
�
I
)
F�W
� � 5
� 'i XRYrtlfEDlqfEY�HD
urgr�ux
��J
� �
� ' /
i ,
�_� r ��__���������������������� �����
( '
u T��
L
�' � When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the
l ' height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope.
i �
i ]E.�][L'"]C1H[ �'7C'][�1#"]['A �dE�'7[']E�1H[1mI1[�AL �El[kV1f�C]E� 15 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
i ,
u
i!
�,
� ' Foundation Observations
��' In accordance with the 2013 CBC and prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation
� � excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have
been excavated into competent bearing materials. The excavations should be per the approved plans,
�; moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level, and square. Any moisture softened earth
� � materials should be removed prior to steel or concrete placement.
ir ' Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the
I materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum
dry density.
�,
� ; Expansive Soil Considerations
�' Preliminary laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of VERY
� i LOW as classified in accordance with 2013 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D4829-03. Additional,
testing for expansive soil conditions should be conducted upon completion of rough grading. The
� 1 following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth
J materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require
additional slab thickness,footing sizes, and/or reinforcement.
`_; Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Lessl
�' Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a VERY LOW expansion
; potential as ciassified in accordance with 2013 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D4829-03. Since the
onsite earth materials exhibit expansion indices of 20 or less, the design of slab on ground foundations is
( i exempt from the procedures outlined in Section 1808.6.1 or 1808.6.2.
Li
F in
f '
l_� • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest
adjacent final grade (i.e. 12-inch minimum depth for one-story, 18-inch minimum depth for
( ; two-story, and 24-inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous
�__; footings for one-,two-, and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12
inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum
( ', width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively per
�; Table 1809.7 of the 2013 CBC, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars,
one (1) top and one (1) bottom.
r !
L; • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio
covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a
� ; minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement
�j ofthe pad footings will be required.
i ' Building Floor Slabs
u
• Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of
��' ]E14.1[�'ll"1H[ S'][']�'ll"� �GdE�"1[']E�C1H['l�Tl[�CR,]L �I�IEL"V][�C1�S� 16 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
i ;
��
�
I !
� ,
r-
il
� ' No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, each way. All floor slab reinforcement
should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-
j' depth.
( �
• Interior floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a
(� minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of
� � moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet
the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A materiai, and be properly installed in
�j accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure
� � that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing
concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a
( i minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used.
l ; Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for
concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into
(�, consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner.
� l
• Garage floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar
' manner as living area floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent
� wall footings with a positive separation maintained with '/s inch minimum felt expansion joint
materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12-inch-wide turn down founded at
' the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn
� down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one [1)
bottom.
l_.� . The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to promote uniform
curing of the concrete and minimiae the development of shrinkage cracks, prior to placing
r � concrete. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during
L.� construction.
i � Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Desi�n Recommendations
l_�
In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the
( i proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using
L�' the Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been
provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of
( ', expansive earth materials are allowed per 2013 CBC Section 1808.6.2. When utilizing these parameters,
�_! the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection
criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect.
!�� It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that
soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate
conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to
L expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner
irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials.
In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this
�; methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance.
Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of
II' �I�l�'1['IH[ �']C]�A"]['1# �'�]E�'1['��]HfY�11f�CA]L S�]El�'Vl[�CE� 17 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
L�
I !
� 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we
recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below
(�% the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete.
� ! The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during
construction.
� The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted
and irrigated,will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near
the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not
� I� account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the
foundation, should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture
�I infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected
even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth
materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping
irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion
; of the slab.
� Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of
; moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the
potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to
C� become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter
� season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures.
C' Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design
)
,; PAR9METiER YALOE
L� Ex ansionlndex Ve Lowl
,� Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fraction Passing the No. <20 percent(assumed)
200 Sieve
C i T e of Cla Mineral Montmorillonite assumed
j Thornthwaite Moisture Index +20
De th to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet
Constant Soil Suction P.F.3.6
L Moisture Veloci 0.7 inches month
Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 5.5 feet
Centerlift, m 1.Sinches
Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 2.5 feet
Ed e lift, m 0.4 inches
Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Negligible
Contact with Earth Materials
L Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as 200 pci
indicated below
Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment 12
( Perimeter Foundation Reinforcement --
`� Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements
of a ASTM E 1745 Class A material
i 1. Obtained by laboratory testing.
2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based
upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report,and structural engineering considerations.
�� IEA.I[8.7['1H[ �'7ClEg1#'7['� �'nE�']['lE�1H[l�d][�CA]L 51E1�'V][�]E� 18 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
� �
U
r,
� �i
�,
� �
� � Corrosivitv
��j Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a
I 1 substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint,
the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by
r j concrete) and the "environment" is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can
� � contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different
oarygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. [t is not considered practical or
�I realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity.
1
The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference
i standard "Bridge Design Specifications", under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has
determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides".
Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less
f�', than 500 ppm. As such,specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required.
li
Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2013 CBC Section 1904.1 and ACI 318, Section
�� 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based
; on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with
Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete in contact
( � with onsite earth materials should utilize Type I or II.
_; Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel
should be considered mildly corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being
corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH
C l values for the earth materials tested were (ower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic materials that
are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to
( � provide corrosion protection.
LJ
If building slabs are to be post tensioned,the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or
i encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable
end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a
recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous,
{ ,i moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely
� encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metaliic cementitious grout may be used
only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by
Hayes Industries, LTD or 0'Strand, Inc.
i
The preliminary test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples, and the initiation of grading
may blend various earth materials together. This blending or imported material could alter and increase
L� the detrimental properties of the onsite earth materials. Accordingly, additional testing for chlorides and
sulfates along with testing for pH and resistivity should be performed upon completion of grading.
III Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C.
�,
I�
L,I ]EAI�'1[']H[ �'1['1[81#'If.�. �C'i�]E�'7['E�]H[1�1[�AL S]El�.'Vl[�CIE� 19 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
fI !
L�
I '�
l , RETAINING WALLS
� Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures
Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Tentative
r i Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum
� � recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 8 feet high. The
active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt
I� slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the
� top, such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls,
active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle
�i point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments.
��N�1'M�U 1TAT C E�U� ALE�N1T F���ID P � SSU� � S c�
� p � ,SSU� � P BACKS O CONiD 0
( 1 I LEYE�L 2s Ih/
Active Earth Pressure 40 63
�' At-RestEarth Pressure 60 95
�._��
�� The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining
I walls. Therefore, the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be
designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls, structures, or vehicles should be added
� to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1.5:1 (h:v) plane projected
I up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement
potential of nearby buildings, the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1.5:1 (h:v)plane
projected up from the heel of the retaining wali footing.
i
Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address
( j equivalent fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual
�� backfiil inclinations, specific backfill materials, higher retaining walls requiring earthquake design
motions,etc.
LSubdrain System
` I We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining
L.1 walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated
pipe should consist of 4-inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the
'� perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/a-or 1'h inch open
graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to
prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system.
I�' In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may
be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure
behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and
� provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be
provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fiil, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot,
L�; IEAI�'][']H[ S'7[']�A'1C1i ��E�'1['��C]H[l�d][cCAL �EI[�'V]f�CE� 20 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
f '
�I
II
� should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter
fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent.
� The retaining walls should be adequately coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven
waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the
j' walls.
f �
Temporary Excavations
l ; All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal-OSHA requirements. Earth Strata Geotechnical
Services is not responsible for job site safety.
�
Retaining Wall Backfill
t , Retaining wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative
prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to
(� 8 inches,watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall
� � backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by
ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain.
' CONCRETE FLATWORK
I� Thickness and ioint Spacine
J
Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 3'/z inches thick and provided with
Cl construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the potential for excessive cracking.
J Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion
joints every 10 feet or less.
II Subgrade Preparation
� � In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete
; flatwork should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum
dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00 and then moistened to at least optimum or
slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches
L below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the earth materials
prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of
shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and
� moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete.
Cracking within concrete tlatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement
�I ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete
distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete.
�iMinor cracking within concrete flatwork is norma] and should be expected.
� I �1#1fL"7[']Hf S�'7f1E�14.'7CA ��E�']C]E�C1H[l�][�CI�.]L �lEl[�Vl[�]E� 21 September 12, 2016
Project IVumber 161329-10A
�
�
� '' GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
�I This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Jason Sims and their authorized
representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth
Strata Geotechnical Services should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior
1 to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly
incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth Strata Geotechnical Services not be
accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for
misinterpretation of our recommendations.
� We recommend that Earth Strata Geotechnical Services be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical
� engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work. In order to allow for
design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to
construction.
�i Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in
writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report. This report and the drawings contained
� iwithin are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings
; or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations
appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately, as
(� revisions may be required.
� ,
�i 42EPORT LIMITATIONS
�
Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
�� circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report
;�' was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional
�
advice included in this report.
� Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation
and exploration. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the
� � works of man on this or adjacent properties. As a result,we do not and cannot have complete knowledge
J; of the subsurface conditions beneath the subject property. No practical study can completely eliminate
uncertainty with regard to the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject properry.
�� The conclusions and recommendations within this report are based upon the findings at the points of
observation and are subject to confirmation by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services based on the
conditions revealed during grading and construction.
L�
This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their
representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the
attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The
L' owners' contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during grading
and construction, and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to
LI be unsafe or unsuitable.
L! lE1#]�'7[']Hf �'7[']E�A']Cl\ ��E�']C1E�C1H[Td]f�C1#]L �Elt�'V]I�CE� 22 September 12, 2016
Project Number 161329-10A
LI
I !
� I
��;
�
� i
�I
�I
��
r� APPENDIX A
��
REFERENCES
�,
J
�
�
��
�
��
�
�'
�
L,�
I !
I�I
� '
APPENDIX A
�� ': References
California Building Standards Commission, 2013,2013 Ca(ifornia Building Code, California Code of
� Regulations Title 24,Part2, Volume 2 of2, Based on 2012 International Building Code.
�'; DeLorme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USAOO.
� i
Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special
Publication 42, revised 2003.
Ishihara, K., 1995, Effects of At-Depth Liquefaction on Embedded Foundations during Earthquakes, Proc.
10� Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, August 29-
�� September 2, Beijing, China.
�? Kennedy, M.P., et all, 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle: California, California
� � Geological Survey, Regional Geologic Map No. 2.
(� National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An lntroduction,page 191.
�
Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementotion of
(1 DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in
Lf California, March.
�
�_�
L
��
II
�J�'!
L
L�,
II
L�
LI
��,
�
fII
�I
�
�I
I
l
�
(i APPENDIX B
EXPLORATORY LOGS
�
�
1
�!
�i
���
U
U
�
�J
�
�
r� Geotechnical Boring Log B-1
. ` ' Date:September 1,2036 Project Name:Vallejo Avenue Page:1 of 1
Project Number:161329-10A Logged By:SNJ
I� ,' Drilling Company:Lal Pac Type of Rig:Mobile Drill Rig
I Drive Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop(in): 30 Hole Diameter(in): 8
(; op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map
l ! v r o. �
a
y _ o O
C v � � m O
� � � � p C p� ` �
I f� a 3 " o. o " � in
Q m E > o �
"' � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
I J � o s T_�
` SM Silty SAND; light grayish brown,dry, loose,fine to medium sand,trace clay
�1 ss z.s� lll.z a.9 Quaternarv Youne Alluvial Vallev Deposits(Qw)
i ; SM Silty SAND; light grayish brown,dry,very dense,fine sand,calcite stringers
5
� 5� 126.1 6.4
� I
� f Fine to coarse sand,trace gravel at 6 feet
------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
� �•5' io�.i io.e SC Clayey SAND; brown,slightly moist,dense,fine to coarse sand,grevel
Ll
10 so s� lo, _ practical Refusal at 10.5 feet
��
� Total Depth 10.5 feet
No Groundwater
U
15
J
LJ 2�
L %
�
�� 25
I�
L� 30 ���
42217 Rio Nedo Road,Suite A-104,Temecula, CA 92590 �R ST4�I I�I G-=oTE6F1� f,RA
II � o
LI
�
�
I j Geotechnical Boring Log B-2
� - Date:September 1,2016 Project Name:Vallejo Avenue Page:1 of 1
Project Number:161329-10A Logged By:JCF
I II
I Drilling Company:Cal Pac Type of Rig:Mobile Drill Rig
' � Drive Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop(in): 30 Hole Diameter(in): 8
�_ op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map
Ii a y Q o
$ � a°'i �' ' � o
i,, o a � �� v � �
,� u LL v v � ,�, �
+-� 3 fl. o N � �n
v o E > 'o �
� °� "' � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
I0 Tousoil
` SM Silty SAND;light brown,slightly dry,loose,fine sand,trace coarse sand
� ai zs' ioza e.e Quaternarv Youn¢Vallev Deposits(Qw)
� , SM Silty SAND;light brown,slightly moist,dense,fine sand with trece coarse sand
5 and calcite stringers
� I a� s� uo.� �.s
�_
------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so/s° �.s� _ _ SC Clayey SAND;dark brown,slightly moist,dense,fine to coarse sand
Irl Very dense at 7.5 feet
� I
10 ------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i63 lo' ius ss SM Silty SAND;brown,slightly moist,very dense,fine to coarse sand,trace gravel
li
I
L
15 ------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sa is� llo.a �:a SP Poorly-Graded SAND;yellowish brown,moist,very dense,fine to medium
r �
sand,trace gravel
�;
L, 20
70 ZO' 120.6 4.4
� Abundant gravel at 21 feet
; ; Practical Refusal at 21 feet
Total Depth at 21 feet
I I 25 No Groundwater
�u
li_::
I 30
L_I
42217 Rio Nedo Road,Suite A-104,Temecula, CA 92590 ' �EO -C n�G
� �
�I
�
Ii
�,
Geotechnical Boring Log B-3
� ' Date:September 1,2016 Project Name:Vallejo Avenue Page:i of 2
n Projec[Number:161329-30A Logged By:
� Drilling Company:Cal Pac Type of Rig:Mobile Drill Rig
' Drive Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop(in): 30 Hole Diameter(in): 8
._� op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechni[al Map
I ,; i r n �
c
" o
a�"i �' ' m o
-, $ 3 o O 'in v � a
(
c =
� I �' 3 LL' O_ � h ry N
l � � O E �• p U
� m "' � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
r, 0 Topsoil
� 'I SM Silty SAND; light brown,dry,loose,fine to coarse sand
�, 3s zs� ioas s.a quaternarv Youne Vallev Deposits(Qw)
I SM Silty SAND; brown,slightly dry,dense,fine to coarse sand
t_;
i"' S 28 5' ioi.o ss Medium dense,calcite stringers at 5 feet
�J
zz �s' lv.i izs
l�
1
10
� i --21-- —101- -io9 s- -18=5- -------Clay nodules at 10----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
�� SC Clayey SAND; brown,slightly moist,mediume dense,fine to coarse sand,trace
gravel
�Ii
f—� 15
si is� llzo a.s Very dense at 15 feet
------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i �� SP Poorly-Graded SAND;yellow brown, moist,very dense,fine to coarse sand
�_
( '
L 20
$9 zo' iio.� �.s Trace clay nodules and gravel at 21 feet
i '
ij
� i
� , Groundwater at 32 feet,but rose to 24 feet after 0.5 hours
�-i ZS �z zs�
ei.i zas Wet at 25 feet
; !
� I
L;
�I I 30
L�
; ; 42217 Rio Nedo Road, Suite A-104,Temecula, CA 92590 *� �
-- YG
U
� '
i �
U
r,
I �
I Geotechnical Boring Log B-3
� ' Date:September 1,2016 Project Name:Vallejo Avenue Page:2 of 2
�_� Project Num6er:161329-10A Logged By:
! '�, Drilling Company:Lal Pac Type of Rig:Mobile Drill Rig
�- "� Drive Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop(in): 30 Hole Diameter(in): 8
� op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map
� � a y n o
� � w �' � m o
I o 0 0 � v _ .o
+�-' 3 " �- � � � in
i Q m £ �, •o u
�1
"' � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
I . 3Q 70 30' 1113 15.9
( �
r, Groundwater at 32 feet
! ',
L�
r-1 35 SS 35' 125.1 11.9
� �
i
�
40 ------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
� l
nnr� ao' izo.a is.i SC Clayey SAND; brown,wet,very dense,fine sand
(�I
lJ
45 ------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
esi���� as� lly.o 36.3 SP Poorly-Graded SAND;yellow brown,wet,very dense,fine to coarse sand
( 1
�_;
l_�� 50
85 50' 317.0 153
� �
�� Total Depth 51.5 feet
Groundwater at 24 feet
f "
�, 55
r �
�
�.J
60
�i
42217 Rio Nedo Road, Suite A-104,Temecula, CA 92590 5 A G-Eo G i C•�i
� �� _ � �� �
u
� i
L�
n
� ��
�
�
� �
�
i ;
�
( I
li
( ;
I !;
�
_;
r; APPENDIX C
�
LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS
J
�
�
.�
I
� �
�;
� i
U
( '�
L;
U
� �
u
� �
li
u
�i
�,
� ,
! ! APPENDIX C
ji
Laboratory Procedures and Test Results
� 1
Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the
�� representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance
� with American Sociery for Testing and Materials(ASTM)procedures and/or California Test Methods(CTM).
� Soil Classiflcation: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general
� ) accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual
Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample
descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487.
Grain Size Distribution: Select samples were tested using the guidelines of ASTM D 1140. The test results
�� are presented in the table below.
1 ;
SAM�P �OCAT OO N TER L UESCR�I� OO N %PASSING#ZOO STEVE
ii B-3 @ 5 feet Silty SAND 35.6
' B-3 @ 10 feet Clayey SAND 45.0
, B-3 @ 20 feet Poorly-Graded SAND 7.4
(I B-3 @ 30 feet Poorly-Graded SAND 19.6
Moisture and Densitv Tests: For select samples moisture content was determined using the guidelines of
( � ASTM D 2216 and dry density determinations were made using the guidelines of ASTM D 2937. These tests
were performed on relatively undisturbed samples and the test results are presented on the exploratory
� logs.
i
i
Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative
�� samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table
� below.
r i SA P E ' �MATE�RIAI. �I�MU� �U,RY. 0 PMUM MUISTU�,�
� I.00�1diI.O.N �DESCR�IPTION DE�NSITP(pc� ' CONf3E�NyT(�°/o) � '
B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 124.5 8.0
( i
L-� Exoansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines
of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below.
LSAMPI.S MATE�RIAL � , � � q p , �
�' �E• �P, NSION I�NDEX EXPA SION POTENTIAL+��re
;� LOCAb.TaION,�� : DESCRIiP ION �.. �� ��e�i°�;;.� w�`�`��' ",��.'°�,"'�'ca��'*';��'
� I
B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 2 Very Low
L,
�
( �
�
�_I
�
� I
l ! Minimum Resistivi�y and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH Tests of select samples were performed
using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below.
� � � S,ANJPLE TER+IAL y li MiIiAIIiMiR� [ �� SI-S1' 'I1'Y
� O�TIU f D SC ��PT 0 P Qo,:,,,�_;cm)
�; B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 8.1 5,000
l II Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM
417. The test results are presented in the table below.
�,
i
� � i�� i 'SA�M'�PL� i � THR+IAL�I I � 0 �SUL H7'Ti C�O� ENT
��I' � LOC9TIUN � � �SC ��PTIO aI�I ��� (%b} weight) S�LF TE EXPO�[�IR�
� B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND No Detecrian Negligible
� Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422.
' The test results are presented in the table below.
LSAMPLE I.00ATION MATE�R+IAL DES@RIPTION CHLO 9iD CONTENT(ppm)
B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 30
�I
�
l_;
L
i
�
1 �
�i
L
L
L
�
1 �
�
i!
�
r�
(��
�
�'
�
��
(; APPENDIX D
L SEISMICITY
CJ
( �
�_,
�'
���
L
�
��
L
� �
��
�'
II 8/2/2016 ARS Online
I' CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
il
Caltrans ARS Online (v2.g.o�)
...............................................................................................................................................................................................
This web-based tool calculates both deterministic and probabilistic acceleration response spedra for any location in Califomia based on
, criteria provided in Appendix B of Caltrans Seismic Design Cnteria. More...
SELECT SfTE LOCATION
� Mur�2ta '�—+�` ;� Merk Sde
—"�n���; ��
� � � � = 4 Overlay
e„ u'
.. ,�i'�+m�agne .r�
� ,d�� c�v�3� otosaw� ` Valle ,.
� a5�`' �r,�n��n Los Cabal "�
b
� Rancho � aa
antaRosa �,�=noca��ra,y o !.f:ng°��� 3
stor/cArea �a �, `'�, Q�,aaF�
( �' �� � ake�Village'9• � s.
'�o
�' ' Temecu �Aa Q�
r.E�sv �,��' �. �.
�� j9 � �Rd -r_ 79'':V� _
.� 9° Lo"s Ranchi 5 v�Y�h� 79 � �
l •
�J� ��� . . � .. . � ..
� Pechanga o
i ', ' Santa �ort&Casino -
'� � Margarita i
GOO I2 Ecologrc�l b
g ._ RQSBfV@_. R7 - Map dRepo7�Galihzp',ercgne
_. . . .
L� Latitude: 33.477837 Longitude: -117.130628 Vsso: 270 m/s Calculate
� i
�
L
L
��
�
�
u
� Mtp:/ldap3.dotca.gw/ARS_Online/ 1/2
! ' &2/2016 ARSOriine
r CALCULATED SPECTRA Display Curves: 3 �
I
� Location: LAT=33.477837 LONG=-117.130628 Vs30=270m/s
Z _._..__...__.._ ..,._. _...:..........................................._.....--:....._.............
� ' �, ; Minimum Deterministic Spectrum i
1.8 ........ .:. ... ............
I j � � , : Elsinore (Temecula) CWith Near Fault Factor Rpplied) �
(-' : �, ; Elsinore Wulian) CWith Near Fault Factnr qpplied) �
� 1.6 -��������;--��-��--�',-��--�����i-� Elsinore CGlen ivy) rev CWith Near Fault Factor Rpplied) �
� " � ' : USGS 5% in 50 years hazard (2008) (With Near Fault Factor Rpplied) �
II y 1.4 .. .... . . .... ... . ...�,,._ ... . ....... . �, ,
� ,
p I
,�{ 1.2 ................... .1. .._"_._..;._..____".�_....___'_�,'___._...:...._._.._:....__. ...:..._._.. ._.....
��'' +i
I I L . I ' I . � ,
LI ,y t . ....:..... ...... . . .... . __.._..._ .. ___;__.__ .__,_.._ . __ � .. : _ __ , ._..._. .
m
u
U
S0.8 ,. .._.- ._ .. . . ... . .. .. ... . . ... . .. . . . . ... __ .._ .
(I�� � �. . : : ' ,� �,
`-' .+ 0.6 ._„ _'_"_ _ _ __'... _". '.... : : . . _
� , _... ..... . ,-.... �..... ......
y
a
N 0.4 - -..._.:�..,. ..............'__...._...:._........; .....:..... .. ........ ..... ...
....... ..:. : ..
� 1
I.......'..., . .
0.2 .......... ..�."�.._�:............::.:........ .........__"___'"__"__"__'___"___.__:....__ '_"_'
. ...,...,...��. ' .. ' ' '
) 0 0 0. . . ...�,...................... .
� . , ................�....�,,..�.....�.. �
� . ..,�.�...............�.....�....:........'.........,
5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Period, T(sec)
� Tabular Data �' Envelope Only � Hide Near Fault � Axis Scale � Show Basin �
�
r� ApptyNearFaukAdjustmentTo:
lNOTE:Cal[rans SDC requires applica[ion ot a Near Pault Adjustment factorfor sNes less lhan 25 km(Rrup)
-� fromthecausa[ivefauk.
( �
� DeterministicSpectrumUsing
I I 0.77 Km Elsinore(Temecula)
� 19.34 Km Elsinore(Julian)
� 20.84 Km Elsinore(Glen Iry)rev
L � ProbabilisticSpectrum Using
0.77 Km(Recommend Performing Deaggregation To Verify)
i
Li OO Show Spectrum wifh Adjustrnent Only
O Show Spectrum with and without nearfaultAdjustrnent
� 1 OK
LJ
LI
I
�I
L
� Conditions oF Use � Privacy Policy
LCopyright O 2009 State of Califomia
Mlp://dap3.dot.ca.gw/ARS_ONine/ 2l2
�
- —, � � � ~7 ^]
C-__: C^ � � C_— �-� �--, � J r--, � -J �' �
.—, � _
PSH Deaggregation on NEHRP D soil
o Vallejo_Avenue, 117.131° W, 33.478 N.
N Peak Horiz. Ground Accel.>=0.7597 g
Ann. Exceedance Rate .404E-03. Mean Return Time 2475 years
Mean (R,M,£o) 4.1 km, 7.12, 0.75
Modal (R,M,eo) = 0.8 km, 7.16, 0.46 (from peak R,M bin)
a � Modal (R,M,e*) = 0.81an, 7.16, 1 to 2 sigma (from peak R,M,e bin)
m Binning: De1taR 10. km, deltaM=0.2, De1taE=1.0
�
0
0
� O
0
�
0
U o
\
o�
� ��a�
����a �a
`
� �0 oc i`<'�i
�� ��� ���
� @
O �a ''0
O ♦�•. ' m s
�O /
09
a-�p '♦
Prob. SA, PGA � �� ��
�o
<median(R,M) >median�'-s@ od'
��,v� F� O
. £p G-Z O G EQ G O.S �'`m-Q h $'
r...; m'i.F� ,so '�'
. -2 <E�<-1 i^! �.5 <��< 1 l 1��`
�
s -� <eo<-os ❑ 1 <Ea<z so o ���a�
Cp- �P
� -0.5 <Ep<0 � 2<Ep<3 200910 UPDATE �� h`-'
Bo 50
2016 Aug 2 2223:52 Oistance(R),magnitutle(M),epsilon(EO,E)tleaggregation for a site on soil with average vs=270.m/s top 30 m.USGS CGHT PSHA2008 UPOATE Bins with It 0.05%contrib.omittetl
� 5�2/2016 geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggim/2008!ouN/allejo Avenue 2016.08.02_2223.43.bR
�� *** Deaggregation of Seismic Hazard at One Period of Spectral Accel. ***
*** Data from U.S.G.S. National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project, 2008 version ***
PSHA Deaggregation. '6contributions. site: Vallejo_Avenue, long: 117.131 W., lat: 33.478 N.
Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30).
� NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below -
Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7597 g. Weight * Computed_Rate Ex 0.404E-03
� � #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00360
#This deaggregation corresponds to Mean Hazard w/all GMPEs
�' DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPSQ 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2
6.9 5.05 0.698 0.553 0.146 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.0 5.20 1.476 1.066 0.410 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.0 5.21 0.087 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.1 5.40 1.532 0.987 0.544 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i 13.3 5.40 0.134 0.134 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.1 5.60 1.490 0.790 0.700 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 13.6 5.60 0.185 0.185 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I I 7.2 5.80 1.360 0.623 0 J34 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000
� ' 13.8 5.80 0.230 0.230 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6.9 6.01 1.652 0.664 0.946 0.041 0.000 0.000 0.000
[� 13.7 6.01 0.342 0.336 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i 6.9 6.20 2.175 0.814 1.286 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.9 6.20 0.440 0.404 0.036 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.1 6.40 2.117 0.650 1.348 0.119 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.9 6.40 0.539 0.465 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
23.0 6.41 0.087 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-� 3.6 6.60 0.876 0.180 0.522 0.175 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.2 6.60 0.133 0.117 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
[� 21.5 6.62 0.310 0.310 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
j 1.3 6 J9 5.035 0.608 2.696 1.730 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.0 6.80 0.160 0.130 0.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.4 6.78 0.541 0.541 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.9 6.97 10.486 1.111 5.225 4.049 0.101 0.000 0.000
�I 13.9 6.96 0.085 0.064 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.3 6.97 0.643 0.578 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 37.1 6.98 0.112 0.112 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I 0.8 7.16 16.987 1.646 7.606 7.199 0.537 0.000 0.000
-' 36.6 7.22 0.331 0.331 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
54.8 7.21 0.056 0.056 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L 0.8 7.36 13.796 1.305 6.054 5.958 0.480 0.000 0.000
18.6 7.42 0.310 0.189 0.121 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
35.6 7.40 0.782 0.780 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
61.1 7.44 0.051 0.051 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.57 15.527 1.432 6.666 6.835 0.594 0.000 0.000
Li, 19.0 7.61 0.124 0.069 0.055 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
35.1 7.59 1.597 1.444 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I 60.8 7.63 0.100 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LI 0.8 7.75 15.580 1.416 6.595 6.919 0.650 0.000 0.000
35.0 7.79 0.883 0.722 0.161 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.7 7.80 0.063 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.99 0.187 0.017 0.078 0.084 0.009 0.000 0.000
L�i 35.0 7.99 0.079 0.062 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.7 7.97 0.121 0.121 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.7 8.16 0.057 0.057 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L�' Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon:
Contribution from this GMPE(%): 100.0
Mean src-site R= 4.1 km; M= 7.12; eps0= 0.75. Mean calculated for all sources.
Modal src-site R= 0.8 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.46 from peak (R,M) bin
MODE R*= O.Skm; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma � CONTRI6.= 7.606
Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution)
I i Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values).
�� California A-faults 83.66 3.3 7.35 0.60
CA Compr. crustal gridded 16.25 8.1 5.93 1.54
( � hltp://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirN200&ouWallejo Avenue�2016.08.02_2223.43.d1 1/5
U
�� &2I2016 geohazards.usgs.gw/deaggirN200fl�ouWallejo Avenue_2016.�8.02 2223.43.tiet
Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%:
�',I Fault ID % contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d)
Elsinore;T aPriori 12.76 0.8 6.99 0.56 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 19.91 0.8 7.24 0.45 45.3
Elsinore;T+]+CM aPriori 5.90 0.8 7.64 0.41 45.3
��I Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM aPriori 5.96 0.8 7 J2 0.40 45.3
Elsinore;T MoBal 4.53 0.8 6.94 0.59 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T MOBal 2.60 0.8 7.24 0.45 45.3
� Elsinore;T+7 MOBal 2.71 0.S 7.53 0.42 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+] MoBal 2.74 0.8 7.63 0.41 45.3
� � Elsinore;T+]+CM MoBal 5.86 0.8 7.64 0.41 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM MoBal 3.42 0.8 7.72 0.40 45.3
(- 1 Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 8.63 1.1 7.39 0.47 45.8
� #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Mean Hazard w/all GMPEs *********#
PSHA Deaggregation. '6contributions. site: Vallejo_Avenue, long: 117.131 W., lat: 33.478 N.
^ Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30).
I I NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below
Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7597 g. Weight * Computed Rate_Ex 0.177E-03
#Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00300
i j #This deaggregation corresponds to Boore-Atkinson 2008
( DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2
6.4 5.05 0.066 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6.6 5.20 0.162 0.162 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 6.7 5.40 0.201 0.201 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 � 0.000
-�� 6.9 5.60 0.231 0.224 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.0 5.80 0.248 0.219 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 13.9 5.81 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6.5 6.02 0.394 0.311 0.083 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 14.0 6.01 0.065 0.0fi5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6.5 6.20 0.559 0.415 0.143 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.3 6.20 0.107 0.107 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 6.8 6.40 0.540 0.387 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.5 6.40 0.149 0.149 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
23.4 6.41 0.054 0.054 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1 3.0 6.60 0.277 0.110 0.130 0.036 0.000 0.000 0.000
_j 14.9 6.60 0.058 0.058 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.5 6.62 0.287 0.287 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1.1 6.79 2.222 0.293 1.235 0.694 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.5 6.80 0.072 0.071 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
.� 21.4 6 JS 0.501 0.501 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
36.3 6.81 0.039 0.039 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L�I 0.9 6.97 4.763 0.488 2.544 1 J31 0.000 0.000 0.000
14.2 6.96 0.039 0.036 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 21.3 6.97 0.572 0.506 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
37.1 6.98 0.112 0.112 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
( II 0.8 7.16 7.632 0 J05 3.697 3.230 0.000 0.000 0.000
L 15.8 7.20 0.026 0.015 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.5 7.22 0.033 0.023 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
36.6 7.22 0.331 0.331 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
54.8 7.21 0.056 0.056 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
�� 60.9 7.25 0.038 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.S 7.36 6.155 0.560 2.943 2.652 0.000 0.000 0.000
18.7 7.42 0.217 0.131 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 35.6 7.40 0.749 0.747 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 54.7 7.42 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
61.1 7.44 0.051 0.051 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L, 0.S 7.57 6.864 0.608 3.226 3.027 0.003 0.000 0.000
19.0 7.61 0.082 0.045 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
35.1 7.59 1.463 1.309 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
44.1 7.54 0.027 0.027 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.8 7.63 0.100 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i 0.8 7.75 6.840 0.596 3.176 3.043 0.025 0.000 0.000
35.0 7.79 0.770 0.609 0.161 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.7 7.80 0.063 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
iI http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirN200&ouWallejo Avenue,_2016.08.02 22.23.43.bct 2/5
U
�II 8/2/2016 geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008!ouWallejo Avenue_2�16.08.02_2223.43.tict
0.8 7.99 0.081 0.007 0.037 0.037 0.001 0.000 0.000
�', 35.0 7.99 0.065 0.047 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
60.7 7.96 0.119 0.119 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
75.2 7.98 0.024 0.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i60.7 8.16 0.052 0.052 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
�: Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon:
Contribution from this GMPE(�): 43.8
� Mean src-site R= 5.8 km; M= 7.26; eps0= 0.84. Mean calculated for all sources.
Modal src-site R= 0.8 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.52 from peak (R,M) bin
� MODE R*= 0.8km; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.= 3.697
� Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3� contribution)
Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values).
� California A-faults 40.31 5.5 7.35 0.77
CA Compr. crustal gridded 3.37 8.7 6.11 1.73
r' Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%:
� Fault ID � contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d)
Elsinore;T aPriori 5.81 0.8 6.98 0.61 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 8.91 0.8 7.24 0.52 45.3
Elsinore;T+7+CM aPriori 2.59 0.8 7.64 0.49 45.3
_ � Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM aPriori 2.61 0.8 7 J2 0.48 45.3
Elsinore;T MOBal 2.07 0.8 6.94 0.63 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 1.17 0.8 7.24 0.52 45.3
� Elsinore;T+] MoBal 1.20 0.8 7.53 0.49 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+7 MoBal 1.21 0.8 7.63 0.49 45.3
Elsinore;T+7+CM MoBal 2.58 0.8 7.64 0.49 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM MOBal 1.50 0.8 7.72 0.48 45.3
� Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 3.93 1.2 7.39 0.57 45.8
� #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Boore-Atkinson 2008 *********#
i 1 PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: Vallejo_Avenue, long: 117.131 W., lat: 33.478 N.
LJ Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30).
NSHMP 2007-08 See U5G5 OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below
Return period: 2475 yrs. Ex[eedance PGA =0.7597 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.196E-04
� #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00000
f #This deaggregation corresponds to Campbell-Bozorgnia 2008
DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2
6.7 5.05 0.073 0.073 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
j�� 6.9 5.20 0.202 0.202 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L� 7.0 5.40 0.281 0.274 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
12.4 5.42 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i���, 7.1 5.60 0.303 0.269 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
12.9 5.61 0.015 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
�' 7.2 5.80 0.265 0.225 0.039 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.2 5.80 0.021 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6.9 6.01 0.281 0.246 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L 13.2 6.02 0.037 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 �
6.9 6.20 0.374 0.332 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.3 6.20 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
�, 7.0 6.40 0.407 0.339 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I 13.3 6.40 0.074 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.7 6.41 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4.9 6.60 0.149 0.095 0.054 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� �, 13.6 6.59 0.026 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
�; 3.5 6.79 0.191 0.142 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.6 6.80 0.027 0.027 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1.5 6.98 0.260 0.180 0.079 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L' 13.6 6.95 0.013 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.16 0.486 0.237 0.249 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.35 0.373 0.186 0.187 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I 0.8 7.57 0.445 0.217 0.228 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L � 0.8 7 JS 0.473 0.223 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
J 0.8 7.99 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
I I http:!/geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggiM@00&ouWallejo Avenue 2016.08.02_22.23.43.bct 3/5
U
� , 8/2I2016 geohazards.usgs.gw/deaggirN2008/ouWallejo Avenue 2016.08.02 2223.43.6ct
Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon:
� Contribution fram this GMPE(%): 4.8
Mean src-site R= 4.6 km; M= 6.59; eps0= 1.73. Mean calculated for all sources.
Modal src-site R= 0.8 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 1.70 from peak (R,M) bin
MODE R*= 7.0km; M*= 6.40; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.= 0.339
l I Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution)
Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values).
r, Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%:
I � Fault ID % contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d)
Elsinore;T aPriori 0.30 0.8 7.01 1.86 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 0.58 0.8 7.24 1.70 45.3
� Elsinore;T+7+CM aPriori 0.19 0.8 7.63 1.64 45.3
I` � Elsinore;GI+T+]+CM aPriori 0.19 0.8 7 J2 1.64 45.3
Elsinore;T MoBal 0.10 0.8 6.97 1.93 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 0.05 0.S 7.24 1.70 45.3
Elsinore;T+7 MoBal 0.09 0.8 7.53 1.64 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+7 MoBal 0.09 0.8 7.63 1.65 45.3
� Elsinore;T+J+CM MoBal 0.19 0.8 7.63 1.64 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+]+CM MoBal 0.11 0.S 7.72 1.64 45.3
(� Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 0.07 0.9 7.39 2.36 45.8
� � #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Campbell-Bozorgnia 2005 *********#
� PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: Vallejo_Avenue, long: 117.131 W., lat: 33.478 N.
Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30).
NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below
Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7597 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.208E-03
r� #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00782
I � #This deaggregation corresponds to Chiou-Youngs 2008
� DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPSQ 0<EPS<1 d<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2
7.0 5.05 0.560 0.498 0.062 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
12.6 5.05 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 7.1 5.20 1.112 0.948 0.165 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
J 13.0 5.21 0.087 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.2 5.40 1.050 0.835 0.215 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L 13.3 5.40 0.126 0.126 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.2 5.60 0.957 0.718 0.239 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.7 5.60 0.159 0.159 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 7.3 5.80 0.847 0.562 0.285 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LJ 13.9 5.80 0.151 0.181 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.0 6.01 0.977 0.599 0.378 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.7 6.01 0.240 0.240 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LI 7.1 6.20 1.243 0.730 0.512 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.8 6.20 0.279 0.279 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7.3 6.40 1.170 0.603 0.567 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.7 6.39 0.317 0.302 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
22.5 6.41 0.030 0.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
L� 3.5 6.60 0.451 0.142 0.244 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.000
13.6 6.59 0.050 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1.3 6.79 2.622 0.315 1.336 0.971 0.000 0.000 0.000
L�, 13.5 6.80 0.061 0.059 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21.4 6.78 0.038 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.9 6.97 5.463 0.494 2.577 2.290 0.101 0.000 0.000
13.6 6.96 0.033 0.031 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
i �i, 21.3 7.00 0.071 0.071 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
`, 0.8 7.16 8.870 0.705 3.660 3.969 0.537 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.36 7.Z69 0.560 2.924 3.306 0.480 0.000 0.000
15.5 7.43 0.093 0.059 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
( � 35.4 7.39 0.033 0.033 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
� 0.8 7.57 8.218 0.608 3.212 3.808 0.590 0.000 0.000
19.0 7.61 0.042 0.025 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
35.1 7.59 0.135 0.135 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LI 0.8 7 JS 8.267 0.596 3.169 3.877 0.625 0.000 0.000
35.0 7.81 0.113 0.113 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.8 7.99 0.099 0.007 0.037 0.047 0.008 0.000 0.000
I � http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggintl2008/ouWallejo Avenue 2016.08.02_2223.43.bc1 MS
�
` , 8/Z2016 geohazards.usgs.gw/deaggirN2008loufNallejo Avenue_2016.08.02_2223.43.bct
;i Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon:
� i Contribution from this GMPE(%): 51.4
Mean src-site R= 2.6 km; M= 7.06; eps0= 0.58. Mean calculated for all sources.
,� Modal src-site R= 0.8 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.34 from peak (R,M) bin
I �I MODE R*= 0.8km; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.= 3.968
�
Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution)
� Source Category: °G contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values).
California A-faults 41.27 1.2 7.35 0.37
- � CA Compr. crustal gridded 10.12 8.1 5.86 1.42
Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%:
�, Fault ID � contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d)
i � E15inore;T aPriori 6.65 0.8 6.99 0.46 45.3
E15inore;GI+T aPriori 10.42 0.8 7.24 0.33 45.3
Elsinore;T+]+CM aPriori 3.12 0.8 7.64 0.27 45.3
r� Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM aPriori 3.15 0.8 7 J2 0.26 45.3
`.� Elsinore;T MoBal 2.36 0.8 6.94 0.49 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 1.36 0.8 7.24 0.33 45.3
Elsinore;T+] MoBal 1.43 0.8 7.53 0.29 45.3
(� Elsinore;GI+T+7 MoBal 1.45 0.8 7.63 0.27 45.3
� f Elsinore;T+7+CM MoBal 3.09 0.8 7.64 0.27 45.3
Elsinore;GI+T+7+CM MOBal 1.81 0.8 7.72 0.26 45.3
C� Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 4.62 1.1 7.39 0.36 45.8
#*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Chiou-Youngs 2008 *********#
***************«**** Southern California «rr««*�+««**«#**�.*.*«.*.**#.•****•*«*..
LJ
LJ
L!
U
LJ
LI
Ll��
LI
L
IJi
I � http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggiM/2008�ouWallejo Avenue,_2016.08.02_2223.43.bR 5/5
u
� � 8/7J2016 2008NalionalSeismicHazardMaps-SoviceParameters
r)
I �
Earthquake Hazards Program
��� 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters
New Search
� �' Distance in�ame 5[ate PreF �ip Dip Slip Rupture Rupture Leng[h
'- � Kilometers Slip (degrees) Dir SenseTop Bottain (km)
Rate (km� (km)
� (mmlyr)
� 0.77 Elsinore:GI+T+J+CM CA Na 86 NE slrike 0 16 195
l I slip
0.77 Elsinore:T CA 5 90 V strike 0 14 52
i 1 slip
0.77 Elsinore:GI+T+J CA Na 86 NE strike 0 17 153
� ' slip
0.77 Elsinore:Gl+T CA 5 90 V strike 0 14 78
slip
0.77 Elsinore:W+GI+T+J+CM CA Na 84 NE strike 0 16 241
slip
0.77 Elsinore:W+GI+T+J CA Na 84 NE strike 0 16 199
� slip
0.77 Elsinore:W+GI+T CA Na 84 NE strike 0 14 124
slip
0.77 Elsinore:T+,7+CM CA Na 85 NE strike 0 16 169
� � slip
��
0.77 Elsinore:T+,7 CA Na 86 NE strike 0 17 127
slip
18.94 EI 'sinare:J CA 3 84 NE strike 0 19 75
(� slip
L � 18.94 Elsinore:J+CM CA 3 84 NE strike 0 17 118
slip
21.27 Elsinare:Gl CA 5 90 V strike 0 13 37
slip
21.27 Elsinore:W+GI CA Na 81 NE strike 0 14 83
slip
34.94 San Jacinto:A+CC CA Na 90 V Strike 0 16 118
I ; slip
�_) 34.94 SanJacinto:A CA 9 90 V stnke 0 17 71
slip
i �
34.94 San Jacinto:A+C CA Na 90 V stnke 0 17 118
slip
�, ; 34.94 San Jacinto:A+CC+B+SM CA Na 90 V stdke 0.1 15 178
slip
� � 34.94 San Jacinto:A+CC+e CA Na 90 V sMke 0.1 15 152
li
slip
L; 34.97 SanJacinto:SeV+SJV+A+CC CA Na 90 V sMke 0 16 181
slip
1 34.97 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV+A CA Na 90 V stnke 0 16 134
III slip
J 34.97 San Jacinto:SJV+q+CC+B+SM CA Na 90 V stdke 0.1 15 196
slip
i ; 34.97 San Jacinto:SJV+A+CC+B CA Na 90 V stnke 0.1 15 170
slip
�_� 34.97 SanJacinto:SJV+q+CC CA n/a 90 V sMke 0 76 136
slip
� �, 34.97 San Jacinto:SJV+q+C CA n/a 90 V stnke 0 77 736
� . slip
�� 34.g7 SanJacinto:SJV+A CA Na 90 V stnke 0 17 89
slip
i� � 34.97 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV+A+CC+e CA n/a 90 V sMke 0.1 15 215
� slip
�- 34.97 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V stnke 0 17 181
slip
Jhttp://geohazards.usgs.gov/cfusiorvhazhadts_2008 searcFJquery_resWts.cfrn 1/4
�
�
� � fl@/2016 2008NationalSeismicHazardMaps-SaaceParameters
34.97 SanJacin[o:SBV+SJV+A+CC+e+SM CA Na 90 V strike 0.1 15 241
r i slip
� � 37.32 SanJacinto:SJV CA 18 90 V strike 0 16 43
slip
37.32 SanJacinto:SBV+SJV CA Na 90 V Strike 0 16 88
�� slip
f � 44.12 Newoort Inolevrood Connected alt 1 CA 1.3 89 strike 0 11 208
slip
r�
44.12 Newoort Inglevrood Connectetl alt 2 CA 1.3 90 V strike 0 11 208
slip
I � 44.12 Newoort-Inolevrood(Oftshorel CA 1.5 90 V strike 0 10 66
slip
47.95 Rose Canvon CA 1.5 90 V s[rike 0 8 70
r I slip
II 52.26 San Joaauin Hills CA 0.5 23 SWthrust 2 13 27
54.55 San Jacinto:CC CA 4 90 V strike 0 16 43
�_� slip
� i 54.55 SanJacinto:CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike 02 14 1W
l , slip
54.55 San Jacinto:CC+6 CA n/a 90 V stnke 0.2 14 77
� slip
� 5578 Chino.al[2 CA 7 65 SW sMke 0 14 29
� I
(_; slip
57.31 San Jacinto:C CA 14 90 V stnke 0 17 47
n slip
I � 57.79 Elsinore:W CA 2.5 75 NE stnke 0 14 46
i j slip
60.00 Chino.alt 1 CA 1 50 SW SMke 0 9 24
� slip
60.43 Earthouake Vallev CA 2 90 V stnke 0 19 20
L slip
60.50 S.San CA n/a 86 stnke 0.1 73 548
An 'PK+ H+ +BB+NM+ M+N 6+ g+g + 511p
� 60.50 �� CA n/a 86 Stnke 0.1 13 479
l._� And2as:PK+CH+CC+B6+NM+SM+NS6+S5B+8G slip
60.50 S.San Andreas:NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 75 sMke 0 14 136
�� slip
60.50 S.SanAndreas:NM+SM+NSB+SSB+gG+CO CA Na 84 5tnke 0.1 13 340
�.J slip
60.50 �g CA Na 86 stnke 0.1 13 512
��� Andreas:CH+CC+86+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO slip
I � 60.50 S.SanAndreas:NM+SM+NS6+SSB+BG CA n/a 83 sMke 0 14 271
�-� slip
60.50 S.SanAndreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA Na 86 stnke 0 14 442
� 1 slip
� 60.50 5.San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SS6+BG CA n/a 85 stnke 0 14 380
i._"
slip
60.50 n An +BB+NM+ M+N e+ B+g + CA n/a e6 slnke 0.1 13 449
� �� � :rp
I j fi0.50 S.SanAndreas:eG+CO CA n/a 72 stnke 0.3 12 125
� slip
60.50 5.San Andreas:SSB+BG CA n/a 71 strike 0 13 707
f I slip
� 60.50 S.SanAndreas'NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 79 strike 0.2 12 206
L' slip
60.50 S.SanAndreas:BG CA Na 58 strike 0 13 56
i i slip
'� �, 60.50 S.SanAndreas:BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 85 strike 0.1 13 390
`-' slip
60.50 5.San Andreas:68+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 84 strike 0 14 321
� I slip
u
60.50 S.SanAndreas:SSB+eG+CO CA n/a 77 s[rike 0.2 12 170
slip
60.50 5.San Andreas:SM+NSB+SSB+8G+C0 CA n/a 83 strike 0.1 13 303
I 'I slip
i i
60.50 5.San Andreas:SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 81 strike 0 13 234
slip
�I i Mip://gediazards.usgs.gw/cfusioNhazfaults_2008_searchfquery_resdts.chn 2/4
u
�,
II
� '� 8l2I2016 2008NationalSeismicHazardMaps-SotrceParameters
60.63 S.SanAndrea5:5M+NS8+S5B CA n/a 90 V strike 0 13 176
i' slip
� , 60.63 SanJacinto:SBV CA 6 90 V stnke 0 16 45
slip
60.63 S.San Andreas:CC+88+NM+SM+NSB+SS6 CA n/a 90 V stnke 0 14 322
(� slip
60.63 S.San Andreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSe+SSB CA n/a 90 V stnke 0 14 384
slip
60.63 5.San Andreas:NM+SM+N58+55B CA Na 90 V stnke 0 73 213
� I
slip
i '� 60.63 S.San Andreas:N5B+SS8 CA Na 80 V stnke 0 13 79
slip
rrr��� 60.63 n An �PK+ H+ +BB+NM+ M+ g+ SB CA n/a 90 V strike 0.1 13 421
I I slip
� 60.63 S.San Andreas:SSB CA 16 90 V strike 0 13 43
l �
slip
60.63 S.SanAndreas:BB+NM+SM+NSB+SS6 CA Na 90 V strike 0 14 263
�� slip
� �� 72.00 Palos Verdes Connected CA 3 90 V strike 0 70 285
slip
72.00 Coronado Bank CA 3 80 V s[rike 0 9 186
rslip
� � 74.40 Pinto Mtn CA 2.5 90 V strike 0 16 74
slip
�i 75.05 5.San Antlreas:NM+SM+NSB CA Na 90 V s[rike 0 13 170
� slip
_ J 75.05 5.San Andreas:PK+CH+CC+eB+NM+SM+NSB CA Na 90 V Strike 0.1 13 377
slip
75.05 S.San Andreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA Na 90 V strike 0 14 341
�I ,I srP
L.f 75.05 S.San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NS6 CA Na 90 V strike 0 14 279
slip
� 75.05 S.SanAnd2asNS8 CA 22 90 V strike 0 73 35
� slip
.� 75.05 S.San Andreas:6B+NM+SM+NSB CA Na 90 V strike 0 14 220
slip
t, 75.05 S.San Andreas:SM+NS6 CA Na 90 V strike 0 i3 133
L � slip
� 76.17 Newnort-Inalevrood.alt 7 CA 1 88 strike 0 15 65
slip
-1 76.47 Palos Verdes CA 3 90 V stnke 0 14 99
slip
J 8274 Puente Hills fCovate Hillsl CA 07 26 N thrust 2.8 15 17
82.80 Cucamonoa CA 5 45 N thrust 0 8 28
���� 8524 BumtMtn CA 0.6 67 W sMke 0 16 21
I slip
`� 87.34 n5a Josg CA 0.5 74 NW stnke 0 15 20
slip
� �� 88.91 S.San Andreas:CO CA 20 90 V sMke 0.6 11 69
�Ji slip
89.15 Cleaham CA 3 90 V stnke 0 16 25
slip
� � 90.56 Eureka Peak CA 0.6 90 V sMke 0 15 19
i slip
�-� 91.19 Sierrd Madre Connected CA 2 51 reverse0 14 76
91.19 San Jacinro:6+SM CA Na 90 V sMke 0.4 12 61
( � slip
L91.19 San Jacinto:8 CA 4 90 V stnke 0.7 13 34
J slip
91.19 Siema Madre CA 2 53 N reverse0 14 57
I� I g2,61 Elsinore:CM CA 3 82 NE stnke 0 13 39
�� ! slip
�'-� 93.98 North Fmntal(Westl CA 1 49 S reverse0 16 50
96.47 Puente Hills fSanta Fe Sorinasl CA 0.7 29 N thrust 2.8 15 11
� j 98.36 Helendale-So Lockhart CA 0.6 90 V stnke 0 13 114
� slip
L�
http://geohazards.usgs.gov/cfusioNhazfaults_2008 searchlquery_results.cfin 3!4
l_�
�
�
�� I' 8✓212�16 2008National5eismicHazardMaps-SourceParameters
Sharethispage: Facebook T,�(gr G000le E ai
�'
I '
� �i
I ''
� I
(�
il ,
�I
l ;
��
ii
( i
tl
ll
�
�
�I
� .
lJl
l.J
I i
1.��
L�
�
�',
�;
�
���
�
i I ry�(p;//yeohazards.usgs.gov/cfusioNhazfa�ts_2008 search/query_resWis.cfrn 4/4
i
u
r'�
� "
� �' &2/2016 Latest Ear�hquakes
f ; `_ � �
�
� ! Search Results
� 8 of 8 earthquakes in map area.
� i _..___ _. _ _...___ ----
i� 6.3 �km SSE of Big Bear City,CA
1992-06-2815:05:30(UTC) 3.6 km
� 17km NNE of Thousand Palms,California
� � ��� 1992-04-23 04:5023(UTC) 11.6 km
_ . . . . . .. .. _...__ -.__. ____._
____ __._ --____. - __.----------
' ' 6.0 6km SSW of Morongo Valley, CA
1986-07-OS 09:20:44(UTC) 9.5 km
i.. . __. _. . _._. . _ . . .. . . .. .._. _ _ . . __-_- _. . __. -___ ._. __ _ __.___. _.__._.._.
� 12km W of Salton City,CA
6.4 1954-03-19 09:54:27 (UTC) 6.0 km
�1 _.._. _____. ._--
�i . . ._._ _ .... _. . ___ . _..._ __. . ._... ._ .
_..__. _. _ _._..
� 6.0 16km E of Desert Hot Springs,CA
I 1948 12 04 23:43:16(UTC) 6.0 km
-1 .- - -_ . ..._... __._. _ ___ .___. ._.__ . ...._. ._._ __. ___. __ _._. ...__._.__._.
16km WSW of Oasis,CA
L 6.0 1937-03-25 16:49:02(UTC) 6.0 km
(J� 6.4 7km WNW of Newport Beach,CA
1933-03-1101:54:09(UTC) 6.0 km
. . . .__ .. ... _. .. _.. __ ._.. .. ..._ ... . ._.. . . . ... .... ._ .... ._._. _._.. _.__________.
�j 6 � Southern California
1918-04-2122:32:29(UTC) 10.0 km
I
_�
; Didn't find what you were looking for?
L� • CheckyourSettines.
• Which earthquakes are induded on the mao and list?
� �' • Feft something nat shown-report it here.
L�
II
�
II�
u
i �
htlp://ear�hqUake.USgS.gOv/ear�hqu2kes/m ap/JF%78%22f22d%?2%3A%721470176909930%22%2C%7250ft%72%3A%22r1EveE5t°/a72%2C%72rt�app0516d1%22°/a... 1/2
L
n
I
� �2/2016 Design Maps Summary Report �
�_ ��s Design Maps Summary Report
� ; User-Specified Input
Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard
n (which u[ilizes USGS hazard data available in 2006)
� �I, Site Coordinates 33.47784°N, 11713063°W
Site Soil Classification Site Class D - `�Stiff Soil"
r�
1 I Risk Category I/II/III
� � Vff�lG r4Kh ' ,,y U` . ,a� .
� J" 9 . � �\.`� o P!�.�I95 ,r a��� 'r� � C3�� .:: ' �.\�� x.y:,a�� ,
��'I �'1'I!t!� ''�s'"v '(,p' M' / ?y .
�li ^' �� ����r ;t ��� � A�`� �,n �.J �� * � � �, ; :I
y
� � �. . � ;� ) p. �• a�y � ��{�� .
Q
� �'n , '"'�����4 �� : �G�� � �'; '� 4 r��$h � . ��
M .c n ����➢ , C� a :� �� f , {�.:�
� � ��' `c�la ,� ' v�r.r� w� ;w ,� � �
�'A' n S �,'z� ..�` ��`��
n y �� �,l � «d��, r' "�,
� � , -�- ��,,, �� ' _ ,
�� �.. � � �
,.� ., �. 1 : ��.w � J
� � � F� f� � � �^'T..�..
�i �'{�Jp^ * ;e'"��� �'"�f�� � .v� �
1 �' .� r� � f � � y'1
� H�/ ! �
� �
i
1 . NbOA'�� � j. .6. y.a� � i ,�� � � .
� � L'�111: L� �3..'-._� � � � r�l �� � �A ' � ._�-�B �G _...,a.�_�.I
USGS-Provided Output
I 1 SS = 1.878 9 Sms = 1.878 g Sos = 1.252 g
L
Si = 0.767 9 Smi = 1.150 9 Soi = 0.767 g
1
For information on how the SS and Sl values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and
�.i deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please retum to the application and
select the"2009 NEHRP"building code reference document.
�I MCER Response Spectrum Design Response Spectrum
i.aa
� . 1.90 1.30
i
1.71 1.17
u 1.52 1.04
1.33 0.91
L I� � 11l � 0.]8
y 0.95 y 0.65
J
0.76 0.52
0.57 0.39
� �� 0.38 0.76
U0.19 0.13
o.00 o.ao
�i 0.00 0.20 0.60 0.50 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.60 1.60 1.80 2.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.60 1.60 1.80 2.00
Period,T(sec) Period,T(sec)
�
� For PGAM,Ti, Cas, and Ca, values, please view the detailed reoort.
LAI[hough this information is a product of[he U.S.Geological Survey,we provide no warrenty,expressed or implied,as to the
accuracy of Che da[a rontained therein.This tool is not a subs[itu[e Por technical subject-matter knowledge.
L
f �
�I II http://ehpt-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/summary.php?templat�miNmal&latitude=33.477837&IongiWde=-117.130628&siteclass=3&riskcategory=0&.. 1/1
u
` -' 8/2I2016 DesignMapsOetailedReport
� ��S Design Maps Detailed Report
I I ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.47784°N, 117.13063°W)
� Site Class D - "Stiff Soil", Risk Category I/II/III
O
Section 11.4.1 — Mapped Acceleration Parameters
Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal
., spectral response acceleration.They have been converted from corresponding geometric
mean ground motions computed hy the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain 55) and
, 13 (to obtain 5,). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B.
; Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.43.
jl From Figure 22-1�'� SS = 1.878 g
�i From Fiqure 22-2�z� Sl = OJ67 g
� Section 11.4.2 — Site Class
The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or the
default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance
� with Chapter 20.
�
Table 20.3-1 Site Classification
Site Class vs N or N�„ s„
-� A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A
�� B. Rock Z,500 ta 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A
C. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf
D. Stiff Soil 600 to 1,200 ft/s SS to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf
E. SoR clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf
I� Any profile with more than SO ft of soil having the
characteristics:
L, • Plasticity Index Pt> 20,
. Moisture content w>_ 40%, and
. Undreined shear strength s� < 500 psf
L! F. Soils requiring site response See Section 20.3.1
I analysis in accordance with Section �
21.1
LFor SI: lft/s = 0.3048 m/s llb/ft� = 0.0479 kN/m�
� �
�;
��
i
�
,
i I� Mip://ehpl-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/repat.phpRemplale=minimal&Iatitud�33.477837&longitud�-117.130628&siteclass=3&riskcalegay=08edit.. 1/6
V
�' 8l?J2016 Design Maps Detailed Reporl
� Section 11.4.3 - Site Coefficients and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE�)
� , ......_._
l ', Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters
� Table 11.4-1: Site Coefficient Fa
il
Site Class Mapped MCE a Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period
r5550.25 55 = 0.50 55 = 0.75 55 = 1.00 55 >_ 1.25
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
�', B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0
- � D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0
�j E 2.5 1 J 1.2 0.9 0.9
' F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
� i Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of 55
For Site Class = D and 55 = 1.878 g, F, = 1.000
(I �
`,I Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient F�
! Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period
J
S, _< 0.10 5� = 0.20 5, = 0.30 5, = 0.40 5, >_ 0.50
I � A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
l
B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
L' C 1J 1.6 1.5 1.4 13
D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5
��,1��, E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4
F See Sedion 11.4,7 of ASCE 7
LI Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S,
f �.� For Site Class = D and Si = OJ67 g, F� = 1.500
u
L
L
II
u
'i� Mtp://ehpl-earihquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/usheport.php?lemplat�minimal&latitud�33.477837&langitude=-117.130628&sitecla5s=38riskcategory=0&edit.. 2/6
�I 8/2I2016 Design Maps Detailed Report
I i Equation (11.4-1): SMs = Fa55 = 1.000 x 1.878 = 1.878 g
� Equation (11.4-2): SMl = F„5, = 1.500 x 0.767 = 1.150 g
i Section 11.4.4 — Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters
Equation (11,4-3): Sos = �� Sws = �� x 1.878 = 1.252 g
il
�- Equation �SS.4-4�: SDl — �� SMl — � X 1.150 = 0.767 g
il
Section 11.4.5 — Design Response Spectrum
� From Figure 22-12�'� T� = 8 seconds
,
� li Figure 11.4-1: Design Response Spectrum
� �
T�To:S�=S�(0.4+O.6T/To)
� Sq=1.252 -- To5T5Te:So=S�
i
J P � � Ts<TST�:S,=So,/T
n , ,
N �
_i o � i T>T�:S.=3mT�IT'
( � �
J �
d � �
1 I
d 1 I
,_ u Sm=0767 '�'_""""'i""""'
Q � , i
�� � ' � �
x � i
a � ' '
a � � '
u i i '
d i '
C i i �
R � � i
� i i
i �
d � � �
a � � '
N , �
� � �
� � �
L � � �
� � �
i � I
I �
I � Ta=0.123 T5=0.613 1.000
I ' Period,T(sec)
��
LI
L
�
�
�
L� http://ehpl-earthquake.cr.usgs.gw/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&IatiWd�33.477837&longitud�-117.130628&siteclass=3&riskcategory=0&edit.. 3/6
1 I &2I2016 Design Maps Detailed Report
� Section 11.4.6 — Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum
� �.
The MCEa Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above
by 1.5.
�
1
5K,=1.878 "
i
i i
� i i
� i i
! � i
i � � i
� i i
o i i
� � i
� �
� � � i
y
_ � �
� � rOHl-1.15� _r___________T
Q 1 1 I
1 I I
^ N 1 I I
I , C 1 I I
I I 0 � 1 I
� I p 1 I I
� 1 1 I
� 1 I I
1 I I
A � � �
� � � � �
� � � �
d I I I
yi a i � �
H � � �
I I I
I i I
I 1
� I I I
i i I
Ta=0.122 T5=0.612 1.000
, Period,T(sec)
I_I
�
�
J
C�
�
�
J
L
I �i
�_�
( II
U'
��
�
� ��
�
���
http://ehpl-earttpuake.cr.usgs.govldesignm aps/uslreportphp7tem pl at�mi ni m al&I alitud�33.47783781ongitude=-117.130628&siteclass=3&riskcategory=0&edit.. 4/6
` �� 8/2/2016 DesignMapsDetailedReport
� Section 11.8.3 — Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design
l �. Categories D through F
i'� From Fiaure 22-7�4� PGA = 0.774
l �
r; Equation (31.8-1): PGAM = FP�qPGA = 1.000 x 0.774 = 0.774 g
�
�I Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient Fp�p
�� � Site Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA
Class
I
PGA <_ o.io PGA = 0.20 PGA = 0.30 PGA = 0.40 PGA >_ 0.50
I A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
ll
B 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0
c i.z i.z i,i i,o i.o
��
� D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0
E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9
r� F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
n Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA
1 �
For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.774 g, Fp�p = 1.000
CJSection 21.2.1.1 — Method 1 (from Chapter 21 - Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for
Seismic Design)
� From Fiaure 22-17�5� CRS = 0.901
I '
From Pigure 22-18�6� CRl = 0.887
I
II
L
�
L
� '.
�
� I http://ehp1-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/reportphp?template=minimal8latitude=33.47783781ongitud�-117.1306288siteclass=3&riskcffi
�� ��=o���t.. �6
� 872/2016 Design Maps DeWiled Report
� Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category
Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter
�I RISK CATEGORY
VALUE OF Sos
I I or II III IV
Sps < 0.167g A A A
( , 0.167g 5 Sos < 0.33g B B C
0.33g 5 Sps < 0.50g C C D
�� 0.50g 5 Sps D D D
For Risk Category = I and Sps = 1.252 g, Seismic Design Category = D
�I Table 11.6-2 Seismic Design Category Based on 1-5 Period Response Acceleration Parameter
RISK CATEGORY
VALUE OF Spi
I or II III IV
I
' Soi < 0.067g A A A
Cl' 0.0679 <_ Sol < 0.133g B B C
0.133g 5 Spi < 0.20g C C D
0.20g <_ Soi D D D
I I For Risk Category = I and Spi = OJ67 g, Seismic Design Category = D
l
LNote: When S, is greater than or equal to OJSg, the Seismic Design Category is E for
buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of
the above.
� Seismic Design Category =_ "the more severe design category in accordance with
Table 11.6-1 or 11.6-2" = E
i
� Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category.
References
`J' 1. Figure 22-I: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/ZO10_ASCE-7_Figure_22-l.pdf
2. Figure 22-2: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf
� � 3. Figure 22-12: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_2242.pdf
�-' 4. Figure 22-7: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf
5. Figure 22-i7: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-17.pdf
L6. Figure 22-18: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22d8.pdf
�
�I
L;
�
LI Mlp//ehpl-earttquake.cr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/reportphp?templat�minimal&latitud�33.477837&longitude=-117.130628Esiteclass=3Eriskcategory=0&edit.. 6I6
�
I ;
� ''
�,
( 1�
��
n
� ;
�I,
� APPENDIX E
U LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS
,
i
�'
�,
�
�i
,
�,
I '
L'
� �.
�L
I�
�
C� �-, C- C�' C_� � � C' �� '� � �� `__� � � `� --J :� ��l
LIQUEFACTION & SETTLEMENT OF SANDS ANALYSIS
ProJectName: VallejoAvenue
Project Number: 161329-10A
Boring Number: 83(In-Silu)
Horizontal Gmund Accelera6on (%g) 0.774 Energy Ratio CE(Auto-hammer) 1.50
Analyzed Groundwater Depth(feet) 5.0 Borehole Diameter Ca(6-8 inches) 1.00
Averege Wel Unit Weight(pc� 126.6 Groundwater Depth in Boring(feet) 32.0
Design Magnitude EaAhquake 7.7
Magnitude Sraling Factor(MSF) 0.9
Blow To1al EHedive Fines Sampler NCEER NCEER Liquefaction Laye� Layer Percenl SeltlemenlPer
Depih Coun1 SPT Siress Stress Contenl Overburtlen Type 1998 1998 Safety Thickness Thickness Volumetnc Sentl Layer
(feep SPT Cal.Motl. Nm (tons/ii2) tons/i12 FC(%) CR Cx b Cs (N�)� (N�)� CSR CRR•MSF Fector t(ft) t(inches St2in (inches)
21.168 0.317 0.317 0.75 7.45 0.99 7.00 35 46 0.50 CortectedSPT>30' S.00 60.00 0.00 0.00
�78i632, <^.0475., �0:397,'i 075: :1;31. .U.98.t d:00 . 25 :;94 _ 059 CortectetlSPT>30' „2.50'. �?',30.00, sp0l00': .AIOD�s��..�
15.B7fi 0.633 0.477 0.75 720 0.98 7.00 21 31 0.65 ��0.493fi� CortectetlSPT>30• 2.50 30.00 0.00 0.00 �
�28i_556,...0.960� �-0.638i;i 086, �.,1t02 0.97,,, 7i00. 50., .=85,� 072_ '- - Corteded3PT>30' ,5.00 ::�8000, �, ..0:00,> ,O;UO,=.�<
67284 1266 0.798 0.95 0.89 0.95 7.00 86 87 0.76 CortectetlSPT>30' S.00 fi0.00 0.00 ' 0.00
54:432, 1583.;i:s0939:? �0.95� _ :0:79 _ 0.9Ya :1:00.., �61-� se2 .0.78..':'�:;- .;: CorteaetlSPT>30' SODe,r'�6000 = :0'i00 ;O100,' ::;R
52.920 1.899 1.119 1.00 0.77 0.93 7.00 56 64 0.79 Cortec[etlSPT>30• 5.00 60.00 0.00 0.00
_ _- -'. ._
s8'4'k280i ,2278„.��1.28D:i 1.00 r��{0'.68i.,.a�089,,.�,1:00 .a64 :-':72 0�77„ ,:i;. '.`�. CortectedSPT>30' 500! ;.6000 .r,;0;00�x ., .•0.00: :?;
58212 2.532 1.440 1.00 O.fi3 0.85 1.00 55 71 0.75 CortectetlSPT>30• 5.00 60.00 0.00 0.00
?.49i140E�.2849..:;i1;807'-„ 1.00��;0,60, tORt �;PODp-,,,45,.��45 .0�72�::�='c�; CortectetlSPT>30' z��S.OD:�.�.;,8000�:�yrU:00xz. �.�.`.2.��.:i
64.260 3.1fi5 � 1761� 1.00 0.58 077 1.OD 56 56 0.69 - � CortectetlSPT>30' S.00 60.00 0.00 0.00
464:280 . 3.228 !.57793z- 1.W. '�0`.57,.. 0.76 �:-;1:00�..K55 :55 089ti�.:'-- `r-.'�. CartectetlSPT>30' �77.00n.,'.'t.72.00k:i�L'O:OOry, _a�0.00:t3ii
Total Settlement(inches): 0.0
Procedure esWblishetl by T.L.Youd and I.M.Idriss,et.al.,1996 NCEER-96-0022 Workshop&S.C.E.C.SP117 �
Evalua6on of serilements in sand due to earthquake shaking,Tokimatsu and Seed,1987 - '"' � � ' ` �"� �_ . �
3 E�ension af rod above boring(feeq . le i
• CftR7.5isnottlefinedfor(N�)60csgrealerthan30. Soilsvnlh(N7)fi0cs>30arewnsideredloodenseloliquery(NCEERWarkshop)
(N1�60-NMCNCECBCRCS �Ni)eocs=KsINi)so -� ' .. �,:. - - 1
- ,,,,9E1�Tet�R[ov[E.sE[+QR� _aE'l]8t �stk<.:�5`2:.`I
�
��
� �
�,
I-
; ,
,�
i
�
� ,
� �
� �
'' APPENDIX F
�_�
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
� SPECIFICATION
,
�
I l
,
�,
�-�
i '
�
I
��
� ,
i �
�_�
��
�
�i
�
n
� EARTH-STRATA
r-�
'' ' General Earthwork and Gradine Snecifications
r,
I �
� I� n r 1
I ' Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are intended to
� �' be the minimum requirements for the grading and earthwork shown on the
r;
approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s).
iI These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications should be considered a
part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s) and if
they are in conflict with the geotechnical report(s), the specific
� recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more
general specifications. Observations made during earthwork operations by
the project Geotechnical Consultant may result in new or revised
�i recommendations that may supersede these specifications and/or the
recommendations in the geotechnical report(s).
�' The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: The Owner shall employ a qualified
� Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant), prior to
commencement of grading or construction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall
j be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and
' accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions,
and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading or
Cl construction.
J
Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the Owner shall
� '� coordinate with the Geotechnical Consultant, and Earthwork Contractor
�- (Contractor) to schedule sufficient personnel for the appropriate level of
observation,mapping,and compaction testing.
r
f �l
�� During earthwork and grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall
observe, map, and document the subsurface conditions to confirm
f I assumptions made during the geotechnica] design phase of the project. Should
L-� the observed condirions differ significantly from the interpretive assumptions
made during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall recommend
i ', appropriate changes to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the
�J reviewing agency where required.
`I The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture conditioning and
l-I processing of the excavations and fill materials. The Geotechnical Consultant
should perform periodic relative density testing of fill materials to verify that
� ' the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified.
iJ
III
�
� '
�
�
I
�
� ,
ii
�� The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be
qualified, eacperienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation
� � and processing of earth materials to receive compacted fill, moisture-
� conditioning and processing of fill,and compacting fill. The Contractor shall be
�I provided with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s) for his
review and acceptance of responsibiliries, prior to commencement of grading.
f� The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in
I ' accordance with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s). Prior
� ' to commencement of grading, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the
�_.i Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the
sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "equipment" of work and the
' estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. The
� �
Contractor shall inform the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of work
� ; schedule changes and revisions to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance
� ' of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation
and testing. No assumptions shall be made by the Contractor with regard to
( I whether the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations.
Il
It is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment
( ' and methods to accomplish the earthwork operarions in accordance with the
`� applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these specifications, and the
recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s).
( I At the sole discretion of the Geotechnical Consultant, any unsatisfactory
�� conditions, such as unsuitable earth materials, improper moisture
conditioning, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress keyway size,
-I' adverse weather conditions, etc., resulting in a quality of work less than
required in the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s), the
Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the
1 Owner that grading be stopped until conditions are corrected.
J
Preparation of Areas for Compacted Fill
� 1
V� Clearing and Grubbine: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other
deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed in a
� � method acceptable to the Owner, Geotechnical Consultant, and governing
L� agencies.
L � The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals on a
site by site basis. Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall not
contain more than 1 percent organic materials (by volume). No compacted fil]
j j lift shall contain more than 10 percent organic matter.
L.�
Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor shall
� ' stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous materials specialist shall
�-� immediately be consulted to evaluate the potentially hazardous materials,
prior to continuing to work in that area.
�
I
'
�
r'I
� �
�
� �
�' It is our understanding that the State of California defines most refined
` ' petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) as
r, hazardous waste. As such, indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids
� � may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and
shall be prohibited. The contractor is responsible for ail hazardous waste
� related to his operations. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise
l I in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Owner should contract
the services of a qualified environmental assessor.
� ' Processin¢: Exposed earth materials that have been observed to be
' satisfactory for support of compacted fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall
be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Exposed earth materials that are
�,, not observed to be satisfactory shall be removed or alternative
' ' recommendations may be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant.
Scarification shall continue until the exposed earth materials are broken down
f� and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform,
� flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. The
earth materials should be moistened or air dried to near optimum moisture
( � content,prior to compaction.
l �
Overexcavation: The Cut Lot Typical Detail and Cut/Fill Transition Lot
(J Typical Detail, included herein provides a graphic illustration that depicts
� typical overexcavation recommendations made in the approved geotechnical
report(s) and/or grading plan(s).
`-� Kgvways and Benchin�: Where fills are to be placed on slopes steeper than
5:1(horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be thoroughly benched as
jcompacted fill is placed. Please see the three Keyway and Benching Typical
-� Details with subtitles Cut Over Fill Slope, Fill Over Cut Slope, and Fill Slope for
a graphic illustrarion. The lowest bench or smallest keyway shall be a
� '� minimum of 15 feet wide (or 1/z the proposed slope height) and at least 2 feet
L- into competent earth materials as advised by the Geotechnical Consultant.
Typical benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent
� � earth materials or as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill
L� placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 should be thoroughly benched or otherwise
excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the compacted fill.
� �i
�� Evaluation/Acceptance of Bottom Excavations: All areas to receive
compacted fill (bottom excavations),including removal excavations, processed
� ' areas, keyways, and benching, shall be observed, mapped, general elevations
L� recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical
Consultant as suitable to receive compacted fill. The Contractor shall obtain a
! ' written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing
�� compacted fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for
determining elevations of bottom excavations, processed areas, keyways, and
( 1
I
�
� I
�
�'
i
�
� ��
� benching. The Geotechnical Consultant is not responsible for erroneously
�I� located,fills,subdrain systems, or excavations.
� Fill Materials
� ' n r 1: Earth material to be used as compacted fill should to a large extent
� be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances as evaluated and
� accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant.
,
v r iz : Oversize material is rock that does not break down into smaller
�r I pieces and has a maximum diameter greater than 8 inches. Oversize rock shall
� not be included within compacted fill unless specific methods and guidelines
r acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant are followed. For examples of
I 'I methods and guidelines of oversize rock placement see the enclosed Oversize
� ' Rock Disposal Detail. The inclusion of oversize materials in the compacted fill
shall only be acceptable if the oversize material is completely surrounded by
r� compacted fill or thoroughly jetted granular materials. No oversize material
� ' shall be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of
proposed utilities or underground improvements.
( 1
` � ImFort: Should imported earth materials be required, the proposed import
materials shall meet the requirements of the Geotechnical Consultant. Well
r j graded, very low e�ansion potential earth materials free of organic matter
� � and other deleterious substances are usually sought after as import materials.
However, it is generally in the Owners best interest that potential import earth
U materials are provided to the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their
suitability for the intended purpose. At least 48 hours should be allotted for
the appropriate laboratory testing to be performed, prior to starting the
r ji import operations.
L
Fill Placement and Compaction Procedures
f 'i
L- Fill Layers: Fill materials shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in
nearly horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Thicker
L'� layers may be accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant, provided field density
� testing indicates that the grading procedures can adequately compact the
thicker layers. Each layer of fill shall be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed
j ', to obtain uniformity within the earth materials and consistent moisture
L� throughout the fill.
� i Moisture Conditioning of Fill; Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill
� shall be watered, dried, blended, and/or mixed, as needed to obtain relatively
uniform moisture contents that are at or slightly above optimum. The
� i maximum density and optimum moisture content tests should be performed
��' in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM test
� �
method D1557-00).
� I
�
�
� ��
r
� �
� Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed,
� ' and evenly spread, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of
�� 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test method
iI D1557-00. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either
specifically designed for compaction of earth materials or be proven to
� consistently achieve the required level of compaction.
� Compaction of Fill Slo�es: In addition to normal compaction procedures
specified above, additional effort to obtain compaction on slopes is needed.
l I This may be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers as
the fill is being placed, by overbuilding the fill slopes, or by other methods
r producing results that are satisfactory to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon
lj completion of grading,relative compaction of the fill and the slope face shall be
' a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM test method D1557-
00.
i
' Compaction Testing of Fill: Field tests for moisture content and relative
density of the compacted fill earth materials shall be periodically performed by
( I the Geotechnical Consultant The location and frequency of tests shall be at the
� � Geotechnical Consultant's discretion based on field observations. Compaction
test]ocations will not necessarily be random. The test locations may or may
�j not be selected to verify minimum compaction requirements in areas that are
typically prone to inadequate compaction,such as close to slope faces and near
benching.
L� Frequency of Compaction Testing: Compaction tests shall be taken at
minimum intervals of every 2 vertical feet and/or per 1,000 cubic yards of
(J compacted materials placed. Additionally, as a guideline, at least one (1) test
� shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or for
each 10 vertical feet of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill placement is
I1, such that the testing schedule described herein can be accomplished by the
� Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the
earthwork operations to a safe level so that these minimum standards can be
� � obtained.
Compaction Test Locations: The approximate elevation and horizontai
� ' coordinates of each test location shall be documented by the Geotechnical
� Consultant. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Surveyor to assure that
sufficient grade stakes are established. This will provide the Geotechnical
( � Consultant with sufficient accuracy to determine the approximate test
-� locations and elevations. The Geotechnical Consultant can not be responsible
for staking erroneously located by the Surveyor or Contractor. A minimum of
two grade stakes should be provided at a maximum horizontal distance of 100
�I' feet and vertical difference of less than 5 feet.
� �
I '
Ij
U
li
( ,
Subdrain System Installation
��' Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical
report(s), the approved grading plan, and the typical details provided herein. The
(l; Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrain systems and/or
changes to the subdrain systems described herein,with regard to the extent,location,
grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading or other
�i factors. All subdrain systems shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor (except
for retaining wall subdrain systems) to verify line and grade after installation and
� prior to burial. Adequate time should be allowed by the Contractor to complete these
� i surveys.
Excavation
� All excavations and over-excavations for remedial purposes shall be evaluated by the
Geotechnical Consultant during grading operarions. Remedial removal depths
� indicated on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual removal depths
and extent shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field
evaluation of exposed conditions during grading operations. Where fill over cut
� � slopes are planned, the cut portion of the slope shall be excavated, evaluated, and
-� accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of the fill portion of the
proposed slope, unless specifically addressed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical
� details for cut over fill slopes and fill over cut slopes are provided herein.
;
Trench Backfill
LJ 1) The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for trench
excavation safety.
� 'I 2) Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the
LJ applicable provisions in the Standard Specifications of Public Works
Construction. Bedding materials shall have a Sand Equivalency more than 30
I J (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the conduit and
� thoroughly jetting to provide densification. Backfill should be compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density, from 1 foot above the top of
LI the conduit to the surface.
3) Jetting of the bedding materials around the conduits shall be observed by the
Geotechnical Consultant.
L 4) The Geotechnical Consultant shall test trench backfill for the minimum
compaction requirements recommended herein. At least one test should be
conducted for every 300 linear feet of trench and for each 2 vertical feet of
�U' backfill.
5) For trench backfill the lift thicknesses shall not exceed those allowed in the
Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction, unless the Contractor
� � can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fil] lift can be
�� compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment
or method.
I �
U
i �
�
— ,— .� ,—, —_
C� C-- �^ �- �-- � --- � ,� '.^ ,-; � _ .i � � � _ __7 �
' ` ` " ` ' — STABILIZATION FILL TYPICAL DETAIL
,
� . �
ohchnfcal. nnronment�l n ,Ma r/e s oa no Gbns en s
�- i -a` y�'�.�`.fR "' �' �xu -it .y Y -�
� � r�'48E7TERPEOPL�:BETlENSERV/CE.f9El"IERNESVLTS '�'jl MIN.OF5FEETDEEFCOMPACTEDFLLL,BUTVARIESAS
RELOMMENDED 8Y THE GEOTECHMCAL CONSULTANT
15 FEET MI
4INCNPERPORATED '�- ' .-.:. —' :•-1 :_.•^:
�K,y. :;;�;�::..`� +:i,•:-i•
PROPOSEDGRA�E PVCBACKDRAI �'1''�''�,�'�
�' _ :.f::��` .'Yi'.�ir'•��•. �`..1a
4INCH SOLID PVC �'h - `Ct0 FE'���MIN::,': ;,ti'',<' ''�: :
OUTLET �,/. _,x _ � a �.
� � r..��. :.
�s,c....;�:..� :...7: .. .' . �
�
T/PICAL BENCHING INio EARTH MATERIALS • ' ...��"'':•�:'�;� -'':::-3:.^:: "•4 .•�:..
,. . .......,
�:�.. ......:.
.. .,,�.,�;�
._... ......,� . .._n r.. < .,.;: . .. ._
_:...:.,��„�,�e..:....... .. .... q . .....:,....>,....
/ �
/ ' � n '
, ; s .� , .. ..
42NCHPERFORATED � '. .: 4 ....; �..'. 1 . '..c IYPICALBENGNINGTNTO f{
PVGBAGKDRAIN t.'COMPACTEDFILL:,,,.� EARTHMATERIALS
4INCH SOLID PVL � 's � '; P 5 30 FE T MAX
oUTLET � -:'7
_
... � � " ...: : ) " .. ... �......_..!.
� " P
.: �
� :'. � :. � �as �
ti '.:`� ` . '_ :�.
/ l. _..:i.:.. _.' .._.
�.:?.n.r..:'..:::...,.'..,,..,.... . . ._..
. ...
. ..� . .. . ..................
h\ .
��
2 FEET MIN � �� . r �� ��
� 'r _ � `� ................ ............. \....:.. . .............................
� _
. : � n .`�,. - \
..
�...
.. ..\
5 FEEt N �-' ` �' : '+, t f \ � GEOFABRIC(MIRAFI140N OR
�;`L';Y,;^';^:�"-;>.'� � \ �PPROVEDEQUIVALEN
�
\PERFORATED PVC PIPE WLiH PERfORATIONS \
KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD \ FACING DO �
]5.o FEET DESCEND INTO SLOPE � �
KEYWAYDIMENSIONSPER6EOTECHNICALLONSULTANT/ � /� \
GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MINJ \ r :
\ / :;'• ��'` �
12INLH MIN.OVERL.�P, ��:j,:�'�'�
SECURED EVERY 6 FEEI'� I _ '
SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVL OU7LE7�PIPE, ��'-��
SURROUNDED By LOMPALTED FiLL. OUTLE75 TO .. ;
BE PLALEO EVERY 100 FEET oR LESS� ;:::t /
�� �a�
5CUBIGFEET/FOOTOf%aINCH-1�INCH \ /
OPEN GRADED ROCK
� �
C L_- C� �� C�' C� i� �� �_`�J -�
.-, � �-) _^_-� � �
�- J 7
- ' ' BUTTRE55 TYPICAL DETAIL
0eo hMnl IronmanW dMs I� tlmCona I
k ., a`.��k�'-`��`:!���`P�'.a4-�ti�'`��.�v3u���+,��r- ��`�
'_�`BETiIERPEop�E BETfER sERVIQE':%6E7TERRESULT,S' � .:� MIN.OF 5 FEET DEEP COMPAGTED FILL,BUT VARIES AS
RECOMMENDEDeYTHEGEOiECHNICALLONSULTANT
PROPOSED GRADE 15 FEET MI
`.r:'°..,;.�.:y:sr:.:}, : -
4INLH PERFORAIED - q:�+;. _
PVL BALKDRALN - -
4INLH SOLID PVL ``�'' '�'�'+� -
OUTLET -•���SOFE_��MIN�µ '.-" f�V�
..>:.�:. . ';z;.::�`` �
a:�: c:.;..:;;�-`
-:i:"ii - ,�'i�i
, ...;..:i�_v:�.�.:x:i;:"
�,,';.iy;'i2'=�P7';:;.� �
iYPICAL BENLHING INTO LOMPETENT EARTN MATERIALS � " _ ' :C�.�`'
;�'�F - ;':Ct.,� :.�-;,
�7:' .�i:ti* . "
4TNLHPERFORATED �t=.;:�:.;:;>':Y;.�:i�^.�; ".,e•�?;��.
PVLBALKORAI � ' . '. Y. ': � . � :°^: PICALBENCNING
� . OMPACTED FILL � `
TNTOCOMPETENT
4INCN SOLID PVC '. �..� '�. „_,. 5� 30 FE T MAX EARTH MATERIALS N
OUTLET 'f' �:="r s: � ,:� �RSPY'
. . . ",+:��;_^�;.
�-"`:yq�.�'• ;".�,i-ir`,' ' �
y
�' a,-' � � �' p'(�
..� ' E :.: � . .` , '._\ GO E
. . .................. .......
1 i
2 FEEi MIN / ?,.��. '- ^ :� � � \`� �
+ �:. I:i�7 :�<('. - `�� ��
.
.... .,...;
::.-,.....r�_n•:.�..
, .,,_...
..... ......t_�y..._.�.;
�..:t . '�. ................�`. ............. ............... .............................
. u. . .... . ` \
5FEETMIN . . '.^ '- \ � GEOFABRIG(MIRAFI140NOR
i
'':;u�:^1,.�;:,_,,L�iz':-?.:,�.-i� \
- �nPPR�EQUIVALENT)--,
\ PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORA120N5 � \
KEYWAY BOTTOM SNOULD FAGiNG OOW `�
15.0 FEET DESCEND SNTO SLOPE \ / \�
KEYWAYDIMENSIONSPERGEOTECHNZCALCONSULTANT/ / \
GEOLOGIST(TY7ILALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) \ ,;:t;,� .
� , � �=--�`� �
�:;.��
12INLH MIN.OVERLAP, �
SECURED EVERY 6 FE'e1 I - '
SCHEDULE4050LIDPVCOUTcETPIPE, -'�'
SURROUNDED 8y COMPACTED FILL OUTLET•5 TO ' .. ;
BE PLALED EVERY SOO PEET OR LE55�` ^::j �
� �'.
5CUBICFEET/FOOTOF3/aSNCH-1YeINCH \%\ /
OPEN GRADED ROCK� �
� /
_. —�
C_- C- L- C � C L� C C�' O � C) � � � `� _-7 � �
� CANYON SUBDRAIN SYSTEM TYPICAL DETAIL
� _ �.c,���� _
�m.�R� �,�.
Geolxlminl��ronmen antl HbNsls ekln��f'onsulbn_
�p�c
� ' ' x��'_; c>;F..'"'�"` F t .;v .� 9
. 58ETTER�PEOPLE ;BELfERSERV/CE'::BETTfRRESULTSx �_�
cONTACi BETWEEN SVITABLE AND
UNSUITABLE MATERIAL TO BE REMOVE
PROPOSED GRADE�
. .. , ..,.—a.. ,.�-�....�.. — _ —
.... ...._.. . v.��7;:':'.�:-�ri- -
. . . .t .+ Y �. .' �.r
� , J.+ A�
y"� �
�'Sth i: i ��GOMPA�'fEDFTLI. � : '' e�� GEOFA6RIC(MIRAFII40NORAPPROVEDEQUIVALENTJ
ti' tx;
}T r � . �� : ,,M� : � 6INLH LOLLEGTOR PZPE —�
� - � ' ;: (SCHEDULE40PE0.FORATEDPVCPZPE _� \
$.� ;, t - ` � , ��� .� �y� WITHPERPORAIIONSFALIN�Wh'�j
EXISTINGNANRALGRADE - � i: �' x � ��� �'.,• g ?�`' �
� ,... . .. . . 4 ;n , i \
^Sv�M1 F+ . . �
;�',`i� �4aiza i �,. . rwk Syy.'�, e�+r.. �-% � � �y�>.
•,�> > .,7 yf '� p 6 Y' 3'Y`� � ' � 1
P I
q*k ���y ~�� �5}4�.>yY F � �� � t2INCHES MIN.oVERLAP,SECURED EVERY 6 FEET '�I f 6INC MIN
a ..� r t �+ io r"� ' .
UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED (�� � ;".� � i J k' ' /
. Ks .f ! \ .�2.::
�4q:C-Lr��,$;,,.,.��:,.>i:'u*,'.',^,:,..= .
c��,.:.:;'.�.�r.'+L'�7;�;���� :�.
�
j"�..; /
I �:'�.- 9NBI[FEET/FOOTOF�IN[H-IJ��� �
� � �� TNCH CRUSHED ROLK
TYPICALBENCNINGINT COMPETENTEARTH MAlERIALS � ___ ._ _ ____ _ _ �� � INc'NMT�
COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS NOTES: �YT Y T Y T Y�Y��
1-CONTINUOUS RUNS IN EXCE55 OF 500 FEET
LONG WILL REQUIRE AN BINLH DIAMETER PIPE.
2-FINAL 20 FEET oF PIPE AT oU11,ET VJILL BE
SOLID AND BALKFILLED WITN COMPACTED
FlNE-GRAINED EARTH MATERIALS.
CANYON SUBDRAIN TYPICAL OUTLET
20.OFEETMIh GEOFABRIC(MIRAFZ140NORAPPROVEDEqUIVALEN
PROP05ED6RApE--�
r
v�--^ �
TYPICALLYIO.OFEET t :�-. � t���y����� '1 `. � .y' ,_..
BUTVARIE ' " ....^r-:•:,. .ay�.,e.
•,
�"'"_
I .0
6ZNCHSOLIDPVCPIP �:�,`���� �%
��2% — INCN-Yz
INCNCRU5HE0
v ROCK
0 FEET MIN
INLHSOLIDPVLPIDE INCNPERFORATEDS[HEDULE40PVCPIPE
f- C-- � C � �; O ^ O � �� �.� �� �� ^-7 � _J �
I � , ''� CUT LOT TYPICAL DETAIL
,� � „ "
Geotec n I En ���m��ibl dMabns s Tu1by Ca su �tr
Y.. Y 'a�-' 1. Y!^ S yTy�Y r.q i 1� t . �-�
�.B�TIERiPEOPtE �BEiTERSERVICE�BET7ERRESU6T5`*
/ / � � \ �
� �
� �
REMOVE UNSVITABLE MATERIALS � �
�-� r�
PROP05EDGRADE I I
II 1:1 PROTECTION TO COMPETENT
EARTH MATERIALS
ORIGINALGRADE
— �..e . �— . ... . � ' � _ _ _ _
` l ' .cdN�PAci'Eb FzIC � t . � � �.�` �
' � ,4 � OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT 1 � „ �� - 5 FEET M T VARIES
yL� 4 � 4 \ . 4 � ' j' \.
��' ..� . . . '. .. � . � .. ..�t'���� �Y.:����n�n�. ..�....... �'- . . i:1r n''..
IN BU
COMPETENT EARTH 7MJAT./ERJIA.jLS
1:1 PRO7ECTION TO COMPEiENT ���;�;`y���Y�"
EARTH MATERIALS
NOTE:REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM
2Y.FALL TOWARDS SIREET OR OTHER SUITA9LE AREA(AS
OETERMINEO BY THE GEOiEGHNILAL CONSULTANn TO AVOTD
PONDING BELOW THE BUILDING
NOTE:WHERE DESIGN CUi LOTS ARE EXCAVATED ENTIRELY INTO
COMPETENi EAR7H MATERIALS,OVEREXCAVATION MAY STILL BY
NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK LONDITIONs OR MATERIAlS Wlhl
VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS
C C- C"� C l- C � � � C7 � � � � _�7 �-7 =, `� �
� � : , . �� CUT / FILL TRANSITION LOT TYPICAL DETAIL
� � I Envlronmen��a Tes m Conaul m�
��� � r
� :;'..• � BEZTER EOPLE°.AB ERSER C�,�:��B�ERRES�L 5���� �
� / \ �
� � .:.:.. �i
� � .e' r•:..:;:.• ..
� � ...'...: .. ....:..a.�� : �.
/ � �RApE : ., .� . . .. . ".. ':+,r
�� r� pRtGINp�_,�g�oROGK1REMOv��
,. : �"._�.,."�:: ✓
, ; . R�p , .. . ., . :. r
In. .:,..,;':"''•`�OgNgA R'hR�P\"`'.�'':��:":,��;,��;'�;.�
PROPOSED GRADE ,'`:..:.tOpS��.P�'�U�SNS ij AB�:M�::y�',�yi:..:J�
I .. •.:':'.'' :i';.:1 .,�..::�.':.":':i•, ��y:`.'... .
. :..., �� ":� / 1:3 PROJECTI
:.._.. �:.��:.���:�, . �
, _;�.,:�.:':��...�•,�, COMPETENT RTH
� ON TO
- - - - - - - 1 �� Ea - - - -
MATERIALS
.6QMVit6TERfSCL. ' �r3.y .y �'`�k�hs � . .
' � kq��g�(E�(�7��r,�.�°� ti � 5 FEET MIN BUT VARIES
. �� �IS$ Y , t ."i , \ .
< j' .\ `R ' � 1� �A . �I.
� � ( '� :��'t• ' .
i
1.- . � f� a '1.`I�rti�� �.tP,V�J
_ '��>r�re }:: y i +�� ' .nAMP�
... ,r n.. ' R
Y�� }L Sr t� 4 4y.�l'� �� .... . Mp��Nt�P
\,� (��
��� 4.,Fnr 1i"�i�/!/:�::�..>w'^::'.�:'�
�r.{.�.w?�Y�f:'�t^-Y
�;��:�:`�'%�'�r�'�•.''= NOTE:REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOUL�BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM
��...:.,.;,,.,
��"y�'�'�'�'�'+"'%i'� 2Y FALL TOWARDS SIREETOR OTHER SUITABLE AREA(AS
i::...;,�:,.:.,..N�.
i�✓Yc;'C;..:_-.•�.:.^, DEIERMINED BY THE 6EOIECHNICAL CONSULTANn TO AVOID
T/PILAL BENCHING INTO PONDING BELOW THE BUILDIN6
COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS
NOTE:WHERE DESIGN CUTLOTS ARE E%CAVATED ENTIRELY INiO
COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS,OVEREXCAVATION MAY STILL BY
NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK CONDIIIONS OR MATERIAlS WITH
VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS
�-- �--- �- �-- �: `-, f-, �� �7 ---� L=' `-J �-� � �-7 � � __ 1 � --,
--� -�
' � KEYWAY & BENCHING IyPICAL DETAILS
` `� �'" r' ' � '" CUT OVER FILL SLOPE
Geo ec ri c�6 Enu rommenml an M�1 dslaTesOna ConaW en
� �W � !
u BET.TER�PEOPLE'BETTERSERVICE B@TTERRESULTS��- �i PROPOSED6RADE
CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND ...::��
UNSUITABLE MAIERIALS TO BE REMOVED r,�y
.'yr
E%ISIING NATURAL GRADE - ��.'��` ''���
_ �..
4 '/%
P,�RS_il
J�� /
PROPOSED6RADE / ��� � ��
OVERBUILD AND LUT BACK TO ' � � '
TNE PROPOSEO GRADE � COMPACTED FILL ,` -4pQQ .'� '
TO BE LUTBAGK
/ ;� � ��Q,F.�� � .. H
� -:/ k�S':.�.
/ � . �� ` ,.,. tP�
11 PRO7ECTION TO j� - ��x. � ��� P��
COMPETENTEAR7}i �. ' y1rJ�� �� �(�'�
MATERIAL / .:� / _; .�.�,� .�EP�
. ! ,vY�Q�� _ ' Q�,�CI
TEMPORARY I:1 GUT / �v� �� .x e :. G0�
' . " '4 „�. �._:
. /'�ti ' • �.1.�. K'i .
C <�.v
/ .., ..'...�.:1^�A.1i:. .
.4 4 l�`
... .:. . ,... �T .2r'S"J+ir r� �' � � � ....................... ................ ..................
..,� .
.t. '�•: •-••_ . . . . /�
. .•.. .. .. . .".. r�� � ..;�
�,...:..,:..;..:,,:.. . . �,-r:.,,.`',.`o . ...� '+�f"
'.i.J:'�.;.:;�:_:' ;•i'•:
—.i._.� . ' - _'.✓::� 5.0
`.r? -'�,}.:
2.0 FEET MIN�
KEYWAY BOTTOM SNOULD DESGEND INTO SLOPE
15.0 FEET
KEYWAYDIMENSIONSPERGEOTECHNLCALCONSULTANT/
GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.)
NOTE:
NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1(N:l�MUST BE
6ENCNED INTO COMPETENT EAR7H MATERIALS
__-- --- —. f__' r--• r—� (—� �--� —� •--� �� -� .—� �
� -- C-^ C - �-- C �_ _� �_- � --' �^' ---' ^� �
� �_� _..-. __.� `_ __� _ _, _
� ' ' � ' KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS
�,,,� n ,I,��,,,,,, ,��„ , ,,„,,,�� ,�.�e FILL OVER CUT SLOPE
��-�.� � „� �� ��;�; �
� �BET,lER!PEOPLE BELT,ERSERV/C�.$ELlERRESUL7S�
....................................................................................................................................................:..^... .. . _ ..— .�-
��,;.:� .:�C�-^��:��'.ii.+--l+:"2
PROPOSEDGRAUE / �L,,�p��;.��:F"`1°�,�� �
_,��..,'"wMFR.``;':� :v r: �ti.''�`�y'`ars�.:o.'r�.
/� ' U_'0. . � , � Y ...:y�iric.:iS;';"'.:.x
ly:`...:`.� .�"_'/�t.liis.'.,'Ch�-r'r'..�:eJ�
/. `i':` -.�taY'.n'.u.1a a���:{'�li..+��1'SJ�/f��
/.��ii',: _.-, i��. n�. y fi:+' .�'1.::�^i:'.t�:�i�
i�' .�e...;�.���..tv�'•�,�'l ��.�.5:.,:
/ ii .�Y, \ Y6*` " ]
EXIS7IN6 NANRAL GRADE �� ° ��'� y'}''y4� �/' , �
t ` � �
`:v
Q a � r . � c
� FEM h'� {�'� +CpMPA�DK3Li.° � > .
e�OPQL� �Y� 1Y� : ~ 'q Y
/ �: � �y.:.-V�.....e::�:''.
/��;>r'P����'R��"�_i�b��:�'`�!i�;�`-:-iul^i VARIES
�� ".�E (4FEETIYPICAL)
��.�:J�OS P�,��.:n".:`7:,:�-i'.`::.`;•'„�'•-'.�,.'.''y':'`,:.
��;:�-` �J� Z`�t�
GONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE S�,pu' JN'i;;';,.i`�.
H EARiH MA7ERIALS i0 BE REMOVED ,�w±;,.SOp50 1.��
.�....:: ..
...� ,..
���h+�:� ,
�;;�tl�...:;.:.�'. .::
� ¢:�:,^
.�� ;�.:�.C'�,'�
�' . �� ' x�I� �'�.
CUTSLOPE � �:� r � ��,
v�.�sesanohs -- "
�`� � .1,: t•�. P�
� ' � n. ,�,RS
: t'�� x ; � � �fP
., l, ' Y •, ��r�"�se � '� .i ' . .. ��.�EP�� VARIES(8 FEET TYPICAL
�` � �
"-'L' '" "���,.���;�x�.:-�;�>i;i.:. ���•Q
r'�[;;:':y':
KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO
15.0 FEET SLOPE
KEYWAY DIMENSIONSPERGEOiECHNILALGONSULTANT/ NO7E5:
GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR]5 FEET MIN.) NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:l(H:l�MUST BE
BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTN MATERIALS
iHE cUT SLOPE MUSi BE CONSiRUC7ED FIRST
r—'_ —. �-• r--. �—�. f� r--� '— . ___
l—__ ._... � �_— . . .�_' ,--� --• � —
� L- _� l..___— L___.� �.._- _� ' . � � J � _ � � J ) —1
� , ; � �� , KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS
{aBOIBCIIlIICiIE�IV/IpI1II1MbIMLIMtfBIIt9TbHMCOl19YN//IIS FILL SLOPE
� ������ ..��,��.�,�� ,� ,�,.-. �
BEITERPEOPLE BElTERSERVlCE"BETTERFESULTS
PROPOSEDGRADE
�y1�'':'�y�.:y.,:�:n—�;:.—.._:,�.:
i:=>:.,�µ:�:;:..C:;.✓.;..:. .:�Si�.;j' .;y�
,.iv: °.��:.:-:>";4�a` :..CY:rI..�:�._.��,�'�:w(
/� .ai ` , i.
/�'�o' (i� CI� , � 1 'l l..f�'� �� � � . L
�V�. M�
�Q . F�� : S .r4+ �
:Y�^:n�^ ��:� s��\�k
EXISTINGNANRALGRADE / `•�a.'��'�, �'.eF`�,.x:�i^"Ajr�`��:C :f" ;�v�
�f��;;.:,:���s .'- .}i.':::r?�:':``^.?.s(.
�r . .:..- �� '`��;'Y�:',.>C.�i;.�;�.;;';�::::i:,,;:_:C�;' ...r.+
.'F��=!^ :��:�' ,.):i� ,. _;i:'
/ : a x +
� � �.�y.��`a.� � 4`6A1PJCttP"�:�LL.� ` • ._.
�g�.r'�y R �. i L 4:
/ , �.�tc�A F y. � E' .n.�'��
� •5"",J�/.� ' . .... . . ' VARIES N
CONTACTBETN/EENSUITABLEAND l �. . �� '��„��+�•-:;.�,�„�;�..y�.
UNSUITABLEMATERIALSTOBEREMOVE ,/:�;:-��`>-%"' �`` - �'`"''i+`-'^'K"'';4;>-+?`:� (4FEETTYPICAL)
>'i.i".`,<'a'�:SSiy:,'.i?,t.:,:T__._.
1:1 PROJECTION TO / ' �"�R:
COMPETENTEARTH ' ,,
p
MATERIALSFROM � �` ._LpO� •"� �'
PROPOSED TOE OF SLOPE � � �.�� � :
TEMPORARY 1:1 LUT ��-; ` a.�'f3� '� '
/ .� a4�a ::`;:
y �q,��K�"�;`,,. Rt�
, {i�o�+� , �� P
. _ . . � . . . y o m'.sbp� r� « .. NS�Pp,'.SN .. . .......................................... ... ................................
.� ' + - ' - .� i �,a'. �� �' %� ��a ��y E'� VARIES(8 FEET TYPICAL
�]x�f� N 4�' f '!f 3� A i�4 �,r� �CC(� \y�� LQ[+"
�};�5.�� �'VI .Y C.i Aa 4: �' AT �
:_a.��t i i^.c �..-u:v{irl� t
.l14::4-�' AS t.:�u,l,��
2.o FEET MIN
KEYWAY BOiTOM SNOULD DESCENO INTO
15.0 fEET SLOPE
KEYWAY DIMENSIONSPERGEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT/
GEOLOGIST(T/PZCALLY N/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.)
NOTES:
NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER 7HAN 5:1(H:V)MUST BE
BENCHED TNTO COMPE7ENT EAR7H MATERIALS
�������� ���cYPI�<c:l,�� //1��� � � � � � 1
�b
..i � f��� .� �
"1'• � '�
��� 11 1� •'���1 ♦�11�111�111111�11111 11�11�� 11 ��
�'i1 111��111�111��11 �111���11���11�II�I��O���II�������11��1��11�11�11���1111�1 �1�111 111!11� 1�.
ii1��11�11 �����I��IIi�11.��r�� C�11[��I:IIi�In��1 �1t1 ��11 �I��I11�1����� • � � � ���1111��111111 •�•
�IIi��11 �11���1�� �1��11�III�III11� 111�11�11111�11�1111��11��1��1111�IIIIIIIII�I11111�II��III�IIIII�I�I��II��Ii
����� Ii1��1i1 II�II�I����111��11�II1���l�11�I��I 1�111�11�111 I�1�111111�11i T�1�1��III�1��I�I I�IIIj��
•• •1��11•1'����� �1�•��I�I�1��1�A11��1�1��11���11111111 1�111�11111l111�11]���IIIIIIIIj��.111�111��11�1i�
� �II.i1�1�11�11111�11�1111�i111�III�Y111�1�•'II�I��i:�11�11�11�1I��1111111�11���1111I�111��1:i�1[I����1111��11
1 •
1� �G� • �1�•�••�11•••••,11�•1���1� 111 111.�'i1:�.:�1��1:.�11:��11�1�11Y�11��11����11G�111�1�1�11�
11111j1 111
11�11� 11 •��III��1 1�� ��11�� 11�11 � 11�1j11�111�11��1I117�111� 11 1��•
���II��II�IIIII�IIIIj�1I11111111j�Ij�11 � IIII�I��IIIr. • �1�1 �I�� 11111 1� In��11j11111
11 • ♦ 11.��1 •� 11 111� .��� ��1���� 1 1���
r��'I ♦ •• IIIii�1��111�1I��11�� � 1��111 ♦ 11��11 �-� •��h1� 11 1�IIIi�1 Ili��i�������•}l �1��1 �Ii�1i
�,����yl" f���F� '�j+'/Y-
��� •� F. �''�'e�I'Y�F�►'
, q i�s!�ij.. �, � 4��3j�� ��.L�ii��">,
• ' p T�/d�d,}il � a9�f�o��il �!�1���'�.
,o ••� ���• ' i� MI9 ��� y, �.1��'��Y �m,���.s���h��� �����a��r.
,;?���;�„ ', �� � ��ai. �t✓ s r� ���s;�i� ��a����,v
•C��• ••e• � " .�'�+�i��'F� a�0 +e�u��i M.+i�� Yi�
'��:::•��'�, �i� i�i"�,� h�� �e-�•ef t! ��a.��a1
�..,��.z�j a, z r .l..�,�,.a.v,
.F;::°:F;%¢�� �i►.''si.r,'� ��ee�k.y�i- ��...r,�, .
•�;::�..:• •� ��'d�!. y -we���'-qis�' ���a�%a�'
:E�:. :::,
: .:E. �_hd� �r�p.���. s_!.y
• l:C•. .. e91�c
,•.OE:•.:•ICC,
lpi:!�:4i:!� yVk��.�}�.��"19,�
��Lj�I�i91�!
��.�/�
�� ��
�
a . .
[ D
�'• '
• •'
•� � .
(� • • �
Pe � � o ! :• � •
• •�• �
� ���� a�
• •• �� �
, ..
� .
•• �•
)
1 �\ /�\ LEGEND
I �� Lacatiaw are Appwximate
1
\�
\ '. / Geoloyic Units
1 � o so� ioo� �
, �
1 M ��� / Qyv - Quoternary Young Volley Depasits
� ,
� � �
EASEMBLIC TILITy � symbols
1 TRACT 3646 \ �
MB 57/86-87 � \� �
�,.� a/ � � / - Limits of Report
h� � �� \
� �9.6]' ^ /
��\\
. � \�\ � - Boring Location
� 7'.D.=50.5" InclutlirgTatalOSPfM1wd
- � � � o.p,�„s�o���„v
G.W.�32'
I � �:;�� d
� �?� � -
� a
s-z �, , �:
T.D.=2� � 3-5 ^' � � 3-5� - Recommended Removal Depth
� d
ORryEyqy�
90.00'
V 21�.13'
d
��:;��" d
❑ �
a o
�,�� B_3 ,�;�;>'E d -�
T.D. =50.5' �� 231.17' W
183.84' G.W.c�32'
- ' � o GEOTECHNICAL MAP
� �;��, -1 0
T.D.=1 ' � 29370 VALLEJO AVENUE
nc p C N��'W' • O CITYOFTEMECULA,RIVERSIDECOUNTY. CALIFORN/A
oR�vur� .� �v Z
' 0 � � � APN 922d90-015
N � 5
O N PROJECT VALLEJO AVENUE
ij � �^ •OO� CLIENT MR.JASON SIMS
� !� PROJECT NO. 161329-10A
DATE SEPTEMBER2016
/ � �I SCALE 1:50
— O
��� DWG XREFS
� � � REV/S/ON
I DRAWN BY JDG PLATE 1 OF 1
_ Z O
��«E��AVENUE
�—� ------ 3� VAILEJO qvEN = fl - —___ I N G
� �-- � Geotechnica�, �,nvironmenta�,
�_ ---_�
-' ��_ �� _ _ anc� Materia�s Testin� Consu�tants