Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Review Report Dated 4/25/2000
f.. �. M r• x y 't .f v :. $(.�j� rl'Fis`v `` L`' c xba 1 t +Y 1 1 Y+1 t l] I�Cr r R3 1 '� vdl w IP : i F Y f�� F'� rr ill + y #f E; wi tl ' s :i 3gt-t 1 "4 y ' et j td t t X f 'W� ' ks s Y h + ��4 � cel >. ,,.A � c F r f x ! s t r: a ' vA giiR f y.4 1 hr ..� rr �' J l i 1 t d F F 4 I a . t ,.. e Y _ y r n ( i N Y� S ! £ 3 nt t. ,, z t .1: ig ;J `' , ipirgi. ,r . ��T <j: • • �2E$PONSE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY • RE1iIEW OI x�2EDii�,WK TO,WNE CENTER .: ;REVIEW REPORT DATED APRII,25''?.19 00 r PLAT PLAN NO 16535 )14 s CQI�NTY GEOLOGIC REi. PORT NO 1013 - I • << b k} +. 3 F r M? l4 ▪ ate 4 ' t ` L 4 ♦ s 1 a st si ::.,.:. 1 1 p:131d� =C :1u '.l res rf - . . .::: 1 . . { i;Na ... 1Gfi h c:c 1 ik v /t s 1 ✓ .l bf. s 2:;:;,1::.:2;.,;:t:::::...,: PREPAREDkOR �` L „, t lei t .1 l t'. . ELEGACI G(SRPORATIOIN 171 0XCEi$RRNARDQ CENTER DRIVE aii • ' AN DIEGO, CALTEORNTA 92128 .' 1 1111 x � l 1 ft r� al 5 t i f J 1 ' ro ! . • ri a7 rs " S .`J: _ 0 '� V � {d J it Y7 1 1� 1� ti • t-� vL s 2 r > CH MI s 4:,* 1x29200U s n f -Tr1 £",� � une7 ,r r 4 f t ( n) t tf4Ati.- ,,7-...*.:.%.1.,:.•!,,P..., h rt '✓ C 4_1 al _- { 1' }1.l n) i".x'1^2 1-k 3 fw. 'f "r" al a i v ti n t r 1-7" v & x. w-r * l .• cU- .� {cr { `it s e Y s"t t-SY r3 t� i 1 r Di n,7�. F y:. soF ,a 0• r t a s e �� .i4 Y } 4 4. t14 3 1 1 f '!. s `x'n-`J b• h. ,:,-; 7-J s ° ' '` f : e -. 'F t-.-r viir -av ti '" .• .6-v.c$T, it Y , r h'h te blt �4 y A yk .- �!nh� L IN .". l•C- f S `'f 7 i ^ �'�14 .�,r' y"ry..�r .3. F.k4�u'� 'F : i▪ 1. 5 say' =fir ya �i eery ` �` �.d: fF tk..?,n. r �X.rt;+a s ,....nom .r-... .r;C. -. 0.L,.kc- ._..._- Ve PETRA COSTA MESA•SAN DIEGO•TEMECULA•LOS ANGELES June 29, 2000 J.N. 208-00 EXCEL LEGACY CORPORATION 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, Calif. 92128 Attention: Mr. Geoffrey Sherman Subject: Response to Riverside County Review of Redhawk Towne Center Review Report Dated April 25,2000. Plot Plan No. 16535. County Geologic Report No. 1013. References: See Appendix A Gentlemen: This letter is provided in response to the County of Riverside "Liquifaction Report Review" dated June 20, 2000. Our responses to the individual items are as follows: Item 1: "Copies of the previous geotechnical reports by Geocon,dated 5/18/99; and Engen dated 4/7/00 prepared for the subject property should be submitted as part of this review." Response: Copies of the two reports without boring logs and site maps which were included in our report dated April 25, 2000, are attached to this response in Appendix B. Item 2: "The geotechnical consultant of record for this project should be indicated in your report." unty for a project lly Response: Submittal that the s lbmitting consultant is the geotechnical consultant si of record.f Petrae Redhawk Towne Center.nc. is Geotechnical Engineer of th Record , d PETRA GEO b`HNICAL INC. 12225 World Trade Drive,Suite 0 i June 29, 2000 ji ORATION J.N. 208-00 EXCEL LEGACY CORPORATION page 2 REDHAWK TO )Th oundwater 1 ( and/or data from the exploratory Item 3: "four liquifaction analysisshouldab eVbased upon historic highgr data,ogsojectch fuduce er borings which indicates that mottled soils exists as shallow as 8 feet be ow the ground surface." site-specific geotechnical investigation for the major tenant of this Response: proposedA oosspalluvial i sC.o A shopping center did not encounter "mottled" soils. Copies of the additional boring logs are included in App plot plan with approximate locations is also included. down stream from Vail expected be associated with With the site adjacent to Temecula Creek, _Lake high ground water would be e the dto be asthe influence relatively short intermittent flow along expected creek. beSi only a short encs surface h flpotent al for creek su sustained rise in ground water is not event, the p the anticipated. therefore,the potential for liquefaction ound water level resdes) upper 20 to 25 feet(near where the existing gr is considered low, uifaction analysis should evaluate the potential for development Item 4: "Your liq hazards _to lifelines and lateral of sand boils, differential settlement, spreading." Based uponground surface (approximately 8 the condition that ground water levels could conceivably Response: high ground water), rise to within 16 feet afssura ce - historic f et below thef originaltgroundthe site d further silty sand layers and lenses at differentysis of the site )locations within._d son_ and/or sand lay uefaccfion under honzontal acceleration of magnitude su 0.48g8 (that _apercenthas probability magnitude (that acceleration which a10The and of being exceeded in a time frame oo f years).o0la and silte sandyor y layers dense lenses are interbedded between lay to dense sand and silt mixtures that are not liquefi and discontinuous liquefiable. Furthermore, the liquefiable alluvial sediments are interfingered throughout the site,both horizontally and vertically. As such, it is our --) Additional conclusion that only isolated locations within thesite will experience liquifaction in the event ofstrong ground analysis is found in Appendix D With the construction of a compacted fill mat o`at least 5 feet in thickness beneath the bottom of footings under maJorructuresd/ 4 • I June 2000 TION J.N. 208-00 Page 3 EXCEL LEGACY CORPORA 29, REDHAf TOWNIE CENTER ortland cement concrete over basically the remainder of • • asphaltic and p tion of sand boils to the surface beneath the site,the potential for migration c ; structures is expected tobe m�� Should liquefaction occur within the site, an., estimated total maximum n seismic-induced settlement less than l inch ise isabased calculations ticipated foncal,/ isolated areas of the property. This )at s best than 15. s fon, ral liquefaction ofq the soil oils s with-(N1)60 the proposedtur structure Temecula �� spreading of liquefiable soils beneath closest structure to Temecwillula Creekab is calculated onm the ocreek iand therefore the risk consideredAppendix C about 80n feet from Calculates for settlement and lateral spreading are found in pp D. um of 90 percent The present compacted fill was placed at a minimum relative compaction. It is proposed that the structure for the major tenant will be placed on a compacted fill mat compacted to a minimum { of 95 percent relative compaction. To reduce the potential for lifelines lure at the boundary between these two conditions, it is to rupture ed with flexible joints sand container to enable recommended that those lifelines be design /and/or couplings embedded in a loose,coarse uake. the flexure to occur in the event of a design eartl'q uefaction potential should be r Item 5: ecoasure for mitigationliq recommended so that the liquefaction at this site poses a sufficiently low provides a level of protection with regard to potential bearing hazard and Your recommended 5 foot and lateral displacements. "election. failure, settlements, not achieve a suitable level of prpotection. You compacted considerfilmat may fill,r You should connected grade measures,Teased as of compacted footings � l bs." and/or post-tensioned ected to As discussed above,lateral spreading or liquefaction is not exp Response: incident hazard at the site. It is expected that the 5 foot thick be a high • s compacted to at least 95 percent mat e relative the sibottomwillffootings, o de adequate protection to the large structuresof t refro depo potential bearing failure, settlements and late al displacements. p consider a The design of smaller structures may post- tensioned slab-on-grade system. i June 29,2000 � TION ER J2 00 EXCEL LEGACY CORP ` page 4 ` REDHAWK TOWNE ort indicates on page 5 that the site is underlain your rep Diego County. This by • Item 6: "Although minor, and refers to faulting in San project the is i formation;id this is located in Riverside Coolnshould bes ure es d tovclarifyPauba formation, at depth. Your rep inconsistency" formation underlies the site at • Response: You are correct is stating that the Pauba form faunder ine San Diego depth. The statement in the report concerning a series of enechelon.e.,much ofSouthernenerally strike in a northerly to northwesterly of en faults that g direction, also applies to this area of Riverside County. versid e County We believe these responses should adequately answer elf there are any other concemsror concerns for the Redhawk Towne Center profect questions,please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely yours, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL,INC. '; EE ..\ Roy J. Rushing 1" No. 1080 I I--°°Senior Associate Geologist EXP. F� }tit C.E.G. 1080 rare OF CII,OC a Y Distribution: (6) Addressee in Department (2) Riverside County Planning Appendix A References orts Attachments: • ix B Text of EnGEN and Geocon Rep Appendix C Logs of Additional Borings with Map Appendix D Additional Calculations 4 ' . APPENDIX A • Li pETRA APPENDIX A REFERENCES 1) "Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study, Proposed Redhawk Towne Center, South Side of Route 79 South,Between Redhawk Parkway and Apis Road, City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California", prepared by EnGEN Corporation, dated April 7,2000. 2) "Geote anon, Wali at Temecula, Temecula, California", preppreparedd by Gby Geooconconal ig Incorporated, dated May 18, 1999. and Observation Services During Remedial Grading for 3) "Report c TestingTemecula, California", Vail Ranch Commercial Site Tentative Tract 23172, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated September 1994. 4) Bartlett, S. F., and Youd,T. L., 1995, Empirical Prediction of Liquefaction- Induced Lateral Spread; Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 4 Paper 7247. 1998,"UBCSEIS" - A Computer Program for Determining 1997 Unifoormm Building Code Design 5) Blake, F., Parameters,Version 1.03 6) Blake, T. F., 1998, "LIQUEFY2" - A Computer Program for Empirical Prediction of Earthquake - Induced Liquefaction Potential,Version 1.50. 7) Blake,T.F., 1996,"EQFAULT" - A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitalize California Faults, Version 2.20. as in 8) California Deportment of Water Resources, 1971,a Water Wellsater and Sm i?s n the Western Portion of the Upper Santa Mara 20. 9) Special Publication in March 13, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California", California Division of Mines and Geology 1997. i. E H.B., 1998,Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due 10) ToEar Earthquake e and kith;Seedinee g,Vol. 113,No. 8, to Earthquake Shaking; Journal of Geotechnical Eng Paper No. 21706. 11) Kennedy, M. P., 1977,Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California; Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 131. 'i . • APPENDIX • F7: • • .Yi PETRA 1 I. I -:; •Sd Encreenno ard Carauthroo Seat•enadarsal&Oka'• or anew° •Insetl •Cumueko Maud lean' +Tat)• ®° EN Corporation •Geob77•'F�1 •R¢x I&IIET Ttfl As®em I ; ,, aENVIRONMENTAL &GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NEPNORK . I a 1 GEOTECHNICAUGEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING STUDY proposed Redhawk Towne Center and Apis Road South Side of Route 79 South, BetweenRiverside,Parkway ar w y Temecula Area, County of nia Project Number. T1971-GS April 7, 2000 is • e- Prepared for. Price Enterprises, Inc. �; cel Legacy, Corporation �r ' r . ��44 j emardo Center Dnve �� e 5, "-s ?`�• lifomia 92128 a ,z ,, 'u.• _y C*�.a1 a } y ami �.a` (i. J 1 -s: r.'�tu'u is "z 'a+"..,, ,.M rs....n. AN, _ie !x•,2c,T: 'i..a es..• .u..• vim.:.. >re.-.r.. I es".. 1 i-mw,'e• .w- -Yn. e .s- Ea ar.! h+ ; ' '' C a"s'y : ' F.a�sy,` t a " r ' 7 s- . m S -s` - e 4..•_.-,,•.,i.,,,,, ..--•2:4.-- mac✓ t mLL `. a9.-- t -- .' '-"7-: - gtr =€ _AN � EMR NtaENCear ° 6ucif4 :q" 41 •A r Aa�: . _`,l.,l : s .� , YN ..-a; Ma i2 .nsiaa { ,i.r � n3 �S .. J , — Price Enterprises,Inc_ i Excel Legacy,i.egacy,Corporation Project Number.T1971-GS l • t TABLE OF CONTENTS I Pte_ $action Number and Title 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............._....... 20 IN-IRODUCTrizati .................................•............_.....__..........................----..-..._......_._..._. ...2 on 2.1 Autho 2 2.2 Scope of Study .............................. .................... 3 Previous Site Studies..................... ............... . 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................. ......__.3 4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION........ 4.1 Location ...................._....._...._... ........ ..............................._...._......_......... 4.2 VegetaTopogrtion. ................. .........3 43 Vegetation......_..._•---- •. ...................._- ........_........_... 4.4 Structures................. ........................3 FIELD STUDY ........................................................................................5.0 4 4 6.0 LA BORATORYTEST1NG............................................ • 6.1 General ................... 6.2 Classification ...........te Density Test.................................. .....4 6.3 Corso Moisture Content Test.................5 6.4 Consolidation Test..•-•-•-•• --•.mum Moisture Content Relationship ...5 Density!Optimum 6.5 Maximum Dry .. ....................................... --.5 6.6 Direct Shear Test....-......•............. ..-...-_.-...-........._............_._...._..._. 6.7 Expansion Test ................................... 7.0 SITE CONDITIONS.................... ...... :........................................................................ ........................................_............._....._6 7.1 Geologic Setting................................ ................................. ............_......6 7.2 Faulting .....................• ................ • 7.3 Seismicity .................................... ...................................................- .....7 7.4 Earth Materials........................... 7.4.1 Fill....... ............................ ............................................ 7 7.4.2 PaubaAlluvium................. .. ...................................................8.6 7.4.3 Pauba Formation Bedrock...................................................... ................................... :.... 7.5 Groundwater .........:...Se- ..._.. ........_..._............_...--- 7.6 Secondary Effects of Seismic Activity................_... 8 • 8.0 D......ONS................................................................. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................... . ... ...........'._9 8.1 General •....................dati.. ..............................._......_... .._...9. 8.2 Earthwork Recommendations...................... ..............._......-. ......9 8.2.1 General........................... ..................... ....................................... 8.2.2 ClearingExcavation 8.2.3 Excavatio of On-Site Mate als as Fill .........................-- "9 8.2.4 Suitability ._.-..._10 8.2.5 Removal and Recompactien............................... EnGE`Ii Corporation I I Price Enterprises,Inc. f Excel Legacy,Corporation � Project Number 71971-GS . TABLE OF CONTENTS (Corrtinaed l fiat • V Section Number and Title •-10 Requirements -_-.-.._---•_.__.__-•-••-••-•.__-••-•• •_..--•-••--.--_10 8.17 Cil Placement Reil --- _-_•-___-_.-_-. • 8.27 Compaction Equipment....................... _......11 8.2.8 • Shrinkage and Subsidence _______________________________ 82.9 Subdrains.............._.............._......._._....__...-._.-...... -.____11 .......12 8.3 Foundation Design Recommendations 8.2.10 Observation and Testing.:._-..•-•.-----••••--•-••-.-... _..11 •.---•-_...__.._-•••.-__•••- 8.2.11 Soil Expansion Potential....................................... -.-............12 8.3.1 General ••..__••_•__•___.••••• • -._-.-••••••......................12 8.3.2 Foundation Size •- --•••-••............... ---••--••-•........•• -_12 8.3.3 Death ...............................••-_. 12 •- _._-..........--..-_..........-...12 nt ...........•----•••-••..-.-.__--•••-•.... 8.3.4 Seanng Capacity•-----•---•--•'...•••--•-••--•••________________••._••- 13 • 8.3.5 Settlement------------------------- 8.3.6 Lateral Capacity __________________________________ ........... ..14 8.3•7 Cement TWe________ ___________________ 8.4 Slab-on-Grade Recommendations.................. ..14 8.4.1 Infero Slabs----------------•------•••••--•-•- •-15 8.42 Exterior Slabs................:. ... ...... • 8.5 Pavement Design Recommendations..........................................•_...........-•_..-.-_._15 r 8.6 Utility Trench Recommendations______________________._-_---_----........_ .._.._........................................ 6 8.7 ' Finish Lot Drainage Recommendations............................. 8.8 Planter Recommendations Construction .................. 8.9 Temporary Construction Excavation Recommendations_._____•-••__.-_ •__••.•__••_.__18 8.10 Retaining Wall Recommendations......................... .........-............-_18 Pressures........................ .•-•-•••------••-•-• ._..-••-•-•--18 • 8.10.1 Earth 19 8.10.2 Foundation Design.............................. ............................. 19 8.10.4 Backfill............................. • 20 9.0 PLAN REVIEW .................... 20 ................... 10.0 PRE-B1D CONFERENCE..............................•••- •-••---•-••••-- 20 11.0 PRE GRADING CONFERENCE--------------- 20 • 120 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING..................................................... ................................ -.- 21 13.0 CLOSURE ...................... APPENDIX: TECHNICAL REFERENCES EXPLORATORY BORING LOG LABORATORY TEST RESULTS DRAWINGS EnGE N Corporation I eamixtca `� �'"LL_"EGm' n'n '24 Ewe* � c daro' TS I .Sd SCoa s ,� ' T - 1TESS•1apOrfszamoom, .• m .aniao � EN Corp_________---------- oration Ooration . .6.- - - ENVIRONMENTAL &GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORK i April 7, 2000 Price Enterpri , Inc. Excel Legacy, Corporation 17140 Bernardo Center Drive San Diego, California 92128 - (858)675-9400 I FAX(858) 675-9405 Mention: Mr.William Stone Regarding GEOTECHNICAL/GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Proposed Redhawk Towne Center, South Side of Route 79 South Between Redhawk Parkway and Apis Road City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California project Number T1971-GS - TPC Consultants, Redhawk Towne Center, Conceptual Grading & Drainage Plan, References. 1• plans dated March 17, 2000. 80-scale Temecula, Geocon, Inc., Geotechnical Investigation, Walmart at Temecula, 2. 18, 1999. California, report dated May 3. GEE, Report of Rough Grading,Temecula Creek Channel Improvements, and Disposal Areas,Tracts 23172, 26861, 23267, parcel MapsRiverside Count18993 and 23063, approximately from station, 114+00dated to April 26,on 1995. California, W.O. 225301.22, reportRemedial 4. GeoCon, Inc., Report of Testing and Observation Services, During Grading, For Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative Tract No. 23172, Temecula, California, report dated September 2, 94. • Dear Mr. Stone: rfortned a GeotechnicaUGeolagical According to your request and signed authorization, we have pe project. The Purpose of this study waseto.recommendluate ations for Engineering Study for the subject p 1 subject property with resp geologic and o thecssite con design within the dati P P etc., for the fine gradingherewith, are the results of this firms findings and of the and recommendations for foundations, slabs on-grade, proposed development. Submitted, recommendations, along with the supporting data. z�si.,- .,s... . .x.., a _VI ir tit , t.'t t` .? a�,(-, .� -1`.. . ' Y rcnv.+ .ism.t sF.... -'^ C 1 -. - 1 +�7 y r ft -s e �?.�.xuw 5.' ..,y 1'L .r-av_`^ 4..r `�,. _`� 4,0,„,,“...i',.d A �f4%�- "--E'F ,,- 6.i f e rc-. ';.'N...,.e Y Ta+f }'p��p�-p ff .'1'°.".b;•x� .n a 3.. ..9i �-'�- .. ,.. , ,lI, .....�='m�-nna.:S-MA11:381t�l m,in ? '3 —r�� 1 3.R Excel . acy, on Project Number.T1971-G5 i ApdI2000 i Page 2 'kk . I RY i A geotechnical/geological U'TlVE SUMMA the subject site - t, 1.0 Cstudy of the subsurface conditions of geotechnical/geological engineering � Exploratory excavations have been has been performed for the proposed development The data have been performed and earth material samples subjected to laboratory testing- analyzed with respect to the project information furnished to us for the proposed development It is the opinion of this firm that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical / geologic standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are followed in the design and construction of the project 2.0 INTROS�N engineering study Performed 21 Authorization- This report presents the results of the geotechnical ,� in m d e on the subject site for the proposed development Authorization to perform this study form of a signed proposal. was designed to determine and • 2.2 S_20_ The scope of work performed for this study with respect d to evaluate the surface and subsurface COnd�mmendations andons within the criteriaforbject use by the design geotechnical characteristics, and to provide reand construction of the engineers and architect for the development of the site and for design sde reconnaissance and proposed development The scope of work included the following. 1) exploration; 3) sampling of on-site earth materials; 4) surface geologic mapping; 2) subsurface exp and 6)the preparation of laboratory testing 5) engineering analysis of field and laboratory data; this reporterforned on this site (see 2.3 previous Site Studies: Previous geotechnical studies have been p references). 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed improvements will consist of building expected to be asart store and nine ( other proposed follows: structures. Foundation loads for the Wal-Mart9 Interior Columns—65 kips Exterior Wall Columns-50 kips Masonry Walls-4-6 kips/LF The remainder of the structures are expected to impose relatively light loads on the foundation soils. Continuous footing loads are not anticipated to exceed 2,000 pounds per lineal foot (p EnGZN Corporation _ _ i . - . . Price Enterprises,Inc. Exp Legacy,c„rparaeon Project Number.19 t-GS2000 i Apr Page 3 i I for most of the other structures. It is anticipated that relatively minor (less than three (3) feet) If cuts and fills will be required to bring existing grades to planned grades. The above project description and assumptions were used as the basis for the field and laboratory exploration and t testinting programs and the engineering analysis for the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. This office should be notified if structures, foundation loads, grading, used for final development of the site and/or details other than those represented herein are proposed so a review can be performed, supplemental evaluation made, and revised recommendations submitted, if required. 4.0 SITE DESCRfP'T1ON 79, between Redttawk 4.1. Location: The site is located on e of State Highway Parkway and Apis Road in the Countyof R ersidewas relatively flat due to 42 Topo�v: The topography of the site at the time of this studyline. . previous grading. The Temecula Creek Channel exists along the south property I on At the time of the field study, vegetation across the site was light to moderate and 4.3 Ve�aetatr_ consisted of grasses and weeds. At the time of the field study, there were no existing buildings at the subject site. 4.4 Structur=s= Ranch) exist near the southwest However, structures designated as part of a historic site Nail portion of the site. . 5.0 FIEF Y Site observations and geologic mapping were conducted on February 29" , March 1° and Z". subsurface condition was performed to 2000 by our Staff Geologist. A study of the property's jorato o evaluate underlying earth strata and the presence of groundwater. Eighteen (18) exp borings were excavated on the study site. The borings were performed by ABC Uovin Drilling, The- using a truckmounted drill rig equipped with 8.0-inch outside diameter hollow-stem auuggece at the maximum depth explored was approximately 61.5-feet below the existing _ excavation locations. Bulk and relatively undisturbed samples of the earth materials d at various depths in the exploratory borings and returned to our encountered were obtaineBulk samples were obtained from s and testing. cuttings developed during the excavation process laboratory for verification of freid dassificatioand represent a mixture of the soils within the depth indicated on the lags. Relatively undisturbed samples of the earth materials encountered were obtained by driving a thin-walled steel sampler lined with 1.0-inch high, 242-inch inside EnGEN Corporation I _ Price Enterprises,Inc Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number.T1971-GS ii April 2000 I. doPage 4 . diameter brass s. The sampler was driven with successive drops of a 140-pound weight g l blow counts for each successive 6.0 inches of i having a free fall of approximately 30-inches. The shown in the Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented penetration, or fraction thereof, am moisture-proof containers and in the Appendix. The ring samples were retained in dose-fitting (oratory excavationsand returned to our laboratory for testing. The approximate locations of the exp are denoted on the Geotechnical Study Site Plan. The exploratory boring excavations were backfilled with excavated soil. 6.0 tABORpTORY TESTING obtained during 6.1 General: The suits of laboratory tie dix. Following is a listing on samples of earth material sting and brief explanation of the the field study am presented in the APP will be laboratory tests which were performed. The samples obtained.during the field study 30 days after the date of this report. This office should be notified immediateiy if discarded and 30 days• retention of samples will be needed bey in the exploratory borings 62 • Classier n—� The field dassfiration °��materials the Unified Soils Classification System, was verified in the laboratory in general a ASTM D2488-90, Standard Practice for Determination�e Identification Soils Niscel sa Procedures). The final classification �po� BnngLog Summaries presented in the Appendix. density were 6.3 In-Situ Moisture Content and Densi Test: The in-,6-90 u and D2937-83 (1990) procedures, isture content arid dry determined in general accordance with ASTM 022 turbed sample obtained. The dry density is determined,in respectively, for each selected undisof the oven dry pounds per cubic foot and the moisture content is determined as percentage • weght of the sod. Test results are shown in the Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented d in the Append«- compacted fill behavior Consolidation Test- Settlement predictions of. the on-site soil and I behavior• 6.4performed in general under load were made, based on consolidation tests that were a 1.0- with ASTM D2435-90 procedures. The consolidation apparatus is designed to receive inch high, 2.416-inch diameter ring sample. Porous stones are placed in contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit addition and release of pore water and pore pressure. Loads n normal to the face of the specimen are applied in several increments in a geometric p 9c under both field moisture and submerged conditions. The resulting changes in sample thickness EnGEN Corporation I tI Price Enterprises,Inc. I Excel Legacy,Corporation �. Project Number.T1971 GS April 2000 i Page 5 are recorded at selected time intervals. Water was added to the test apparatus at various loads i;- to create a submerged condition and to measure the collapse potential (hydroconsolidation).of the sample. The resulting change in sample thickness was recorded. 6.5 Maximum D Dens' I 0• 'mum Moisture Content Relationshi• Test Maximum dry density / optimum moisture content relationship determination were performed on samples of near-surface earth material in general accordance with ASTM 01557-91 procedures using a 4.0- inch diameter mold. Samples were prepared at various moisture contents and compacted in five (5) layers using a 10-pound weight dropping 18-inches and with 25 blows per layer. A plot of the compacted dry density versus the moisture content of the specimens is constructed and the. maximum dry density and optimum moisture content determined from the plot. . 6.6 Direct ShearTest Direct shear tests were performed on selected samples of near-surface earth material in general accordance with ASTM D3080-90 procedures. The shear machine is of the constant strain type. The shear machine is designed to receive a 1.0-inch high, 2.416-. ';: . inch diameter ring sample. Specimens from the sample were sheared at various pressures normal to the face of the specimens. The specimens were tested in a submerged condition. The maximum shear stresses were plotted versus the normal confining stresses to determine the shear strength (cohesion and angle of internal friction). 6.7 Expanses T Laboratory expansion tests were performed on samples of near-surface earth material in general accordance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard. In this testing procedure, a remolded sample is compacted in two (2) layers in a 4.0-inch diameter mold to a total compacted thickness of approximately 1.0-inch by using a 5.5-pound weight dropping 12- inches and with 15 blows per layer. The sample should be compacted at a saturation between 49 and 51 percent. After remolding, the sample is confined under a pressure of 144 pounds per square foot (psf) and allowed to soak for 24 hours. The resulting volume change due to the increase in moisture content within the sample is recorded and .the Expansion Index (El) calculated. The expansion test result is presented on the UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results sheet 7.0 SITE CONDITIONS 7.1 Geoloai_ c S=itina: The site is located in the Northern Peninsular Range on the southern sector of the structural unit known as the Penis Black. The Perris Block is bounded on the northeast by the San Jacinto Fault Zone, on the southwest by the Elsinore Fault Zone, and on the north by EnGEN Corporation Price Enterprises, Inc. I Excel ren corn Project Number T1971-GS Apel 2000 . Page 6 .. f the Cucamonga Fault Zone. The southern boundary of the Perris Block is not as distinct, but is ji. a complex group of faults trending southeast from the Murrieta, believed to acoincide. Twith is characterized by lame Mesozoic age intrusive rock California, area- The Peninsular Rangeand sedimentary rocks. Various thicknesses of masses flanked by volcanic, metasedimentary, portions of the region fill the colluvial I alluvial sediments derived from the erosion a tl1e sltethe eYTheearth materials encountered low lying areas. Fill and alluvium materials sections of this report on the subject site are described in more detail in subsequent an Alquist- 7.2 Pauitin No known active faults traverse the site. The site is not located within Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. approximately 4,500 Elsinore Fault Zone: The Elsinore Fault Zone (Wildomar Fault) is located app fautt feet west of the subject Property. The Elsinore Fault ZOne is a major historicat times (1856,lateral lip 910) • system, which has experienced strong earthquakes in and exhibits late Quaternary movement. t Zone is ' San Jacirrto Fautt Zone: The�ndsn Jnorthwest northwest-southeast The located aJacinto Fault �s a major northeast of the subject site and right lateral strike-slip fault, which has displayed surface rupture and associated seismic ground shaking in 1899, 1918, 1923, 1934, 1937, 1942, and 1954. San Andreas Fault Zone: The southern segment of the San Andreas Fault Zoneis located approximately 28 miles northeast of the site, and trends northwest-southeast across the southwestern frontof the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas Fault is a major right lateral strike-slip fault, which exhibited major surface.rupture in 1857 during the Fort Tejon earthquake and again in 1868 during the Dos Palmas Earthquake. 7.3 Seismic- : The project lies within an active area of faulting and seismicity of Richter California region. The seismicity has included approximately eight (8) earthquakes • magnitude M 6.0 or greater within approximately 70 miles of the site and approximately 10 earthquakes of Richter magnitude, ranging from M 5.0 to M 6.0 within 50 miles of the site. Numerous earthquakes ranging in magnitude from M 4.0 to M 5.0 within 30 miles of riods of 32 subject site have been recorded socitng the ated with the SaniJacntothrough Fault Zone aloThis ng I sdominance s°utileast of seismic activity has been as unction with - section in the vicinity of the Salton Sea, and within the northwest portion near its j the San Andreas Fault Zone. The predominance of the remaining recorded activity has been EnGEN Corporation i 1 Price Enterprises,Inc Excel Legacy,Corporation Projed Number T1971-GS April 2000' Page 7 associated with the San Andreas Fault Zone. The most recent earthquake activity in the Southern California area includes the magnitude M 7.3 and M 6.6 earthquakes on June 28, 1992, on nearby faults in the Landers and Big Bear areas, respectively, and the more recent magnitude M 6.7 earthquake on January 17, 1994, in the Northridge area. Based on computer software by Thomas F. Blake (EQSEARCH), the maximum peak ground acceleration experienced at the site since 1800 was approximately 0.25g from a magnitude 6.8 earthquake in 1918 on the San Jacinto Fault Zone located approximately 18 miles to the northeast. A maximum moment magnitude (Mw 6.8) earthquake on the Elsinore Fault Zone (Temecula Segment) could produce a peak ground acceleration of 0.628 at the site. The following parameters apply: .. Seismic Source Type: Type B Fault . Closest Distance to Known Seismic Source: Less Than 2 Km Soil Profile Type: SD 7.4 Earthy als: A brief description of the earth materials encountered in the exploratory • excavations is presented in the following sections. A more detailed description of the earth materials encountered is presented on the Exploratory Boring Log Summaries presented'in the Appendix. The earth material strata as shown on the logs represent the conditions in the actual exploratory locations and other variations may occur between the excavations. Lines of demarcation between the earth materials on the logs represented the approximate boundary between the material types; however, the transition may be gradual. 7.4.1 Pill: Fill materials were encountered up to a depth of approximately seven (7) to nine (9) feet below ground surface in all borings except for B-7 and B-8. Fill.materials consisted of silty to very dense in These sand to sand that were found to be moist and medium dense (see Reference Not) and arell materials were placed during grading of considered to be competent engineered fill. In addition, there are numerous small stockpiles of undocumented fill (apparently from nearby construction activities) throughout the site. 7.4.2 Alluvium: Alluvium materials were encountered exposed at the surface in o bagel sB 76 5 d Bfeei 8 and below the fill materials in all the other borings to depths of app EnGEN Corporation ' Price Enterprises, 1 Excel Legacy,corporation Project Number.T1971-GS �. April 2000 , Page 8 r t below ground surface. These materials consisted of sand, silty sand, silty clay, clayey silt, and sandy silt that were found to be moist to wet and loose to dense in-place. 7.5 Groundw ter: Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 26 to 30 feet below ground surface. 7.6 Secondary Effects of Seismic Activitt: The secondary effects of seismic activity normally considered as possible hazards to a site include various types of ground failure and induced flooding. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, the distance of the site from the zone of maximum energy release of the quake, the topography of the site, the subsurface materials at the site, and groundwater conditions beneath the site, besides other factors. Since there are no known active faults on' the site, the potential for hazards associated with fault rupture is considered low. Due to the overall favorable geologic structure and topography of the area, the potential for earthquake- induced landslides or rockfalls is considered low. . The channel alignment for Temecula Creek was graded and constructed in 1995 (Referenced No. 3). The entire channel slope along the property is an engineered fill slope with filter fabric blanket, class 3 bedding blanket t and 'A ton riprap. Based on the above mentioned previous. I for the otenti a project, P grading and the proposed grading (see section 8.2.5) for the subject p 1 hazards associated with lateral spread is considered low. The potential for hazards associated with liquefaction exists. Calculations show settlements of seven (7) to eight (8) inches are possible with a differential settlement of three (3) to four (4) inches possible. However, the potential for hazards associated with liquefaction should be low if the earthwork and foundation recommendations presented in this report are adhered to. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS is report are based 8.1 General: The conclusions and recommendations fre exploratory epresented in xcavations located acroon the ss the results of field and laboratory data property, experience gained from work conducted by this firm on projects within the property and general vicinity, and the project description and assumptions presented in the Proposed Development / Project Description section of this report. Based on a review of the field and laboratory data and the engineering analysis, the proposed development is feasible froma • geotechnical / geologic standpoint provided significant earthwork is performed to density the natural soil deposits. The actual conditions of the near-surface supporting material across the . • EnGEN Corporation :k Price Enterprises,Inc. Excel Legacy,Corporation :, Project Number.APrif WOO , Page 9 The nature and extent of variations of evidentthe suntilconstruction.subsurface variations conditions . site between may varyof i. been the exploratory excavations may not become the material become evident during construction of the proposed development, this office should oration can evaluate the charadenstics.ot the material and, be notified so that EnGEN Corp if resented herein: Recommendations for ort, pavement design, slope maintenance, etc., am needed, make revisions to the recommendations p general site grading, foundations, slab Supp presented in the subsequent paragraphs. ommendations • report are intended for. 1) the use of 8.2 Earthwork Rex resented in this the rework grading recommendations p abs cast rade; and 2) o 8.2.1 Gem�' The g and suitable a unsuitable shallow foundation system ando alta e lengineered building pad support fore near-surface earth sidewalks, patios, etc.). If pavement subgrade soils am exterior hardscape ( site and the areas am not paved prepared at the time of rough grading of the building of the subgrade soil will have to be performed immediately, additional observations and testing asphaltic concrete or PCC pavement to locate areas aggregate base material or asp and/or seasonalras before mayaying havebeen construction traffic, construction activities, and/or which been damaged by need to be modified The following recommendations may wetting and drying• require. supplemented during rough grading as field conditions req grasses, weeds, brush and other deleterious materials als should eo removed from : Alt debris, 8 2 2 the proposed building, exterior hardscape and pavement areas No disking or mixing of organic material into the soils is performed. mixing of teredorganic sc ain general,s be structural fill before gradingperformed. Man-made objects should, in general, Iles of undocumented fill should be overexcavated and exported from the site. NI stocky removed, cleanedof debris and then may be used for fill purposes. within the subject property is • 8.2.3 Excavation Charactenstres• Excavation and trenching easy in the near-surface earth materials. present are anticipated to be relatively general, the on-site earth materials 8.2.4 Sui{abil' of Onsite Materials as Fill: In 9 contain rocks or clumps greater than 8-fiches in considered suitable for reuse as fill. FII materials should be free of significant amounts organic materials and/or debris and should maximum dimension. EnGEN Corporation . \ . . Price Enterprises,Ina Pn , Excel Legacy,Corporation I Project Number T1971-GS .i April 2000 ' Page 10 t • 8.2.5 ' Removal and f cote action: 7g: All nonstructural areas Nonstructural Areas and Small Buiidin• Pads Alon• H • • ar in9 lots, landscape areas) to receive fill (and shallow cuts of less than 1-foot) (driveways, Pacted to a minimum relative should be scarified 12-inches, moisture earthwork conditioned recommended for cuts greater than 1-foot in compaction of 90 percent. No specialSection 8.5 for pavement purposes. existing engineered fill areas, other than that required by at ground (2) feet below existing grades. Nonstructural area removals for those a2 exlocated �t owhere wo alluvium is exposed (see figure 1, B-7 and B-8 area) moisture conditioned and then. surface ed 12-inches, The bottoms in alluvial areas should be�loce�f 90 percent. recompacted to a minimum relative come Structures Alon Temecula Creek : Temecula Creek should Removals in structural areas of the anchor tenants situated along extend to 15-feet below existing grades or 15-feet below proposed grades, whichever results inerimeter footings should be the deepest removal. Horizorrtal extent of removals beyond the p equal to the depth of removal and should be a minimum of 15-feet. Erode= Areas that have been eroded should be removed to competent engineered fill and then props rty backfill with engineered fill. import, should be All fill material, whether on-site material or uirements: representative before placement All 8 2 g approved Placement R Engineer and/or his rep ort fill shouldI by the Project Geotechnical vegetation, organic material, debris, and oversize material. Imp fill should r be exp sf veg on-site material. Approved fill material should be placed inbe ho more expansive than the existing thickness and watered or aerated to Isnot exceeding 10-Inches in compacted horizontal + 0 percent of optimum). Each lift be'spread obtain near optimum moisture content (S• P of soil moisture. Structural fill evenly and should be thoroughly mixed to ensure uniformity action re 95 percent. All within the Wal-Mart pad should meet a minimum relative. compactioon Maximum dry lative compaction of other structural fill smumosturemeet aminimum content for compacted materials should be determined in densitycn and e optimum accordance with ASTM D1557-91 procedures. Moisture conteet`rfof fill materials shod Geotechnical Engineer.not vary more than 2.0 percent from optimum, unless approved the Prof ... EnGEN Corporation Price Enterprises.Inc. ., Excel Legacy,Corporation .. �I . Project Number.April 4S . f.. 000 Page 11 i compaction equipment to be used for the 8.2.7 Da►npaction Equipment It is anticipated that the ane sheepsfoot rollers to achieve proper project will include a combination of rubber-tired ui ment, by itself, may not proper compaction Compaction by rubber-tired or track-mounted p f, be Adequate • water trucks, water pulls, and/or other suitableequipment ui shouldis the sufficient. The provide sufficient moisture and dustcontrol. should belsuch�ttlat uniformon of equipment and proper available to performing responsibility of the contractor p compaction of the fill is achieved. grubbing re will be a material loss due to the clearing and bb fill g 2 g per to s and in age of m: The alluvium that is excavated and replaced operations. Shrinkage of existing shrinkage of the alluvial soils will be on t It is estimated that the average to a minimum of 90 percent should anticipated. thee ordeerr of 15 percent, based on fill volumes when compacted A higher relative compaction. Shrinkage of the existing fill soils is expected to be 0 to 5 percent relative compaction would mean a larger shrinkage value. at this time, final the need for subdrains is not anticipated i 8.2.9 Subs Although roiling by the Project Geologist recommendations should be made during 9 observation and testing should be conducted by the During grading, erfby the 8.2.10 Observation and Testier that the grading is being P ed Geotechnical Engineer and/or his representative to verify Geotechnical Enineer according to the recommendations presented in this report The Project of fill and ghould and/or his representative should observe the scarification and the p take tests to verify density, uniformity and degree of compaction obtained. the moisture content, additional compaction effort, with the Where testing demonstrates insufficient density, should be applied until retesting shows adjustment of the moisture content where necessary' relative compaction has been obtained. The results of observations and testing of the that satisfactory Report following services should be presented in a formal Finish Grading P without the Geotechnical grading operations. Grading operations undertaken at the site Engineer and/or his representative present may result in exclusions of the affected areas from P the finish grading representative will be for the P re ort for the project. The presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and/or his u ase of providing observations and field testing and will not � n supervision or directing of the actual work of the contractor or the contractor's includemP any employees or agents. Neither the presence and/or the non-presence of the shall excusetechnical the Engineer and/or his field representative nor the field observations and testing contractor in any way for defects discovered in the contractor's work. EnGFN Corporation : IPrice Enterprises, Inc. Excel Legacy,Corporation project Number.T11471-GS 0 Page 12 ansion Potential: Upon completion of fine grading of the building p ad, near-surface 8.2.11 Sail Ex potentialntesting to verify the preliminary expansion samples should be obtained for expansion ^ted in this report • and the foundation and slab-on-grade recommendations prese sifted as test results expansion index range of 1 to 28, which are classified The results of recent testing indicate an a very low to low expansion potential. 8.3 Foundation Desi n Recommendations: 5,3.1 Ge�� Foundations for the proposed re may consist of conventional column footings structure s founded upon properly compacted fill. The recommendations and continuous wall footing for foundation design and Cons��soilson are based d not presented in the subsequent paragraphs potential for the supporting geotechnical characteristics and a low expansion gyral requirements. The Structural Engineer for the intended to preclude more restrictive structural Project should determine the actual footing width and depth to resist design vertical, horizontal, and uplift forces• of 18 inches. Continuous. No. 5 steel reinforcing bar ve a minimum width 8.3.2 Founds bO_ t Size: Continuous fog reinforced with a minimum of twO 2) near the bottom of the footings should be continuously No 5 steel reinforcing bar located located near the top and two (2) occur due to minor characteristics or seasonal moisture change in the supporting sols. footings to minimize the effects of slight differential movements which may • variations in the engineering 18-inches and be suitably Column footings should have a minimum width rade beam, founded at the same depths and requirements. A 9 the sanies, garage d reinforced, based on structural or reinforced the same as the adjacent footings, should be provided across any er de ctural es of perimeter openings. In addition it is recommended that the Project foundation Engineeroth design a grid of gradebeams to increase the struduintegrity hazards of liquefaction. mitigation against the possible s along Hwy. 79 may consist of a post-tensioned system beyond normal standards to aid in The foundation system for the small building slab system if desired by the Structural Engineer• compacted fill should 8.3.3 De th of Embedment: Exterior and interior footings founded in properly extend to a minimum depth of 18-inches below lowest adjacent finish grade.minimum footing width, and minimum • earthw 8.3.4 aearina Capacity: Provided the recommendations for site o o the project design and depth of embedment for footings are incorporateds for the construction, the allowable bearing value for design of continuous and column footing EnGENCorporation . . - ... . 77 -(72_0 Price En EntenVises,Inc. I Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number.Ap -GS April Page 13 Ii 2,000 psf for continuous footings and 2,000 psf for `. total dead plus frequently applied live loads is 20 percent for each compacted fill. This value may be increased by column footingsoin properly • 'ti°nal foot of depth and/or foot of width to a maximum °o f 2.0 01times st 3 0 andsignated maY be increased .additional value. The allowable bearing value has a factor of safety by 33.3 percent for short durations of live and/or dynamic loading such as wind or seismic — forces- into the following two categories: 8.3.5 Sem eft Estimates of settlement are separated 1) Buildin•s for la •e anchor tenants alon• Temecula Creek Based on the anticipated loads and the recommended bearing values, it is' expected that total long-term settlement will be less than one (1) inch due to to reach 0.5 inches over static loads. Differential settlement should be expected a distance of 40 feet 2) Small buitdinos atony Hwy, 79 Hwy.H 79 are expected to The lightly loaded structures for the small pads along experience total post-construction settlement of less than 0.75 inch. Differential Settlements are expected to be on the order of0.25 inch in 30 feet.. robable earthquake. Potential total settlement in the Analysis of the design seismic condition P indicates that the entire site is subject to possible liquefaction in the case of the maximum event of liquefaction has been calculated to range from 5.5-inches to 8.0-inches, assuming that the supporting soils are recompacted to the depths previously specified. Differential settlement le buildue to liquefaction is expected to be less than half the total settlement. within any sin g 9 term Capacity Additional foundation design parameters for resistance to static latera l 8.3.6 � forces, are as follows: passive Case: Allowable Lateral Pressure (Equivalent Fluid Pressure), Compacted Fill- 175 pcf Allo Compacted Fill Coefficientble 0.35 pcf on: Lateral load resistance may be developed by a combination of friction acting on the base of foundations and slabs and passive earth pressure developed on the sides ofthe footings'and compacted fill. The allowable values may stem walls below grade when in contact with properly loading, such as wind or be increased by 33.3 percent for short durations of live and/or dynamic EaG11Y Corporation I - .. rises,Inc.Price Enterprises, Excel Legacy,Corporation 'I Project Number.T1971-GS April 2000 ,.: Page 14 t seismic tomes. For the calculation of passive earth resistance, the upper 1.0-f°°i of material shoulda concrete slab or pavement. The maximum recommended neglected unless confined by allowable passive pressure.is 5.0 times the recommended design value. t T all concrete used at the site may contain n et The results of chemical analysis indicate that the soil near the surface contains 8.3.7 Cem�� required based on the test results, which are presented low tI oderateCement soluble e V te Cement iss. Asreq i a res Type II Cement No Type in the Appendix of this report. both endations: The recommendations for concrete s stabs, both interiorfor the ion 8.4 Slab-°exterior, a Recomm pavement are based upon a low exp ande urngmaterial. Concrete ng PCC to minimizeas a result of supporting material. Concrete stabs should be designed should be placed°nnaccorciance with shrinkage. Joints (solation, contraction, and construction) the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Special precautions should be taken during placement and curing of all concrete slabs. Excessive slump (high water I cement ratio) of the concrete and/or improper curing procedures used during either hot or cold weather conditions e, Wicking, or curling in the slabs. It is recommended that all could result in excessive shrinkage, and curing be performed in accordance with AC1 concrete proportioning, placement, recommendations and procedures. rade should be a minimum of 4.0-inches in thickness c 8.4.1 Intdrior Interior concrete slabs-on-grade ong and be underlain by 1.0 to 2.0 inches of clean coarse sand or other approved granular material n of placed on properly prepared subgrade Per the Earthwork Recommendations Sectioriches is . report. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #3 reinforcing bars placed n center in both directions, or a suitable equivalent, as determinedby the Project Structural cr ection Engineer. The reinforcing should be placed at mid depth in the slab. The n cessisv o for anticipated and/or reinforcing steel should be increased appropriatelys are anticipated over vapor bo nier with a minimum of 6.0 mit in concentrated floor loads. In areas where moisture sensitive floor covering the slab, we recommend the use of a polyethylene ed or sealed at thickness be placed beneath the slab. The moisture barrier should be over of dean, moist (not and bottom by a 1.0-inch to 2.0-inch minimum lay splices and covered top and-to minimize potential punctures. An alternate saaturaated) sand to aid in concrete curing nested by Wal-Mart, consisting of a 4-inch thick moisture control method, as typically req capillary break of free drawing crushed aggregate is considered acceptable, if desired. EnGEN Corporation , Price Enterprises,Inc. ` . . Excel Legacy,Corporation .- �I Project Number.Tnp97 t.CS l page-15 • i` tenor Slatis- All exterior concrete slabs cast on finish subgrade (patios, sidewalks, etc., with t E;c nd 8.4.2 _- should be a minimum of 4.0-inches nominal in thickness the ` tion of PCC pavement) reared in accordance the excep be underlain by ort. Reinforcing in the slabs and the use of a a minimum of 12.0-inches of soil that has been prepared • the slabs should be according to the curtest local Earthwork Recommendation section of this rep compacted sand or gravel base beneathaccording to standards. moisture content acted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction to b Subgrade soils should be moisture conditioned to at lea optimum of 6.0-inches and proof comp placing aggregate base material or a depth procedures immediately before p 9 basedd on ASTM D1557-91 placing the concrete. . preliminary pavement recommendations are 8.5 Pavement Desi n Recommendations: presented based on R Value testing traffi c of soils obtained from the site and an assumed future c Index(Tl)• CALTRANS design loading expressed in terms of a Traffic in general accordance with ons have been determined Pavement recti of 6.0 for truck traffic areas' and Procedures based on a (TI) of 5.0 for automobile areas, a (TD an R Value of 48. ®1111111111111112 3 inch AC/4.0 inches AS 5.0 111116 .11111 . �.. 3 inch AC/4.5 inches AS 6.0 5.0 Portland Cement Pa`�t Subrade ve: 6 inch Automobile PCC/95 6.0 Portland Cement Pavement ent Allubt mate e. 7 inch MS PCC/95 ro a ade P riate pavement section for the anticipated c The project designer should choose the app pattern and delineate the respective areas on the site plan. recti actualr calculations may, atc times, ed standards, the AC pavement sections and the ith Portlandd cern Ci of Temecula adopt to review and approval by the City of Temecula. Cemenflict nt pavement section, are subject Asphalt concrete pavement materials should be as specified in Section 39 of the current Specifications or a suitable equivalent Aggregate base should conform Standard CALTRANS Standard in Section 26-1.0213 of the currenn, CALTRANS lench backfill, should to Crass 2 material as le specifiedquand driveway Specifications or a suitable equivalent The subecade soil, including utility percent relative compaction. Subgrade in the parking be compacted to at least 90 P acted to at least 95 percent of maximum density in areas for the Wal-Mart store should be comuirements. All aggregate base material should be the upper 12 Inches, per their typical req IGEN Corporation . - Price Enterprises,Inc. .. Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number 11971-G5 AO 2000 Page 16 compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Maximum dry density and optimum for subgrade and aggregate base materials should be determined according to moisture contentdumpster pick-up areas, and in areas where semi-traders are - k. it ASTM parked on procedures. In the pavement such that a considerable load is transferred a mid mum smallthickness eofl ,7.0 to r be parkedpavement is recommended that rigid Portland Cement concrete inches be provided in these areas. This will provide for the proper distribution of loads to the pavement surface- Special consideration should deformation of the p Asphalticraticoncrutd lsobesubgrade without causing small radius turns. also be given to areas where truck traffic will negotiate Portland Cement concrete is to be placed directly on pavement in these areas should utile stiffer or the areas should be paved If In areas where'P action. Portland Cement concrete- of 95% relative comp rade should be compacted to a minimum the bee co site and the subgrade, the subgrade h toeing pavement arerrt subgranot pa a soils are prepared at the time of rough g will have to be performed areas not paved immediately, additional observations and testing avement to locate areas • before placing aggregate base material, asphaltic concrete, or PCC p that may have been damaged by construction traffic, construction activities, and/or seasonal pavement areas, soil samples should be obtained at the wetting and drying. In the proposed p to California Test Method 301 time the subgrade is graded for R-Value testing according procedures to verify the pavement design recommendations. trenches within the zone of influence of foundations S 6 Utility Trench Recommendations Utility e, andior pavement areas should backfilled floor slabs, exterior hardscappad and extending to a or under building trenches within the building inga with proPeriy Compacted soil. NI utility exterior footings should be bac fled with thor on-site or distance of 5.0-feet beyond the building ro osed to pass perimeter wall footings, the bottom of similar soil. Where interior or exterior utility trenches are p to retaining wall, and/or decorative concrete block P from the outside be bottom building, projected downward loads. Imes are designed for the footing surcharge the trench should not be located below a 1:1 plane p J be cut back edge of the adjacent footing unless the utility • Ita isc recommendednhthat all utility trenches excavated to depths of 5.0-feet or deeperort or according to the "Temporary Construction Excavation Recommendation" section of this re construction- Backfill material should be placed inBaal th1c1 ckfill rift mess be properly shored during action equipment used. _ appropriate for the tyype of backfill material and comp should be compacted of to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction by mechanicals{oil for Jetting or floodioding the backfill material will not be considered a satisfactory EnGENi•I Corporation Price Enterprises,Inc t Excel Legacy,Corporation • Project Number 11971-GS April 2000 ' Page 17t. bythe Project procedures are reviewed and approved in wing comp-mon unless the P density and optimum moisture content for backfill , Geotechnical Engineer. Maximum drydensity ASTM D1557-g1 procedures. , material should be determined according Recommendations: Positive drainage should be established away from Lot Drain- a Recomm walls, and the decorative 8.7 Fieish the back of retaining the tops of slopes, the exterior walls of structures, perimeter walls. Finish lot surface gradients in unpaved areas should be block P guide surface water away from foundations and concrete s to provided next to tops of slopes and buildingwater should be directed toward over the tops of slopes. The surface aures or slabs and from drainageowingof surface water should not be allowed atry from the suitable mts. facilities. Ponding positive gradient of 2.0 percent on pavements. In unpaved areas, a minimum slopes fora minimum distance of 5.0-feet and a minimum of 1.0 pence structures and tops of provided. Landscape trees and off the Property in a nonerosive manner should be from the walls of the pad iswith drainageplanted at least 5.0-feet away of high water needs should be P reliably discharge to a permanent plants res. g out from roof drains should p a minimumbly of discharge flet from the enteaor �, Downspouts ll- which slopes away from the structure into planter areas building surface outs from roof drains discharge from the structure at building walls- In no case should downspouts or subdrain adjacent to the building unless there is positive drainage away immediately directed onto a permanent all-weather surface a minimum gradient of 2.0 Percent. system. around the perimeter of the structures should be designed o ensure d-tions: Planters S$ onto is maintained and minimal irrigation water is allowed adequate drainageThe Planters should drain directly designed tot ensure teassoilsthe buildings• to percolate into the underlying flit designed subdrain system. paved areas or into a prop Y Temporary c4nst^s�On surrounding• p Recommendations: than 5.0 feet in depth and to a maximum depth of 15-feet should be p Construction Excavation utiiitrenches, etc., more g g Ternc •ora foundations, retaining walls, tY ex -cations for rough gr-ding, properly shored or cut back to the P following inclinations: Inclination Alluvium/Com•acted Fill a ui meat, trucks, etc.) should be allowed within a No surcharge loads (spoil piles, earthmoving 4 P equalto ethepth should be initially observed by the p of the excavation slope 1.5 times de project Ges ecdeth 1 horizontal distance measured from the top of the excavation. Excavations FnGEN Corpora«°' _ . Price Enterprises,Inc. Excel Legacy,Corporation • Project Number. l 2 0SApr0 Page 18 ! the recommendations presented or to Geologist and/or their representative to verify and safety. Moisture variations,Engineer, maintain stability or changes in the coarseness of the make additional recommendations to m upon the permit steepening P differences may the cohesive or cementation or,oc necrseytiP utility reviewtrybys the deposits require slope r, eog Geologist, or their representative. Deep elite project Geotechnical Engineer, exp require special considerations to stabilize the wallsothe slope to which will a should be controlled along the top experience caving drainage If excavations am to be left open for long periods, the slopes trenching roperations.ion f tSurface raveling, preclude erosion d the slope tece- a protective compound and/or covered to minimize drying w111 not be cut ed with P than 5.0-feet in depth which should beerosion sprayand/orcue the slopes. For excavations mom and/or erosion of slope inclination, the contractor should submit to the ownerbracing, back to the ecommended P drawings showing the design of shoring, representative detailed s do not vary from owner's designated repthe(CAL OSHA or OSHA, i sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection. drawing • of the OSHA Construction Safety a statementHAorFEDgned by wthhichever requirements at the time of construction), � likable for the project engaged by the contractor at his whichever is app Engineer in the State of California, drawings complya registered CMI or be Structural Enc in that the contractor's excavation safety If the drawings vary from the applicable OSHA Construction expense, should tr submitted certifying bya Registered or Sof OSHA Cs, theectira angers• m ared, signed, and sealed Safety Orders, drawings should be p P . in the State of California. The contractor should not proceed with any Structural Engineer ro ect owner or his designated representative has received and excavations until the P 1 drawings- erl prepared excavation safety acknowledged the properly non expansive granular soil (E1=0) or very low Retainin Wall Recomr^endations 8.10 walls backfilled with upward sures: Retaining within a zone extending 8.10.1 Earthy anion Index of 20 or less) to flatter can expansive away from the materialsothe( P at a slope of 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) be and away from heel of footing� atura/ soil pressures: designed to resist the following • • ' • 30 •cf Active . backfill within the active 1 at-rest • st ssisesill ansivity may be used as should The °n-site materials of above. Wads that are free to deflect 0.001 radian at the top pressure zone as defined EnGFN Corporation ______...----- 1 Price Enterprises.Inc. Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number 11971-GS p Page 19 are f v mo designed for the ab assuc° mmended active condition. Wallsthat candido not capable pabe o this pressure. Surcharge loads, dead movement should be assumedrigid and designedphydrostaticthalso be and no buildupshould ues backfill the wall assume well drained distance behind aging on the backfill within a horizontal pressures should be applied � an and/or lice, Uniform surcharge should considered in the design. coefficient for a additional uniform (rectangular) pressure distribution. The lateral earth pressure uniform vertical surcharge load behind the wall is 0.50. depths into Retaining wall footings should be founded to the d foundations and. • 8 t 0 2 Foundation design competent, undisturbed, natural soil as star properly Compacted fill, or firm. comp value across the footing (as long as may be designed for the same average allowable bearing recommended.a the e resultant force is located in the middle one-third of�staece9as P with to the y same allowable static lateral bearing pressure and allowable slidingresistance. a factor of safety of When using the allowable lateral pressure and allowable sliding i 1.5 should be used. behind and at the base of all retaining system should be constructed fallTypical 8.1 0.3 Subs A subdrainagprevent the buildup of excessive hydrostatic pressures.i e surrounded walls to allow drainage and to gallery, Perforated P P subdrains may inducts weep holes with a continuous gravel9 approved system. Gravel galleries and/or filter rock, if not properly by ier designed and graded some other raded for the on-site and/or import materials, should be enclosed in a geotextife or of a suitable substitute in order to prevent infiltration ac 4NP, least 4.0 inches in fabric such as cloggingMifi 140N,the System The perforated pipes should be at fines and of system. have volume of perforations should be placed flow gradient diameter. Pipe downward. Gravel filters should i e. Subdrains should maintain a positive at least 1.0 cubic foot per lineal foot of p P • and have outlets that drain in a non-erosive manner.. In the case of subdrains for basement walls, they need to empty into a sump provided with a submersible pump activated by a change water level. may consist in the walls (if backfill width is less than 3 feet) behind retaining eofextile fabric such • g•t0.4 of 0_.- t Backfill0.75-inch inchrdia gea lealer c such 0.5 -to 0.75-inch diameter, rounded to subrounded gravel enclosed in a 9 ac 4NP, or a suitable substitute or a clean sand (Sand is used,Value the greaters 140N, Sup compa on. If water jetting than 50) water jetted into place to obtain proper to a the sand should be densifie specified density is not obtained by water system should be in place. Even if water jetting is used, minimum n action. If the sp to a of 90 percent relative come ... EnGEN Corporation I ! Price Enterprises,Inc. 1 . Eccel Legacy,Corporation j Project Number.T1971-GS April 2000' Page 20 jetting, mechanical methods will be required. If other types of soil or gravel are used for backfill, action of at least 90 I methods will be required to obtain a relative comp mechanical compaction percent of maximum dry density. Backfill directly behind retaining walls should not be j compacted by wheel, track or other rolling by heavy construction equipment unless the wall is p ort u backfill is used d designed for the surcharge loading. If gravel, clean sand or other imp upper 18-inches of backfill in unpaved areas should consist of typic walls, the action in order to prevent behind retaining on-site material terial comQected to a minimum of 90 percent relative come the influx of surface runoff into the granular backfill Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for backfill. and into the subdrain system. rocedures. materials should be determined in accordance with ASTM 01557-78 (90) p s for PLAN REVIEYV plans and specifications for the project, but before bid 9.0 —_ and foundation plans for the proposed.development should Subsequent to formulation of final construction are requested, grading compatibility with site geotechnical conditions and EnGEN Corporation to verify comp be reviewed by ort If EnGEN Corporation � not conformance with the recommendations contained in this report will assume no rporati n is for accorded the opportunityto make the recommended review, misinterpretation of the recommendations presented in this report. 10.0 PRE-BID CONFERENCEand the be desirable to hold a pre-bid conference with the owner or an authorized representative, It may Engineer, the Project Geotechnical Engineer. the Project Architect, the Project Civil Eng in the bidding process and proposed contractors present This conference will provide continuity clarify questions relative to the grading and constriction requirements of the project. 11.0 _RE-GRADING CONFERENCE the owner or an authorized of grading, a conference should be held with and the Project Before the start 9 the Project Architect, the Project CMI Engineer, questions representative. the contractor, should be to clarify ineer present The purpose of this meeting eqs Geotechnichl Eng that the project sP relating to the intent of the grading recommendations and to verify Any special grading comply with the recommendations of this geotechnical engineering report. procedures andlor difficulties proposed by the contractor can also be discussed at that time. 12.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING under engineering observation and testing • of the property should be p but is not limited to, Roughgrading grading includes, performed by EnGEN Corporation. Rough EnGEN Corporation Price Enterprises,Inc I Excel Legacy,Corporation [_ Project Number.1971-G20008 April ' 4 Page 21 t esIn cuts, fill placement and excavation of temporary and permanent cut and fill f slopes. In addition, EnGEN Corporation should observe all foundation excava�°�I to commendations in this report. Observations of Observations should be made before installation of concrete forms and/or reinforcing the conclusions andutilitytiionsof verify and/or n cuts,dify finish grading, or other trench backfill, pavement overexcavation fill placement. or other earthwork retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, erfortmed by EuGF�i CorP°�°n" If the subgradeompletand base curse. • completed for the subject development should be p performed by EnGEN the observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not pe onions of for the performance of the development is limited to the a P Corporation, liability Corporation. If parties other than EnGEN the project observed and/or tested by GINmust be engaged to perform soils and materials observations and tetheyaspects Corporation arerequired to assume complete responsibility for the geotechnical ftified that they will be req ort or.providing alternative of the project by concurring with the recommendations in this rep defects the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and/or hivsaf fedr recommendations. Neither shall excuse the contractor in any representative, nor the field observations and testing,The Geotechnical Engineer and/or his discovered in the contractor's work and the representative shall not be responsible for job or project safety. Job or project safety sole responsibility of the contractor. 13.0 CLO__ SSE cities or project named or described in this for use by the p rs or purposes. In the This report has been prepared .Hent e document. It may or may not contain sufficient information for other P�proposed develop event that changes in the assumed nature, design, or location of the P P ort are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in end s rerecommendations of this report ort will not be considered valid unless the .changes are reviewed and ort modified or verified in writing. This study was conducted in applicable standards of our profession and the acceptedNo ot general accordance with the PP ort was prep princiared pes and practices at the time this rep is made. Althougher geotechnical engineering P of this report, warranty, implied or expressed beyond the representations every effort has been made to obtain infornation regarding the geotechnical and subsurface to the knowledge of unknown regional or conditions of the site, limitations exist with respect ort. However, changes in the localized off-site conditions which may have an impact at the site. The recommendations presented-in this report are valid as of the date of the rep EnGEN Corporation . ... Price Enterprises,Inc. I Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number:T1971-GS April -GS000 Page 22 conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural 4. nt properties. If are processes or to the works of man on this athedesignr and constructioncproclessswhich observed rervnot or information becomes available during evaluations reflected in this report, EnGEN Corporation should be notified so that supplemental can be performed and the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report can e modified or verified in writing. This report is not intended for use as a bid document. Any person or company using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform such independent studies and explorations as he deems necessary to satisfy himself as to the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used in the performance Changes in applicable or appropriate standards of cam or practice of the work on this project. and experience. occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge Accordingly, the conclusions and by changes recommendations presented in thiwhich occur inmay be lithe future.dated, wholly or in part, outside the control of EnGEN Corporation 1- Thank you for the opportunity to provide our services. if we can be of further service or you should have questions regarding this report, please contact this office at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, EnGEN Corporation / Zo i � OPLFjD DEwEY C� tO. W / er / 110 - E 162 T 0 gE '� •sbjom ratene, CEG 19 Geotechnical Engineer Thomas Dewey, CERTIFIED- ( Princip Senior Engineering Geologist ENGINEERING Expi 09-30-01 Expires 11-30-01 \i/),%:EOLOGIST = @QOFESS/Ory • ��p N 8Aq q�F TD/OB:rr • F CPa-� /I,q TEy ... aiO F w Distribution: (6) Addressee 111 No. 162 14 ALE: EnG£NWepor9r+9 GS1T19TIGS Erol wry.Geotechnical Easy * .. *r . `r>qA�rECNN�G Q���r F°F CAO EnGEN Corporation . . . . . . 1 . .. Price Enterprises, Inc. . . Excel Legacy,Corporation I.r, Project Number T1971-GS Appendix Page 1 . . . . . 1.: . i APPENDIX . 1 . i . . . • . . . . . . '.• . . :.i• . . .. . . . . . . .. ... ... . . . . . . . s • . . . •. . . • . . . , • . • : . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • EnGM4 Corporation- . . . . . . . . . . .. - Price Enterprises,Inc. iI Excel Legacy,Corporation . . Project Humber T1971-GS 1 pAppendix Page 2' i TECHMCAL REFERENCES geologic structure in the southern Y 1965, Relationship between seismicity and gv. of55iC 4, p.structure til Californiaen, CR., andregion: others, ical Society Bulletin 170.1• on: Bulletin of the Seismological of southern California, Cia rDg 1954, Geology 1969, Geologic map of California, San Bernardino Sheet, 3.2Caifornia Division of Mines and Ge log California Division of Mines and GeologyCalifornia, Scale 1:250,000. map of the Santa Ana 1:100,000 Quadrangle, Department of Conservation, Geology • Oen Ale Report 91-17. 4. faults in eastern San Division of Mines and Geology P geologic map of San Andreas and e lain in T.W ins an70, Regional Oen-File Map, 5 Dibblee, U.S.Geologic Society, P le California: California Division of Mines 0. Gabriel Mountains and vicinity: Lake Elsinore Quadrangle,6. Engel, R., 1959, Geology of the Bulletin 146. and safety elements, TectlNrxl report for County of and Geology Seismic safety Corporation, 1976, 7• Envicom Corp Riverside Planning Department hazard zones in California: California Division of Mines and Geology Hep E.W-, 1992, Fault-rupture S Special Publication 42, 9 p. ion, 1 8. Department J. .,Conservation,CRP J M Seismicity of the southern California reg ' C.R. and Nordquist, 1973, California Institute of Technology.9. Hanan, J.A-, Allen, December 1972:Seismological Laboratory, 1970, Chap.4. January 1932 .. 31 Engineering,Weigel. R. L. (ed.), Prentice Hall, Inc.. Earthquake Eng thermal springs and 10. Henning, G.W. 1969, locations of volcanoes, 1. 1975, Fault map of California with Geologic Data Map N°- 11. Jennings, C•W• geologic thermal wells, 1:750,000:Californiaiifomia Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic scale taand g 12. Jennings, C.W., 1985, An explanatory text to accompany Bulletin .00 1 cp.,2 plates. r of faulting along the Elsinore fault zone in southern maps df Caiifomia: Cal"ReCe Division ofch Mines and Geology• in eciai Report 131, 12 e 1 M.P.. , CRecency ad Dade 13. Kennedy, California:aCaliforniaiia Division of Mines and Geology, p Major Faults Riverside County, uake Recurrence interval on plate, scale 124,000. R J. 1973, Earthq Seismicity & Environmental D.L, California,P.M.nand Proctor,, Douet al, 1973, Geology, • 14. Lamar, in Moran, Douglas E., in Southern cilo oEngineering Geology, Special Publication. Engineering ImpactAssociation of Eng Association of Eng Leeds, D.J., 1973, Geology, Seismicity & Environmental Impact 15. Caiifomia: State of Geology, Special Publication. of a portion of the Elsinore fault zone, October 1955, Geology Elsinore al Report 43. 16. Cann, J.F., Jp, Division of Mines, p Riverside County California.ersde Department nf Natural Department ce June 1982 (Revised December 1983), i Drainage Plan, a Riverside County Planning Department 17. Comprehensive General Plan-Dam Inundation Areas- 100 Year Flood Plains-Are Comp Comprehensive General Scale 1 Inch=2 Miles. 1983, Riverside County Riverside County Planning Department, January 2 Miles. 18. Scale 1 Inch= Maps, Murrieta Rancho Pliven-County Seismic Hazards Map, 1983, Seismic-Geologic11-8 and Sheet Sheet 854E (Revised 19. CalifornialiC reaty SheetPlanning 146, Sheet t February ComiArea, Sheet 147 (Revised 11-87), 854A(revised 11-87)• Scale 1" = 800'. EnGE`t Corporation i Price Enterprises.Inc. Excel Legacy.carporatton Prof Number.T1971-GS Appendix Page 3, !. I. TECHNICAL REFERENCES CONTINUED Santa Ana Sheet CDMG. of California, Olaf P. Jenkins Edition, Untied Rogers,T.H.. Geologic Map ons in rock for earthquakes in the western Rch 1966, inswing Research 20. H,g;, 1972, Accelerations le Earthquake Eng and Seed, University of California, Berkeley,21. Schnabel, P.B. Engineering,States: College of Eng uefaction poterltiaL- Report No. EERC 72-2 procedure for evaluating soil Ilq Center, A simplified P Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1970, Berkeley. wakes: 22. of Engineering, University of California, liquefaction during earthquakes: CollegeEngineering Monographsarthak on l.M., 1982, Ground motions and sod Ilq 23. Seed, H.B. and Idriing Research Institute,Volume 5 of a Series Titled Eng Earthquake Criteria, tr Design and Strong Motion Records- le, Revised Official Earthquake Criteria, Structural Elsinore Quadrangle,24. State of California, January 1, 1980, Special Studies Zones, Map, Scale 1"=2 Mi. Resources, Water Wells and Springs in the Western Pad of of Water Bulletin No. 91-21. 25. theetU ofp California Department River Watershed. Upper Santa Marg 199? Edition. 26. Uniform Building Code (UBC), . , • EnGEN Corporation Price Enb;� l c- Excel Legacy. Project Number.T1971-GS . Appendbc Page 5 i LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 1 EnGEN Corporation . ,,,. CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT i. - .. 111111010MINNISE \ - . :5.0011111111111111111111111111 ll1 jji?iI(lII ': : f: �i � ,5.OU 1. _.: 7111111111111111111111111 1110111110111111110111::,Y.: Applied Pressure-ksf �, StueO . e Or/Dams. ©�� (!�) 0.13 -- - ..l . : igrairern 1.30• MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS MHT' �`8 S SANDY SILT,BROWN NIL Remark' SANIPLEBSQ 10 Clte+� P12ICEpg1SES COI LEL IID BY CZvI �{No. T197 S cOLLECTEDt,E,785ON(311100) IProject REDIiAWR TOWN CENT • Sample No.:B50 10 .. , . - u . • ''.Source:CONSOLS BIIt��faj Orrd��erait Plate BRgtn6g►;r1g tY 161111111110 OHSOLIOPT�M TEST 1P�QT - scsmseassion costemosons itoommaiso izsgamottasso itestassastonso nismosemosa . 21111111111111111111 prlenstila 0;:nin#IPLigisma mATERve.— uscs ma; sANDy siLT,DARK-BROWN ML Project No. T1971-GS Client PRICE ENTERPRLSES Remarks. Project w... EA -..r CENTER Envis;—"P: W � ..v�+v w CONSOLIDATION *EST aePoal as3finis • 111111011111111101 ma ,\ .' - 111111111111111111111111 1111111111110111111 ''.. 11111111111111111111 -i:,.• 111111111111111100 -':._. 11111111111iiiiiiiiing ' ti: 11111111111111111011 ' • • . 11111111111111111111 :- . 1111111111111111111 a,mw�vAAS*4 _._:.: •.: anCpHSOL1D/�11ONTEST PEPoftT Dlea 001111101111111 /1100011tErMalal 5 11111100100010 11101010111111110 1111110110101.11 " 2100110101111011 Apo&led '� �rrr DESCRIPTION � v CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT -230 amarnitteppasa ,iimommimr;iiipoirtan itallmilmmalltoink in iltimummitimintaile • . , •• � taao is.m insimitimasittaile 17-so mmimitimmmanat zo.m 111111111111111111111 5 iC z2so 1 5 Applied Pressure-kM z 11 SweO Press. Svrell eC • °PI ©n® Ovetk en ®m--_ 0.6 . :.. m®Jm■n®w® uscsPAS HT° MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ML SANDY saT(W/CLAY).BROWN Remarks:PRICE USES SAMPLE B13@20 • Project No. T1971 GS COLLECTED BY ClvL l project: R DHAWKTOWN CENTER AMPLE ON CSlIl00) Sample No.:B13 C 20 Source:CONSOLS EnVirefilnenAlj and tical Engineering Heanor Corporation plate MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT ISIMOSUMMISMINSMINIMMI F OSOSSOUSOOSOMMOSSMOSUOMMIS lir111sii�,�����4on s 111101122 ,2.��Mniiiiiv!�ni����n����en OnvSMWASSOMM SOnOSnnU��;SOS OSSUSOOMMOSSMOSSOMMM SOSUSUitflOMOOSOMMOVISMISMOUSOMEMOUSSOMO n��� ISOMMOSSOMWOOMMUS m .■■�■•M ■:■■ �a,■■� MASSUSU z MOWNrMOUSS�i0 n����yin SS 120:ii..n■n•■■n OSSUROMOSS��MMISiiiiiiiiiiiNn „ vMv� im1i INIUMISOMMOMM 8 � nSI �■ ■■..: � HISH� ■.■11uu.11111111■■01SZAV ft Sp.G- ■un 245 ��:i■.0 6.��� 8.0 9.5 11.0 ISS 116 n 5.0 12.6 Water content, % 3.5 A31MD 1557-91 Pmt AModi © No S Test specification: �� ��` USCS catmn Isis �� MI RM lla INIONS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND,BROWN Maximum dry density— 1222 pd Optimum moisture=8.4'x° Rem: PRICE ENTERPRISES Remark 0-5 Proje�No. T1971-GS Ghent COLLECTED BY C M. Project REDHAf TOWN CIS COLLECTED ON(3 ��ple No.:BlC 0-5 :� Source: mettCj�S ""'"_' Plate �� Engineering Network Ccaporation i i MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT ,27/v�/ v/11/�///�/ ■n■// 1111111111111 'i 11111//111111///1111n 11101 i///1111//v��v ,25 mov� 1��vv�►� 1Siiio nnvrn/i/MiiMte/nv// I 111ii11vvvvn11vn 1 �� 1 / 123vv1v/vSP= � ��n/11 amriIIIIlPit# w111■111111 /11�vv!41111111/11nv/a/vvv/ 1111/114nv/n/// 0/"/111/11/ 11111111111111111111111101111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111110111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 '19 11111111111101111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111Unnan 1111111111111111111111111111111111S0111111111111111111111S ��„v����v/258 i�v/!!��iii�n!//,�,!�/,��/n I. 1,7/./ 8 8 4 Water content, 94 D 1557-91 Pte°AMOK ©� '/o< - Test specification: ASTM �� No2� :el levl « pgSHTO De I C MNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ON MATERIAL DESCRIPTI } SILTY SAND,DARK-BROWN Maxiimma dry density=1232 pd Optimum moisture= 10.4% Remarks: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES emarkSAMPLE: 0-7.5 Project No- T1971 GS COLLECTED BY C.M. Protect RES/HAWK TOWN CENTER COLLECTED ON(v29/00) Sample No.:B3G 0-7.5 e .� an4G Puts I - _. Engineering Network Corporation 1 MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT ', ,36 ■■■n 111101111111111111111111111110111111111U1 1 111S11111111111111111 1 32 nanamismunnamommusinummi v-�vin1111111111n 11111111111111S1111111111i1.�n emi�i in nsv111 """■N.ii nn 1151 ,28 r,Jrsrzmrsiiaiva NIIIIIIIIIN IM111111111111111 1I'. 1111111111111111111S1111111111111111111111110101111111111111111111111111 cl 24 .■..■■■■n■.n■ 1111111111111111111111v111111111111111iieii�i►iivi� ��1111�1111�n11���n� m X11111111 Sallall 120■w•�■•:i--i_ AIMM ■I •' NI v.��nv� .������■����:��nn����.,�ZAV fog 1111 ■�■■�nv■■� ■.��'2 65 = �WM���/�uan�v0 v��n�► 116■■■nv■.■ 10 4 6 8 Water content, % Test specification: ASTK D 1557-91 Prod A Modified �� a mrliscs �To ��© Noc l_ev/ 7.0 -a NUsm 11S1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION S1LTY F1NE-S .BROWN Maximumdry density= 127.7 pd Optimum moisture=9.7% project No. T1971-GS Remarks: Client: PRICEpRISES SAMPLE'BSQ 0-5 COLLECTED BY CM Project:REDHAWK TOWN CENTER COLLECTED ON(3/1/00) • Source: „ Sample No.:B5 0-5 i' hrtlrtrl I Engineering 5 VOA Corporaitots Plate . MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT I MIS1111101111111S 1 1 121 IIIIIISIIIISI 1 1Inn 119 1 �■1■,r,�„-"'.—__moi Ta . Wiggallunella. -0 ania1111101 z. 1.11.11111 I 117 __ r �-�_ S 115 ___ �_ ISINK 111111111 Sala ZAV for ISSISSA Sp.G._ 235 113 6 10 12 14 16 4 Water content, % Test specification: AS1MD 1557-91 Pioced=A Modified Bev/ Classification Nat. Sp.G. LL PI Depth No.4 No200 USCS AASHTO Moist SP 43 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TEST RESULTS FINE-SAND,BROWN Maximum dry density= 119.3 pcf Optimum moisture= 10.1 Remarks: project No. T1971-GS Client PRICE ENTERPRISES SAMPLE 137Ca10 5 .. Project RIDHAWg TOWN CENTER COI r PCIED BY CM COLLECTED ON(3/1/00) Sample No.:B7[r• 0-5 Environmental and Engineering Network Corporation Plate MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT 121 I — - . I I 1 I 1 i I • , - . _ II I I I I I , I - III I I 117 , ..a; .. . . . , ..„ I 115 . . 113 . . 1 I I I i .. . . ZAV for t. i Sp.G. = 111 I I I I I 2.6 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 Water content, % Test specification: ASIMD 1557-91 Procedure AModified Bev/ Classification Nat. %> %< Depth USCS AASKTO Moist. Sp.G. U. PI No200 SM/ML 8.4 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION sari FINE-SAND,BROWN 3437cimuni dry density------ 117.5 pcf Optimum moisture= 119 % Project No. T1971-GS Client PRICE ENTERPRISES Remarks: Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER SAMPLE B8@ 0-5 COLLECTED BY CM • Source: Sample No.:B8®0-5 COLLECTED ON(3/1100) 1 NMI Environmental and Gaitedmical Engnmering Network Corporation 1 Plate „ally i li , MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT =1 =n��1 //n/ , 125111n.-=n/■�,- 1iii�u/: `' n101n� e►�niiiv11 4$iIItiIh91uI n! 1ov`��mii /ice■oma i1iuuiml1 t1r41'IPJ1IIII//// �/�/////////����W�� /p///�/ ��//�II �.��/�./�■■■/n //.■�/•2.73 120 11111111111111111111111110 /■■.■■■//■/■:u■■.■■� n�1nn�n11���/ ' 14!//x/ 1111111111111111 //n/ O��u 11.0 12.5 M■n� 15.5 118 n� 8.0 9.5 Water content, % 6.5 D 1557-91 P °A M S ©� %< Test sPeafic�°n: ASTM ®�© No.21 - isms a t: USCS HTO ®�- Sirs llall MApL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAPID,BROWN Maximum dry density= 124.1 pd OPtiraum moisture=10.8 % ENTERPRISES Remarks. Client PRICE SAMPLE B11@0-75 Project No- T1971-GS COLLECTED BON �) Project RIDES TOWN CENTJ� COLLECTEDSample No.:an t 0 7.5 � = and Plate _. EngineeringNetwork Corporation MOISTURE - DENSITY TEST REPORT ,25 pQ■111111111111■n■111111111111 v■■ 11111111111 ■■ 1 nni■IIII1 ■,ivim ,N,■■■n■■1■e1u■n�v■ ■■■■■ 123 1 ■:n1 ■■■nn:■.u;: ■■•■: ■■■■■■■■■ 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 �111111■v■■■■;!�;.■■■■■■ 1111111101111111 ■o,■■��n ;121 111■■■ri■■■►■■■iii■niii� ■■■■■■■■/'a■■■■■■■■■■■■►- 1111311111111111 z , 9■■■■■S■■■■■i■v■■■■■■■101.°0�■ 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111101111111 ■■„1111■n 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111101111 ■1111 ■■n■ • „7■■■vf■■�■■■■■■■■■■vim�iun �� 1111111111111111111111111111111 ■■■■■■�■ ■��■■■�■v��a■a■■■ n■■■■.•■■255 ■■■■■■•�■■.0 .■■■—.5 13.0 14.5 115 n■�� 6 5 Water content % 5.5 D 1557-91 Pruc�A MOd ©� %< Test specification: ASTM ® � No.2t E,evl°A �1 pps}(TO........seloomaismos MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAND,BROWN Maximum dry density— 120.7 pcf Opt10_1 % Remarks: rOled N . T19 1- = ES SAMPLE Bt7(a)as Project No. T1971-GS Client PRICE BY CM COLLECTED 0 (3/7J00) Project REDHAWRTOWNCENTER COLLECTED Sample No.:B G 0-5 Source: �l and Gazdadmic.al I Plate Engineering NODS Co/Qos 1 i j MOISTURE DENSITY TEST REPORT p■■■■O��■MOONSO ■■n ,�■■■■� �rr■■rrn■ mommommon ■ omm mummo sm ■■■ o n■■rr■■r■■■■��w sam ommomms �■■rn ■�mn� ■ 127 r■ rn■m■ ■■■vi■n�n mnvmon wvn.� uvni n o■'�°iiviirr■rm■■ oomm ; n■■■■Wro��r■■rrrrr�mommemommassommommam , t125 rr■rrrrr■ ■■■■■■s►,■■■■ i r■■rrrv■■ ■■rr rr■rr■■■■■�,■■■■■■�r■mr►�rn semms ,,rrnv 0 ,23r1nrrr■v rgtiiip:artaPiiiiEii • i■ 121 1■v■■■ n■■■■■■�■■�iiiriiII%IFt ISI12.5 1111 .06.5 ILO Owater iGetR % 9.5 3.5 ASIMD 1557-91 Pro ' A Modified % Test specification: .../.;EleVI ClaSSfficatioa gpS}1TO 011111111111111113111 DeP� �� assains 1111.11111.111111 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND,BROWN m�drYgty= 126.2 pd Optimum moisture=8.5 % Remarks: Project Pio. T1971 GS Client PRICE ENTERPRISES SAMPLE 5 COLLECTEDBY 0 C M Project �gAWI{TOWN Ca COLLECTED ON(3!1/00) SamP1e No.:B15 0-5 Source: ISIS��andGoiania PiatE Engineeringal rk Corporation i a . t. UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results 3/17/00 . I Job Number: T1971-GS Job Name: REDHAWKTOWN C arrIER L � 79 Location: R HAWK PKWY'-HWY Sample Source: B3@ 0-7.5 Sampled by: C.M. (3/1/00) Lab Technician: J.T.O. Sample Descr. SILTY SAND, DARK-BROWN ded WL: 620.4 Dial Chan Tune R Wet Wt.:CormWA 10:30 196.4 Reading 1� 0.100 NetiWet 0.100 11:00 424.0 Reading 2: WL: 0.102.. 0.002 ' 11:15 215.2128.0 Reading 3: Wet Density. 0.001 7-Mar Readin• 4: 0.101 Wet Soil: 196.4 Dry Soil: Initial Moisture (%) 9.6%116.9 Initial Dry Density: % Saturation: 58.5% Anal WL &Ring &: 647.0 45 . Net Anal WL: 6 387.0006 2 Dry WL. Expansion Index 63.6 Loss: 5.5 383.4 Adjusted Index Net Dry DWL:ensity: 115.8 (ASTMdjUD Index: Satonai Density 16.6% 0.12) Saturated Moisture: • EnGEN Corporation 41607 Enterprise Circle North Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 6763095 Fax: (909) 6763294 f 3/17/00 t EXpansion Test Results UBC LaboratoryI Job Number: T1971-GS I Job Name: �HgyyKTOWN CENTER Location: REDHAWK PKWY -HWY 79 sample Source: B8c 0-5 Sampled by: C.M. (3/1/00) Lab Technician: R.W.art FINE-SAND, BROWN Sample Descr 591 Dial Chan•e Time Wet Compacted2:45 Wt 191.8 Reading 1 0'100 N/A 3:00 Ring Wt= 3992 1: 0.109 0.009 Reading 0.017 3:15 Net Wet WL: 120.6 3: 0.117 Reading0.01725 3:15 9-Mar Wet Density: 187.4 Wet Soil:: Readin• 4: 0.125 168.2 I Dry Soil: 11.4% Initial Moisture ("%): 1082 \. Initial Dry Density. % Saturation: 55.3% 8 Ring Wt.: 620.9 , Final Wt 429.1 1' Net Final WL: 358.3 Expansion Index 25 Dry Wt.: 70.8 Loss: Index: 27.9 353.6 Adjusted Net pry Density: 106.8 IgSTM D In ex: Sato Density= 20.0% 0.12) Saturated Moisture: EnGEN Corporation 41607 Enterprise Circle North Temecula, CA 92590 (909)676-3095 Fax: (909) 6764294 II 1 f 3/17/00 1. UBC LaboratnrYpansion Test Results 1 Job Number. T1971-GS 1.t Job Name: REDHAWKTOWN CENTER Location: REDHAWK PKWY. -HWY•79 Sample Source: 6110 0-7.5 Sampled by: C.M. ( 00) Lab Technician: J.T.O. Sample Descr: SILTY SAND, BROWN Compacted Wt: 615.7 Dial Chan•e TOW Wet Comp N/A 2:15 191.8 Readin9l= 0.100 Ring Wt.: 423.9 2 0.100098 5 Net Wet sit: Reading 2:45 239-3 Reading 3: 0.100 0.000 Wet Density: 0.100 0.000 7-Mar 239-3 Readin• 4: Wet Soil: 217.8 Dry Soil: Initial Moisture9.9% c ): 116.5 1 Initial Dry Density- 116.5 % Saturation: & Ring Wt: 6392 Anal Wt 447.4 Net Final WL: 78 0 • Dry Wt : Expansion Index 61.6 Loss: 3821 Adjusted Index: 4.0 Net Dry Wt: 115.4 Final Density: (ASTM D 4829 10.'12) Saturated Moisture: 16.1% EnGEN Corporation 41607 Enterprise Circle North Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 676-3095 Fax: (909) 676-3294 i i 3117100 UBC Laboratory Expansion Test Results Job Number: 71971-GS • Job Name= REDHAIIVK TOWN CENTER Location: REDHAWK PKWY.-HWY 79 Sample Source: 812@ Sampled by: C.M. (3I7J00) Lab Technician: D.BROWN Sample Descr Dial Chan• Time Compacted WL: 607 2:00 RingWeWI: 198.4 0.100 N/A Reading 1: 0.000 Z'15 `�-= 410.6 0.100 Reading 2: 0.000 :15 Net Wet WL: 124.0 3: 0.100 Reading -0.001 :30r Wet Density 2 6 Readi . 4: 0.099 Wet Soil: 206.6 Dry Soil: 9.2% Initial More Q%) ', Initial Dr/Density 51.3%113.6 % Saturation: 2 Final Wt- &Ring WL: 624. . 427 8 0 'i Net Fnat WL: 376 0 Expansion Index: Dry WL: 51.8 Loss: 372.8 Adjusted Index: U.S Net Dry Density: - 112.6 (ASTM D Fi Satulrated Density: 13.9% 1.2) gaturated MoishiR: EnGEN Corporation 41607 Enterprise Circle North Temecula,CA 92590 (909)676-3095 Fax: (909) 6763294 i ginallass 1/4 3000 ® �MIS �� O C. Psf 16D ���� ®IHMISIMMINIn AA= i IMMOIOINOMMI TAN 0 .72 /�nallialaler���® .• a. 2000nerlinlianillinannalliMPII TAS iall nallitniMIN . ®® 0 MISIIlarra;SMII tii ca INSIIIIIISSIOnnitalrate= allar &PIIMPAlleigiSralliSili u.1 ® 1000 -1 NMI Lt- MSS WWI ® �11111 miss®®0® 500® 6000 0 mmemin 1000 2000 3000 40 0 Normal Stress , psf 1 2 3 �p SAMPLE NO. :. 11 .8 11 .8 11 .8 3000 ® pig sassa�� DRY DENSITY: pcf111 .5 111 .5 111 .5 61 .261 .2IwAT0T, SATURATION, % .2 61 .2 61 .20.528 .528 VOTD RATIO 2.42 2.42 2.42 a 2000 DIAMETER. in 1 .00 1 .00 HEIGHT. in .00 1 .00 0.0 % ®� �r WATER 0 1500 1�s_ DRY DENSCONTENT, ITY Tpaf 111.5 111 .5 111 .5 uta® SATURATION. % 0.528 0.528 0.528 ��w VOID RATIO Id 1000 ' 2.42 2.42 2.42 . l ��® DIAMETER. in 1 .00 1 .00 N I®_� HEIGHT.sasiman in 1 .00 1000 2000 3000 500 ,'�®��. NORMAL STRESS, psfsf 871 1633 2318 swam �� FAILURE CE EN P 0. 18 0.19 0.25 WIMWMI DISPLACEMENT. in 0 .2 O'4 TE STRESS. psf a 0:3 ULTIMA • 0 . 1 I in DISPLACEMENT, in 2.�0 Horiz . Disp 2.0000 2.0000 Strain rate. in/min CLIENT: PRICE ENTERPRISES SAMPLE TYPE: SAND BROWN WK TOWN CENTER DESCRIPTION: SILTY PROJECT: REDHA SPECIFIC GRAVITY= 2.73 SAMPLE LOCATION: RmHAWK PKWY- - HWY 79 DATE: 3/7/00 REMARKS: SAMPLE 811® 0-7 .5 pROJ . NO. : T1971 GS COLLECTED BY C.M . (3/2/00). DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT EnGEN Corporation ate . No . : - -- I 3000 11"11111111111111r1111SnrairinfaMMICISIMISI SO SignijaWriaggraMirinarjrn= InteasrainajnalalimeallarageaMISS i .... TAN r smeassissants. a SIS$ IONS9 .75 Mali Anwairessissansslimissima giligardwararera, ,Ltt:i20°0 ,...00mo__,=nfi=rsaw,rtaild-aa.t.rilPiitina-aaamlaIleuV.mlsIliOSIS:l,.a I_ isnIS...mInI SIS.aWmISraaaw rosmeSanS = o =t, .i Sill ASSiliSSajlaininarrjlanaliSillinill 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Normal Stress , psf 3000 IIIIIMMIMMIIIMMInin. SAMPLE NO. : 1 2 3 0111111111SSIIISSISIS , SallillinillianlinginiWATER CONTENT, 7. 11 .4 11 .4 11 .4 INSIIISMIISIISSO IIISMININIIIISSIBISMI 2500 IIISISSInnarilia DRY DENS/TY, pcf 110.8 110.8 110.8 ISINSra SATURATION, % 64.7 64.7 64.7 ... inairalfralral e ISSISINSISSI °- 2000 airunimAa=urimal VOID RATIO 0.454 0.454 0.454 DIAMETER. in 2.42 2.42 2.42 e ISISSISIBIllal m InESSall~sinj HEIGHT , in 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 (SI) 1500 Wone4allitias SMII WATER CONTENT, % 0.0 0.0 0.0 SS "gin DRY DENSITY, pcf 110.8 110 .8 110 .8 L. ISM • a new., fifiarmantan SATURATION, % 0.0 0 .0 0.0 Q 11,4Wy wilimiseinarm .0 KAMMOrmalaWME VOID RATIO 0.454 0 .454 0 .454 U) paras.4111/111UNIMenial= OMAMETER, in 2.42 2_42 2.42 500 IrWananianni lassinanumammomma HEIGHT, in 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 ilMISIBUSISMISSII NORMAL STRESS, psf 1000 2000 3000 Sananalla naaltalltIOUSISI FAILURE STRESS, psf 890 1614 2387 0 DISPLACEMENT, in 0.14 0.14 0.19 9 9. 1 9.2 9.3 9.4 ULTIMATE STRESS, Pat DISPLACEMENT, in Horiz. Displ . , in Strain rate, in/min Lamm z.000e 2.00oo SAMPLE TYPE: CLIENT: PRICE ENTERPRISES DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND , DARK-BROWN PROJECT: REDHAWK TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC GRAVITY= 2.58 SAMPLE LOCATION. REDHAWK PKWY. - HWY 79 REMARKS: SAMPLE 830 0-7 .5 COLLECTED BY C.M. (3/1/00) PROJ . NO. : T1971-0S DATE: 3/7/00 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT EnGEN Corporation FIQ . No. : f i R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 m a -.. f 40 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 O Exudation Pressure - Ps ' pressure - ASTM 0 2844 Value and Expansion R Resistance R- Sample Exud • R Horizontal Valu Expansion Same Height Pressure Value Compact . Moist . Press. psiCorr Density pressure 0 psi in. psi i _ Pressure % ® 16�® 63 psi PVII 350 n 10. 1 !e 39 Wan 11 350 10. 6 0 .52 ® _ v200 --- -- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND, BROWN R_Value 0 300 psi exudation pressure = 48 I Tested by : J .T.O. T19h1-GS I Checked by: Project No. : Remarks: Project: REDHAWK TOWN CENTER SAMPLE R-2 Location: REDHAWK PKWY. - HWY 79 COLLECTED BY C.M. . . I COLLECTED ON (3/2/00) I ' Date` 3-17-1900 R-VALUE TEST REPORT Fig, No. Environmental and Geotec!kaon Eng i rr i ng Network Corpo Particle Size Distribution Report !. s s e s UMIlIMUhIlI•,� I. r �� ' uiuhI*k*i11 IIIIIIII/III� 1flIl1U11 ec /111111 1 , IIIIIIII ; muRMuR roiiiIflhIIflI\ WMLI cc Iwo i*kII1111/I ... . 1 �111/11111'� I,iin��� , ' nitaiuilyalihli • Illll ik/IIID i' ' ' : '1111111/ / La-i �� 3uulIIflhIthl inhlauMl1 /IIIU111 anamma 111 ; � uiiihlRt%Mihl ' II1 ; ; ', 111/ jhlIIIIfll; ; niulaIJil ' � 1111111/11111tuIllIlMill� � 111 ; ; �/ ; ; 1111111 IIIn111/IIIII 0.�, ani/Illltl� x111111/1 _mm Q1 �� GRAIN SIZE XSAND licrillil era - saa�= SPECMew BROWN SIEVE PERCENTSILTY SAND, sIE FINER PERCENT (X=NOl 1 99.8 �ewher0 916 ��LaniM #16 93.5 PLp= LL= PI= 413 #200 0' 1 5= 56.2 0241 D #100 343 D 0.700 DC60= D10= _ r Cla--� cation USCS= SM AASI ITO= R� COLLECTED BY CM COLLECTED ON(3/1/(30) Date: 3/10/00 * (no No.: B6 10ification Source of Sample: SIEVES EievlDeate: Sample No.: B6@ 10 Location: Client PRICE RPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL ANDGEOTECHNICAL project REDHAWICTOWNC9i1t Plate 1 ` ENGINEERING NETW ORK CORPORATION . . .. No: T1971-03 t Particle Size Distribution Report s SS : ' 8 100 i i srass st t 90linsit UIMIV%IIV I ' 'II�IIII��IIII mourn k i oohs „ 1 , linumina, . cc IIIIIIUIII' ,a111111i 1 sa mom , „ „ , onson imasimas ti valmn, issava itoutype cii- 4Dinal \ ensing aistung 30 Bella \ 111111111111111110101111111111L. , 2nosmi saima smisti tiiialUIIt70 iisessurassESG. 1 0.1 tun o-cni RAN 512E-mm essinsma SIEVE PERCENT SPEC. PASS? SEE LIGHT-BROWN SILTY SAND, FINER PERCENT PhNOI 98.8 III #8 95.685.9 A_""i'°:a� Vmf� P1= 816 59.9 PL= LL- #30 35.7 050= 0.468 # � 23.9 1 085= 1.14 G60= 0.601 D10= #200 D30= 0.230 015_= Clic Cf CliTO= USCS= SM Re la_ COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/1/00) . • (i cCC fiCe"®provided) Sample : 136@ 15 Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: No. 3/10/00 Location: DePth: Client PRICE N TERFRISES ENVIRONMENTAL.AND GEOTECHNICAL- Protect REDHAnTOWNCENIER Plate 1 . ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION . ..ecoo: T1971-GS particle size Distribution Report Sao w ^ SaIA LI� 5 r � s.' % G C Q =I' a'� s t�iiimillI II , IN I 111111-ii 'III�ILIIII I� ; � �I �II//11111 IIilia lnln I1 Si1��Ii , I ' IIIIIIII11111111 onition tIJIlIlIlII, I, IIMIillIlilli WjIiIII ;I ' 11111/ 11pI : iiitiiIIttIIIjIMIlMID � ' kIIIIIIl. 111I Iluululli11� W ;I ' IIII�illw I IIIIII/1111111/ baIIIIIIII/►II11111I IiiiiuilIR111i� Iol l��►1I ' ' ' IIIII/ ► I Ih�14111111It ton 10 . 0.1 0.01 0. 1 GNImZE m %COBBLES % VEL 0.0 °° Y SOH SIEVE PERCENT SPEC. PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) SAND,TAN SIZE 44 100.0 A P1= #S 99.9 #16 98.1 knits 73.7 PL' Coefficients #100 14.8 7.7 D85= 0.777 60__ DDi eap= 0.0980 #200 0.402 4.82 Co0.277 Di s 1.65 C1 � USCS= SP Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/1!00) Date: 3/10/00 (no specification Pmvid<d) Sample No.: BBQ 20 Source of Sample: SEWS Elev./Depth:ate I,pcation: S - Client PRICE ENTERPRISES k ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Ii Proles Rag1AWKTOWN CINIER I plate j 1 ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION P Mo: T1971 GS I I f: Particle Size Distribution Report s s s g 3 _ i a s e s I I �IIIIIllallllili mann ' 1fluIiL�► , � � � � �uiiiiiIflhhIIl__VIII H I !II 1 ; IIIlihltIIi ; Illillitiall iiiiiiIIlihhIhl_ ro ®ultl ; IuihiiIIUIhk �iuiiiiIlihhhIIl i iiii n limos, i; iihMI_ UhhhIII IIIIIIIIn1111111n 11/nUlll ; hhiii_ lihnlIIpuiM1_ Ihhhamtagoqi30 20 Illnlllllll AI �� : nII111111 � � ialllllnlllll11/� 1111111111111 11111/ �° ; 11111 110111_11111111 illaflilli ,0 Illlll/n1 - 0.1 5m �� GRAIN SIZEan Q�f %sewn X= RAVEL XG min ®® PAss? Soil li SIEVE PASS) SILTY SAND,TAN SIZE #4 99.5 #86 95.9 A �s _ #16 95.1 u,= PI • 050 40 7 PL= #200 16 91385= 0.803 D8Co0effo D10 0.369 D30= 0110. D15= Cu= Cc= . Classification AASHTO= USCS= SM Remarks COLLECTED BY CM ON(3/ COLLECTED 1100) (no sponficffion po°1dai) Dabe: 3/10/00 Location: Sample No.: B6Q 25 Source of Sample: SIEVES EIevJ Ba I Client PRICE ENIERPRLSES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project REDHAWIC.TOWNCENTER \ ENGINEERING NEPNORlCCORPORATION Plate . pro ect No: T1971 GS . particle Size Distribution Report g . s s e s = a c ': $ : :100 ; tt ��I111 i 11 �iiiiiiii main�nnniil ; ; nniinnn NEM 1111111_lilIlit ;11111 II ; ;mul�lnlln80 l annllliill� 1 :iii °', , , ' � 11111Iiil i i i �1111111n111�111 ,1111111 nnlliiin� LL Ilia ► i iimorting 1111111z �II/� /Ililtn1 ,111111nnllllin� ; ,a 111n I1111111_lIlt 11111111_1101111 jiIIIllhIIIlI„ „ � 111n111111111111 I I i111111n1Illlllnt�lill01111 ; �, 11111111 1iiiuiiiIhllhlII!U11111_11111111 ,a111� , , , , IUluiIIlIIlIII il/ IIIII IIIIIIIOIll1111 0. 0.001 sm 203 10 GRAIN SIZE•ErnS - mm %CLAY %COBBLES 0.0 90.4 9.6 0.0 Soil De_____ on SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? FINE-SAND,GREY SiZE FINER PERCENT (X °) #4 100.0 #8 999 • #16 99.6 A__ 1.---i—Inas P1= 430 97.8 #50 4-3 PL= LL= #200 24.6 _ Coe p 0.215 #200 9.6 p 0372 Deo= 0245 ar p3a= 0.164 015= 0.117 0i0= 0.0802 Cu= 3.05 Cc= 1.38 • Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks COLLECTED BY CM COLLECTED ON(3 (no specification provided) Date: 3/10/00,: Sample No.: B6Qa 30 Source of Sample= SIEVES EievJDepth: Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES • ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL 1Project BEDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ect No: T1971--GS Plate Particle Size Distribution Report g s ss _ . : 4 ,oa I I , , I I 1 , I I I 1 1 I I I i I I I , I I I I I I I 1111 ' , 1 1 1 I I i ,-t' ' '' II, 1 I ao I, I I II IIkiln ii , ,, I I I I I 1 70 I I I I I I I I i I ,I I; II I I I 1111 I I I I 1111 1 i � I W e0 I I I I I 1 I I �� I I 1 I Z , I I I I I I I I I I 1 I LL I I 1111 I 11 I Z `'0 I I 11111 I , I I I I I 11.1 I I 11111 I II I I 1 I V I I I 11 11 I ed 1 111 Q. 40 I I I I I " _�' , I I I I ' 1 I 1111 I I I I I I I I I '.30 I I I 1111 I le : I I ,I II I I 1111 1 1 , 11111 I I1 1111 ' 1 111 i: I I I I I IIlkI I I ' , , I I � , 1Is .� 1 III , I 1111 I I I , I 11111 0 0 I 1 100 1 01 0.01 000 GRAIN SIZE-mm %SILT %CLAY X COt3BLE5 X GRAVEL %SAND 2.3 PASS? Soil Description SIEVE PERCENT SPEC. SIZE RNER PERCENT (XXNO) SAND,TAN #4 98.1 #8 80.5 #30. 48.5 A�i P1= #50 24.5 PL= LL= #50 9.5 #100 4.3 Coed 050= 1.22 #200 23 D30=2.69 D 5= 0.410 D10= 0.311 Cu= 4.84 Cc= 1.11 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks COLLECTED BY C.NL COI I RCTED ON(3/1/00) (m specification provided) Date: 3/13/00 Sample No.:n86Q 35 Source of Sample: SIEVES EIeVJDDate: Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL p . RIDgp V1RTOWN CENTER i _ ENGINEERING N 'RK CORPORAl10N Plate GS Pro ed No: T1971 Particle Size Distribution Report S Ill m n C S S t - dal i g al 9 c S = 100 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I 90 I� III J rul CC ill I I W w { Z I I ti 1 i- u Z 50 I 1 I W I I I IY I I w . a i 1 30 i 20 ° K . II I I 01. 500 1I 10 1 0.1 0.01 acw GRAIN SIZE-mm %GOBBLES %GRAVEL %SANO %SILT %CLAY 0.0 0.0 90.7 9.3 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? Soil Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) FINE-SAND,TAN #4 100.0 #8 99.7 #16 98.2 #30 923 Atterbera Limits 450 662 PL= LL= P1= #100 26.0 #200 9.3 Coefficients D85= 0.457. D60= 0270 D50= 0.229 D30= 0.163 015= 0.106 D10= 0.0788 C.r 3.42 ' Cc= 125 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/2/00) (m spo t ::an pmvidcd) Sample No.: B11@10 Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: 3/15/00 . Location: . Elev./Depth: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES • ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project REDHAWKTOWN CENIER • ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Project No: T1971 GS Plate Particle Size Distribution Report E. E. . s a 53 I 2 a s a : c 1 _. 103 I I I L I I IITI I 80 1-- ► a. 70 _ — I I OC I I 2 EC r w w . U 0: W 40 - 4 . 0. iI I . _. . 20 Iii . I _ I I I 1 1 500 100 10 1 0.1 j 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE- mm %COBBLES %GRAVEL %SAND %SILT %CLAY 45.1 53.9 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? Soil Description SEE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) SANDY SILT,BROWN #4 99.0 #8 952 #16 863 #30 733 733 Atterbera Limits .... #100 60.3 PL LL= PI #200 53.9 Coefficients D85= L10 060= 0.143 050= 030= . 015= D10= .. Cu= c= Classification USCS= ML AASMTO= Remarks COLLELLe )BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3!1/00) ' (no specification provided) Sample No.: B11® 15 Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: 3/15/00 Location: Elev./Depth: ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Client PRICE ENTERPRISES I Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Project No: TI971 GS Plate it Particle Size Distribution Report s srs 2Q 2 m s e = s iaahlflIMII ,� �, 1iII$S' 1/X1111Ilua/A1111�v 9°1111111111111 i t, i IWIIIIIIIII� 1111/�Ia311W ' , ; � tutu / '111111/'AIIII/!/ IIIIIII■Iliilil/A IIIIIMM11�11/■Illlti��, ; ,W I, „nutiiIIIIIIt11/�IIIIIlimigibus 0. stult ;i 11/�IIIIIII/, allllll//IIII II m a, X�Y 1W_ aSMSAflhI i 1111 GRAIN SIZE m 0.0 0.0 PERCENT SPEC• PPSS? FINE-SAND,GREY FINER PERCENT G1ANO) 199.0 5 t rtnits #4 ' 99.5 A Pt= #16 97.63Pt= 62.1 Com 050' 0253 #100 15.8 per= 0.460 p65 0.145 DfO= 0.123 6.5 #200 p30a .36 Ce 1.02. C1 2.36 ATO= USCS= SP AAS Remarks COLLECTED BY CM COLLECTED ON(312100) Date: 3/15!00 1m No.: c: 131 ®20 Source of Sample: SIEVES Eiev./Depth: Sample No'" Bll(a320 Location:. I Client: PRICE ENTERPRISES RIDHAWKTOWN CENTER E1�NIRONMEMAI-AND GEOTECHNICAL Prof Plate RPORATION • No: T19T1 GS ENGINEERING NETWORK P i rar,ti:lle Size Distribution Report s = _ m s s r IU�1/�IUIm11/ I I, IIID . I I I 100 a � 11 � inillIllihIll 1 :aii'iiii 111 i jIIIIlllIIft ; 111111111wil Ilnn �Ill111111 , , :1111 �lv ll LL jIIiIIIIJ1` iiiiIRUt i 'It'I,. ' wi�� ns liiLa.IIIUMIIII �. losso ', �IIIt�1��IIlijIIL1%11II " ' � ‘ '� � it�lyI� ' ' gun �,,� Idly J1IIIIUI ps � � III����1nit'I,.III #anm� ; ; � ' .��1���nsh 0.�, o�,�lli ' ItlIJIMmm 0.1 x�Y 10 GRAIN SIZE • xsallo x- soil Soil PAsS? ® PERCENT PERCENTSPECGONG FINER p(eN0) SILTY SAND,GREY 44 N 98.6 94.1 � pp #{15 8 430 64. PL= LL its Coeffi—�nls D 4100 19.0 D89= 131 050= 0 111 p10=0403 X200 0.524 D30= 0233 D15= Cu' o Classification USCS= SM AASHTO= Remi COLLECTED BY CM COLLECTED ON(3/2100) Date: 3/IS/00 (no Ctopprovided) Source of Sample: SIEVES EfevJDea�: Sample No.: Bll(a3?s Location: ES ANDGEOTECHNIC Client PRICE EIS /IRONMENTALAL i Proiec REDHAfTOWNCENTER IENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION I pro eot No: T1971-GS Plate • Particle Size Distribution Report I Pa g - 1 = " s 9 S tutLAt4Ii(I 11: jIO1; 111 11■�, iiU 1� nU ; 11111�lU11'1■ Z w 11 '111111�sams 1 1 �11�■IIIIIII j1 ; � �� atisjimansw 1111111/ 1wd11/■IIIIIIIj imam 1. 1 'IIIIIIII�III �' ■pl�llli111 , ;30 asian'. t . 11/�1111111illl111�11111111�\ ■$1_alas �u11111 Di:.,.. ,,,.. . ,o GRAIN S17mm ermassorto ,,•.. ,:. Sod�— SPEC: PASS? cri "cm PERCENT SAND,LIGET-BROWN SIEVE • PERCENT PERCENT (X=.801SLi:E #4 97.9 8.8 864-2 6.0 A Fir..#16 42.6 PL' #30 7A9 050= 0.756 1 0. 9 q ients D85_ 2.27 D60= 1-04 010= 0.159 2 p 5-2D303 0.410 _ C15 tel 8 Cu= 6.51 e -j{Tp= USCS= SP Remarks_ COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/2/00) Date: 3/15!00 (n°— �vldc� Source of Sample: SIEVES ElevJDeP� Sample No= B11@ 30 Location: PRICE ENT�RBES P VIKTOWN CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project REDHA 1 -.,. ,mcvmNG NE Plate RATION .ect No: T1971-GS I particle Size Distribution Report 'I. A S 5 e c i;_: 100 I \ i leI IS!I I i I a lI l l XI ! 'I Z E ,�i•:i I ' II I \I I I I I I I II I I , 1 I, I ; I I li ' ! I I . ea IIII .1 IIIi l I111111 t I I Ii III : ,l;; I ; NI;IIII ! , 11 ; i I I I ,III , I III I I I ' I , ®UM 74 \ I , I • , 1II I ' I III ! I \\I ;L ! ' M / , I 64Z ! ! ` 11I; II � , I I• I UanglalUhhllI i a ®® � IIISM IS. � I ! 30�I� 1 I Ii ism I ®sIoIs Z4AAI I 1 4Ii I � � ! lasse � iI : i I , Ir , I um o 100 10 0.1 0.001 SCO GRAVEL GRAN%salvo-mm INISEISIMIOSEIS 5-260,51-1 SIEVE PERCETI SPEC. PASS? SoDe SIZE FINER PERCENT ( 110) GRAVELY SAND.BROWN 44 89.7 IIII #S 62 6 Ate—�m� P1= #I6 37.0 02 PL_ er s #30#50 1$.4 _ #100 Coeffi 164 055= 3.02 p6 _ 0.242 0�p= 0.146 46 030= 53 Cc= 1.46 Cu- 753 C1ass�HTO= USCS= SP Remarks COLLECTED BY CM COLLECTED ON(328100) Date: 3/30/00 - (nospecifleationprovided) le: SIEVES EIevJDepth: Sampla ion: BI6(a3 40 Source of Sample: Location: RPRISES Client PRICE ENTERPRISES Project REDHAfl TOWN CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Plate ENGINEERING NETNORK CORPORATION Pro ect No: T1971-GS I 1 Particle Size Distribution Report I , 9 3 9 3 _ C I I I i 8 c s '• c • ! I z c j I I I III II I ,00 I I 1 I I . I1 ; ji I ,I I I I I:.1\ I \ :\ \ {I \ H. \ I i. I I11iI ! �. I\ / 1. IIIIiIII I ;1111 , ■; \ \\ il\\\ \ Y1iI III a \T 70 G I! I I I' IIlk I, !, . \ Ill \I I I i i I, I III VIII I1 I , II 'OC : \i I I111 � I .I I I j l I ' I i W I I' ti BU �! I! � � I I ' Ii I I i li • 1 � . 1Li � I i; iala 1.11 iIII �, i ! 1IMilk ., I 111111111101 �o \ 11111�1/II I I II I �0�� i. I ` � I ;mat' 1� � IIl1A11 I � �®�®I� �� �� 'I I I i l 111 ` i it l•11 0.01 0.001 i 4! I II ! ; II I I 1 3.1 o I 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm `� • 500 100 Y. p - %.GpAV0. lliSilligiMall Soil D • SIEVE PERCENT SPEC: PASS? BROWN FINER PERCENT X-NO) SAND' SII #4 79.1 Atterb� V^� Pl= #8 52.8 its 27.5 PL= #100 1. Coe_ ffl— c=e 5 p - 1.10 #200 3'7 D88= 3.01 Deo= p45 DDi eo= 0235 D30= 0.650 Cc123 Cu- 535 c= . Classification . Iii _SCS= SP Ren_W COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) Date: 3/30/00 (no* specificwfion provided) SIEVES Date: Sample No.: B16Q 45 Source of Sample: Location: RISES Client: PRICE ENTERPO�C�!'TER Project RED ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Plate IENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ect No: T1971-GS Particle Size Distribution Repo L S 8 � z $ r. • U II IIIIiI I S C I .' I = � � , � sa < 51. \c ! i � I, IIIA I I ,. 100 ; I i III' I I I�'IIIILI I IIj II. ' � IhI®1 . \ \ I \\\\ I ,i ' fat\\\ �I. � � I1 �. I �� , . � II assi I • 70 '; ', I \ I I , I 'I I 1ff I ,< IIS I ` Irl ,I � 191i � itamisso 'll I I . II`I I i i :, t I, IiI II Z 50 \ I I I l j I I III�III1 ci i1 I `; III! II !' I ` i1 `. � I' I I I � � �CC w soi iIl \ ij3° f III 11111111111110a 111.11111 20 is \ I � � Sall t0 ' ,I I I I ., o.i a.ai ( I I 1 1 ° 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm 500 100 y.SAND l0�. allaiaVel ICO- $Oil$oi10 SPEC: PASS? SILTY SAND(WI GRAVEL).GREY SIEVE PERCENT I PERCENT (7(x/0) SIZE #3 94.62. AtteLL =nits P1= 416 45:6 PL= #50 10� ts _ 2.62 p1 al p50= 0.706 #100 #200 030_= 0.320 Ci 5= 0.131 Dip= Cu- c- Classier USCS= SM ppSHTO= Re�atks COLLECTED BY C.M- COLLECTED ON(3/23/00) Date: 3/30/00 (no specification provided) Sample: SIEVES EIevJDepd1: Sample No.: B16(a3 50 Source of 1 Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project REDHAWInTOWN CE:`1TER Plate ORK CORPORATION Pro ect No: T1971.-GS ENGINEERING NETN i 1 E partiCie Size Distribution Repo C I a Ca ^ 10n ', I ,II i HI :III I IIII1 II II I • IiII I I II I I I I I I 11 sa i t E ISI I ` II r I I I I I� II I � it I I ' ii I Iu�O I ' I'II I N\\' 't \ I � � itililli ,o \ IIIIIII 1I, II ! ILII � I IIID cc LILT- V i 1, ; �! ;III I Ilibt I. I ®I � �I 111111111111111111111 so I `'C I ! �'I ,IIIIII�III I ' i vw4osin 11 I� 1E10 � � �' IIIIIIII/IIIIiII�- II � � , � �on�l I � , 1 I i � ilim��iuun 111 II viii ZU��I� ; ,IlliIlia1e11 I ,11111111Segilialaill chain I a, a.m a I III III ` GRAIN SIZE- lu mm 500 �� VDyGAVEL %SAN D 94.0 6.0 SIEVE PERCENT I SPEC.* PASS? SoilD SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=ND) SAND,BROWN #4 99.8 III #S 96.0 Atterbf m P1= 89.9 6 PL #50 10.6 Co_—�0_502 p 0.429 #200 S'8 p30= 0.0.306 0i3= 0.198 010= 0.142 Cti- .53 C 1.31 • CVa 353 Classicri USCS= SP Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. ON(3128/00) Date: 3x0100 (no specification provide le: SIEVES EIevJDepttu 317® 10 Source of Samp Sample N : Location: RISES Project PRICE AWKTOWNCENTER 'i ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL liens _ I Plate ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ect No: T1971-GS Particle Size Distribution Report = s o t S ' 01 1 1 III 11 lac 'I I 11 II "I II i { , I I { i III ` I I I�'A 90BM I ' i ' I . I{ I . I I `I� I � ' iii Yi \ \ \\ , i 70 " I' . ll jalllI II I I '. 11 I I I: I . I,I 1 ,; I , I { { i � ICY ill , i LAI 60 {' '{ In {{ 1 l' I I !. I11 Ill , { �' . II` ' I • ii so 11 IS . I ate , son o I I I I ISI I Inv I 30� I .I � ISanj!J )$ $ III �Za®I ,' {• I . 0.1 0 to GAN SIZE-mm y.cur 500 100 y.SAN-• ,siiiiassmissas%GRAVEL 11111111 11111111111111.11111.111111 Soli D • PERCENT SPEC. PASS? SRE FINER PERCENT (7(=t1-) BROWN SIEVE SANDY SILT,DARK- #4 99.9 99.6 Atterlr9� p1= #16 96. PL= LL= #50 93.3 • #too 66.4 Cam 050 = #200 D85= 0.163 060=_ p10= 030= 015 Cu- Cc= Classi_ fi T0= timf USCS= ML Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) Date: 3/3 1/00 (no specification provided) Source of Sample: SIEVES EIevJDepth: Sample No.: B17Q 15 Location: RISES Client PRICE ENTERP 1SES project REDIiA ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Plate iNTER t ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION 1 Pct No: T1971-05 Particle Size Distribution Report ^ $ � - a a z�r�= � ;at I s r. c _ _ li I IiII I I IIII � 1 ,°° , I II I I I I I� I: I I I III _ , ; I��p�lllll® 9° 111 I � ' it I ! I•\ 1 I ' illinaillill I ! j ! i I � ; I I!Ii /IIID• � � . , , ®III 11 I 1 \ Ii II ! I I\ 1111 \ NII\ \ ' 1 ii_Z 50 i I 'i ltIiIII11\ \ \ ® I�� iaii 1 , 1I1 1 ! il0'1� ajweirsi .III 1 !• .1 443 �III/II a�1111 ,! I I ! I iitii4i4IIU 1 1111 °.°, °.�, i, I II II , 0.1 • o I ,a0 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm — a 15.7 y.GRAVEL 84.3 x,COBBLES 0.0 0.0 Soil D SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? BROWN FINERPERCER NT 'NO) SILTY FINE-SAND, SIZE #4 100.0 100.0 Atterhem Limits PI- PL= #100 15. Co ^ D50= 0.154 #200 15.7 0.258 D50= 0.181 D50- 030= 0.105 D15= 10= Cu c- Ctass HTO= USCS= SM AAS Re-- COLLECTED BY CM. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) - provided) Date: 3/3U00 (no specifiesoD p le: SIEVES EIevJDepth: Sample : 1317©20 Source of Sample: Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES Project: REDHAWK TOWN CENTER I ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL plate ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ect No: T1971-GS Particle Size Distribution Report = e z $ $ ILII I IIIII I `� 00 I11II1l - I , III illII1 ., 9° 11 iji \ I• ••1 , \ • 1 I I 111101 � I IIS ; IMA WMa 1 !5O ; ; � 11 sa1 1hal , , ILIA LL Ii i w5O 1I iSIVISISINSta . � i � aM i1 ; it ' 11111101111Milaelanna 30� � I 1111111011111nlialliiiirindlilillillia20� I II !li I � tosionsigpiriii 11,° ) 7j ' i � � I. I I 1111111 'I 11 I( I II 1 I , \ I 1 0.1 0.01 , 0 I 10 GRAIN SIZE mm 500 100 ss %SAND � 7.8 y.GRAVEL 905 %GO- SoilSoil D SPEC.' PASS? SIEVE PERCENT NO) SAND,BROWN SITE FlNER PERCENT (X' #6 86. ALLrbera LImits pi= #50 68.6 Pt.=352 100 1�S C°_p 49 p50= 0399 #200 1385= 1.00 ts D60= 0.148 D10= 0.102 • p30= 0253 015-127 Cu-• 4.85 C Class___ 0n USCS= SP Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) Date: 3/31/00 • (no le No.::ficB17 provided) Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: Sample Bl7(a325 Location: RPRISES Client PRICE ELATE ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Proles REDHAWK TOWN CENTER . plate ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Pm ect No: T1971 GS . • t L Particle Size Distribution Report k. = s s S rr _ al v s � e � Ilii. ! '. I. 11IiI I E 100 I III I I- I i I I I j� II nl i. 1i i l �° I ' �I ! !II ��I 1111'1 i ! .1111111 „ I IIS . i 1I Ili ;� it Olt" I I . �I I I '�I ! .. I•i `• IIS I I'; � 'I I ;� II :!! \ • \ 1. i 1i 11 ,,' �: III I 111111/ II ;IIIn11nIl �I I !Ii i i1 I, . ' 'I i z � I `� � I �. „, I ` I. � „ ! ' ! inininum so I I i \'1j!tt\Y\ ��® i a111Illlll11r. ,20 ® ,lllilltm, - , i it l ; Ili ''ili , � II I1 I pills \ III ; I , , VI0.1 ,. 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm 1 i .001 e00 t00 -..�.n-� coest• ES 111.1100221 Df°o SIEVE PERCENT SPEC. PASSE SIZE -SAND,BROWN FINER PERCENT lX NO) SILTY PINE SIZE #4 99.9 6 96 6 ALL— rhe mds pi= 0 628 Pt. 35.0 Co __ciente02 25 #200 24.8 0 D85= OS43 060= 0182 D10= D30= 0.120 015= Cu-. Cc Class SHTO= uSCS= SM Re marlcs COLLECTED BY CM. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) Date: 3/31/00 * (no specification previded) Sample No.: B17@ 30 Source of Sample: SIEVES E1ev.IDate: Location: P1 ;�PENTERPRISES 1 ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICALroREDWK OWN CENTER ENTER Plate II ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro' No: T1971-GS particle Size Distribution Report ill Eaz ,aa j Ie sP r �90 I _ LiI I$ o1I � II � i I Mit I I i 11 ' '91i,i4Ohi �I� ialla I 1�� I II :III � � � � ��®�11811i ro ;,IIIoI „ j; 111l11el .I % , I „ "� X11 I ► ! LI 80 , ; h maw 1 111111111 i_j__Z 5a I I ' i � !I ' ! � al i i; i ! IIn1�11��� ► i , 01111111111111 VIII I inlll® 'call IitI i 11110//11 ' I ' ;11111 30 ®I i I i . 111111/ 111 1 1 11M1 � 11111111111 ► ► i ! ppl IIII111Plim p1�1iI 1 1111111.1, 0.1 0.010.001 ° 5001100 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm smallinENSIansa I FINER PERCENT (X=NO) SANO f.. y,CO %- Soil D on ! SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? SILTY SAND(W/GRAVEL),TAN SIZE FINER #h 90.8 #p 224 Atterherg Limits Fh 22.4 PL= #200 18� Coefficients2.93 Dee= 1 D 0.890 095= 0.431 015= 0.182 D1 0.102 Cu- 11.90 Cc- 1.52 ClassificationHTO= uSCS= SM Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(328/00) ' ' . - (no specification provided) Date: 3/31/00 :: Sample No.: B17@ 45 Source of Sample: SIEVESElev./Depth: Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Protect REDIIA TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ec!No: T1971-GS Plate II particle Size Distribution Report it ' l li I j ligmamia i 90 �I \ i an \ L H NE lau . allII ii ' 1111►�i1 : : : I. 1 , . I , ! I • ;"Ii I i i �. II I � ; ILII t_i 60 i 1 1 ;5: ; ; : �, , : I�i 01 lis 1 \ Imo= Z lU ' } 11��I1111®►Ili 30 II iI11 Ii1111111_ii , . 11111111_1111111111 :ual �� � I I , ii I � I I ! l i I i :I I 0.01 0.001 ima ° 500 zoo 70 GRAIN SIZE-mm .2,ra� X cur _ 2 %CO-11.021 82.6 8 Sail D In SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS'? /GRAVEL),TAN SUE FINER PERCENT (X=410) SILTY SAND(W #8 80.8 #16 8 4 Atterb_ e_� P1= 22.4 PL= #2 0 18.2 Coefficients p50— = 0.890 Den=p85__ 0.431 5_ 111= 0.182 D10= 0.102 C�= 1190 Cc= 1_52 Cl � ass_ificadon USCS= SM AASHTO Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/28/00) ' (no specification provided) Date: 3131/00 Sample No.: B 17(e)45 Source of Sample: SIEVES ERev ID Date: Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Pro ec!Na T1971 GS Plate Particle Size Distribution Report = a ra z - - 100 � , I ; 11 I ' H 1 i { 1 ' il I I 1 r• • i 90 i1 " I I { I i I 80- I ' I1 Il I i 1 II ` I i 11• I - i1 1 I 11 I : I W . I 1 Y 1 1 1 1 Z I i 1 Ii I 1 t Ii ; I 1I I II , zW 5° i 1 i I I{ � I 1 ! I 0i I I ' I I _ I ! I 'i I 1 1 1 111 a. �°ao i I I { I ' ' I 1 11 , 111 1 1 1 il i I I I I 1 I i 1 I 1 i 1 4 1 i ) II I ilii ! I i I I 1 II I ' I '. i I 0 1 I l II II i I I ( 1 , I 0.1r 1 0.01 0.001 500 10010 GRAIN SIZE-mm y 96.7 0 SAN l %SILT 2.6 I %CLAY j %COBBLES l %GRAVEL 1 f SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? - Soil Description SIZE FINER I PERCENT (X=NO) SAND,LIGHT-BROWN #4 962 #8 Atterbern Limits 572 #10 1000 18 8 PL= LL= P1= #200 26 Coefficients085= 1:16 060= 0.631 D50= 0.531 D30= 0.382 D15= 0.275 D10= 0.225 Cu 2.80 Cc= 1.03 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks COLLEL itll BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(328/00) * (no specification provided) Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: 3/31/00 Sample i No.: BIS®35 Elev./Depth:Location: Client PRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GECTECHNICAL Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Project No: T1971-GS Plate Particle Size Distribution Report . 3 9 9 9 _ CS § _ g . a 4 S i . - ICC I II i li I I ( ' Ii ! ' : I I 1 1 1 ! r 1 1 I I I 1' I ! ii _ I 80 1 ! i I I I 1 I - ! I I it 11 I 710 1 ! I ; I !I " ! I 1 "\ ; ; I ! t I I I Ir. us • z 5o I i i I III j II I 1 I I F.. I I I I 'I I ' i 1 I I I I i i I 1 : 1I1 1 I ! — 50 L Z i I I f I I I ' `. i l � I I I . I : :1 I Ww 11 i I ' - i l I I I o- 30 i 1 1 20 11 I �) - I I I '1 I I I. 1 _ I • 1 -Ti ' I I ' I i 1 1 1 ` I i I , ,a ; I • ! I it I II 1 � 0 I I I II11 � Illi 500 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm %COBBLES 1 %GRAVEL _ %SAND %SILT I %CLAY 96.7 2.6 ,. SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? Soil Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) SA1�ID,LIGHT-BROWN #4 99.3 #16 85.5.5 #30 57.2 #50 Attertlero Limits #zoo lH PL=LLL PI Coefficients 085= 1:16 D60= 0.631 D50= 0.531 D30= 0.382 D15= 0.275 D10= 0" Cu- 2.80 Cc= 1.03 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks COLLECTED BY CM. COLLEC i tiJ ON(328/00) (no specification provided) Sample No.: B18@a 35 Source of Sample: SIEVES Date: 3/31/00 Location: Elev./Depth: ' ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Client PRICE ENTERPRISES Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Project No: T1971-GS Plate .. . \ particle Size Distribution Repot 1 . A 95 9 � a sS I � R = § Ill Ii ii ; I I � ' II.IiIItaIS � � ! , i 8° ! 1 ` skai Nalliik , ,, \ t \ ii I% : i ' i !\ \\ \. L \\ , SS i IIIIII�W � I ii I , � 1111 II a a. 1i � ISMS a !4I! \\ \ 0.1 0.01 0.001 10 GRAIN SIZE-mm 500 100 N.SANrr�� mos %GRAVEL _. %co- SoilSoil D simill PERCENT SPEC.' SILTYSAND,BROWN on SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER #4 98.1 Illi 91.6 Atter�mta p1= #16 359 PL LL #50 19.9 Cam p50= 0.441 X200 123 D80= 1.54 4.251 Di 5= 0.0994 010- Cu- Cc . Cu • C1ass�I1 USCS= SM Rem COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3128100) Date: 3131/00 (nospecifictionpro`i le: SIEVES Elev./Depth: Sample No.: B18®40 Source of Samp Location: Client: PRICE ENTERPRISES Proles HAWK TOWN CENTER i ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NETWORKPlate CORPORATION Pro ect No: T1971-GS li Particle Size Distribution Repot ▪ s = s a = S S .0 8- % I. e s e I I I \ I III I 100 \ \ H , • ` `•; Ill I i I I .I ,1111 ��, `:_ `�., Irl l I, I ; 80� i I I IR ll inn ��, I. I I. , i , , , I 1 , salla I 70 i �I �� M ' ''II''' I' ,I:, !!\ i1t : , � lI I ®II II 1. ® , ; � II LL I III 'I , � ' • I4IIRl1%LOU- M al lin� ia I II I' .. Ilp®III0111/ iii" liminis s \ � � �, -am 1 1 ,ismoss I� 11,11111\11111\ ,, I , 1 HI ii , ,, 1 , a 100 10\ 1 1 ill i GRAIN SIZE-mm 500 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 �.rrRr� arisam y.GRAVELor SCO Soil Df SIEVE PERCENT SPEC: PASS? GRAVELY SAND,TAN SIZE FINER PERCENT (X110) #4 91.5 73.0 AtSerb�m� P1= 16 48.9 28.7 PL= 2 0 i4.3 8 0 Coeffl .61 Do= 1.2 #100 _ 1.61 50 #200 4.6 D30= 3.64 0.631 D15 10304 26 Di5 0.196 Cu= 321 Cc Classi �0= USCS= Sp Remarks COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3/28100) Date: 3/31/00 (nosp�ciararionp ) le: SIEVES Elev./Depth: Sample No.: B18(e)50 Source of Samp Location:• ient:ClPRICE ENTERPRISES ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL Project ItEDHAWK TOWN CENTER Plate ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION pro ect No: T1971 GS f • Particle Size Distribution Repot 8 I 9 9 s s _ $ I I I I I I I II 11 „ 9 5 5 3 Iz . 1 'I II. ' I h I I I ILII I I I I' t, 100 I I ! I ', I i ' � UIIIIIU1IIIIIII� I 90 \ I UhI\iI®IiIIII I '�1111VISII I iUuIiIRt1t1i1I \ \ ' %tIIII I ' �11i ' `� I II ,all,, , , ! cc vie , .' ILII LL 8111Ens 11 �,�. I jLIrra• 50 I 11"1® 1■30111®1111■1111111111®11111 . , ; ■1■IIIIIIII, 20,0111®111111; 1 �„� I I. Ali fa1 I , ; I I I , �� i a.o, 0nfin 1 0...1 MAIN SIZE-mm � 500 Ye 9AN� _ y.GgAVEL ,CD- Enio SoilSoil D SIEVEZE PERCENT EPEC. PASS? GRAVELY Y SAND,TAN SIZE FINER PERCENT ��) #4 91.5 0 Atberbera Limits #8 48.9#30 Pl= 28.7 PL= #50 14.8 8 0 Coe-- D _ I= #1001.61 #200 4.6 p85= 3.64 p60= 0304 Dip= 0.196 D30= 0.6311C16=126 • Cu❑ 8.21 � Classip= USCS= SP Remar COLLECTED BY C.M. COLLECTED ON(3128/00) Date: 3131/00 (no specification prom je; SIEVES EIevJDeptfi: Sample No.: B18®50 Source of Samp Location: ENTERPRISES Client PRICE ELATE Project REDHAWK TOWN CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL plate ENGINEERING NETWORK CORPORATION Pro ed No: T1971 GS . .. Environmental Laboratory Certification 41156 . 6100 Quail Valley Court Riverside,CA 92507-0704 ,a:;/ACrit -Sz P.O.Sax 432 Riverside,CA 92502-0432 t - PH (9 ) `9533351 FAX(909)653-1662 e-mail:eshsa>eseaoltom L �_• ESBA8C CK SONS, miamomptm 2860-474 Client: 09440O3f50441 \ Engen, Inc. ( X03. L Reported: 03/27/00 t Tom Dewey rise Circle N. Date 41607 Enterprise Submitted By: GSO 92590-5614 Date: 03/20/00 Temecula, Time: 1105 Client I.D• : soil_ag as listed Collected Ion Cavan. Time wear ssa.eTam ami.r' r" ..., tion Date PPM .-,,,, .� w. Identification z,.. .i.,mtm.."^ x°" : c -" l.f<:g mm n 3'10: ' :u.: 0 8�s atu: P.I. r - � a+r x r; -001 P,�#^'197 � F ��.,� ?'-•wu���"�atr"�B�Ls�& .v^",,..::,r��a�wvo w-::� � �� I n"' � s n �' 10 -002 PRJ# ,�.rsr u w,,.ti RL x ......, �... . pAJ#T1971 GS -,� .x3' "'�...,�-,aw:...-..»..,.....a„r .w. "H.. -. w^e.. ”' x::°, ,<yci...:r... ..,..�,�riilarA`a,...t.�n .>•r tx^e x ".wa_.�" : t �.. nw✓iJk�" rc '^"'" -003 811; T197 :.w.,� .c,.4z .krc.. „,,., ..10 pg,7$T1971-� • Date analYs icompleted: (Water Extractable sulfate:03/21/00) . ND = None detected at RL (Reporting Limit) Results reported in ppm expressed on air-dried soil basis. E. S . :abcock & Sens cc: 1 Ea' Price Enterpnseetino. Excel Legacy,Corporation Projed Number:T1971-GS Appendix Page 6 SmLEIIIIENT DUE TO LIQUEFACTION CALCULATIONS • EnGEN Corporation B-16 LAYER DEPTH (N1) LAYER NO. RANGE SPT 1.1x(N1)60 FS Ev% THICKNESS AH non-liq. 1 0 - 9 59 97 1.5 .3 9 .324 2 9 - 18 21 34 1.22 A 9 .432 3 18 - 23 13 20 .49 2.2 5 1.32 4 23 - 28 ' 16 24 .64 1.8 5 1.08 5 28 - 33 20 28 .73 1.0 5 .60 _ 6 33 - 38 10 13 .3 2.8 5 1.68 non-liq. 7 38 . 48 33 42 1.5 .3 10 .36 8 48 - 53 17 18 .46 2.2 5 1.32 non-liq. 9 53 -60 50 56 1.5 .3 7 .252 7.368 Expected Settlement After Removals of Top 15 Feet= 6.5 Inches B-97 LAYER DEPTH LAYER NO. RANGE SPT (Ni) FS Ev % THICKNESS AH 1 0 - 13 9 14 .40 2.8 13 4.368 2 13 - 18 9 18 1.5 .3 5 .180 3 18 -23 14 19 .58 2.2 5 1.32 4 23 - 28 29 38 1.5 .2 5 .12 5 28 - 33 25 33 1.5 .3 5 .18 6 33 - 43 13 16 .36 2.3 10 2.76 7 43 - 57 20 22 .5 2.0 14 3.36 8 57 - 62 54 52 1.5 .2 5 .120 12.4 Expected Settlement After Removals of Top 15 Feet= 8 inches • B-18 . LAYER DEPTH LAYER NO. RANGE SPT (N1) FS Ev% THICKNESS AH 1 0 - 9 21 34 1.5 .3 9 .324 2 9 - 13 5 7 .26 4.5 4 2.16 3 13 - 18 12 22 .68 2.2 5 1.32 4 18 -23 8 17 1.5 .3 5 .180 5 23 - 33 14 19 .45 2.2 10 2.64 6 33 - 38 32 44 1.5 .3 5 .180 7 38 -43 21 27 .85 1.5 5 ,9 8 43 -62 50 49 1.5 .2 19 .456 8.16 Expected Settlement After Removals of Top 15 Feet= 5.5 Inches Price Enterprises,Inc. Excel Legacy,Corporation Project Number Appendix Page 7 DRAWINGS • r; . . . .. EnGEN Corporation . - . . .. . I \, aresonments specks Matra . .. .. EnGEN Co •°ratio _..:. ... i I, : On LEGAL DESCRIPTIONREGIONAL GE•LOGI MAP son PROJECT NUMBER.: SCALE: r=2,00IY s DATE: 1/24/00 • . , REPORT 131 iliggrEIIIRCE: CDMG SP. (KENNEDY:1977) CCNN NI .. -y.,,,ft-2-v..-...-..---4--.I.( •: a- 1 .. - •, •.;:.4-1:? .i, ri . . •(. .v.1.---- - 0,:: -...,-... .Lr.-%,?7,2i.:..' / . • Ly .1 II :' • 1,--- . . • • ,Kep \t, c :.- --r-..,.. 'it , p..7.. ;Li ,*/) •7:. .. , .. • ...v P . f •Th. , ...- -• it0 '1/4 t- ;V:" i 1.;- 'I,. -..,‘ ;" ' 1-‘`, . r,. / I ' (' 1 '-• I - , , • • . 1 g.'• 1. •••. ..-.....•, .) ! .'V 7''' ) i•:•1.1! .11: . :. ‘1. •31 . fl in , ' '• . -rt7 -4\ ) t*:.,),/, : •...1.251 / • " II n, . 1,...IA•• . • • : •ciaiii.t„ 4* . )33 • • rt . •. ? i %1.,E__ 1./.: i ,:.-Li_ , , -.. , 0 ‘.....o•.: ,, :., ,,),_ , , ; , •N If li • r•/.1 'Tr I t) ‘4-'):. 1 1 I •e•,- • , I • 4.'‘ . it '• •r, ,;A..,) .,r. .,.1,.. )9.:• g. :. . c.4 ilit ..1 --n r : -,e- v. , -.,..,---:, $ f.e: ..'ci. ) .C..,:;•( \t' ii'‘''.1 I , ,-, • \...t - : i-' ''%., . 2 L\V. .11! . ; i ),./ 1 '. tiq‘.1 1:' '.V-Pd."‘\ -.jail)) ' i 40 : • \\ •,:ri 41:.;;;;L: :v.:7....i::,111,11:./jr.r.24::::::::. ii :c k.: .. )...1.i.:......H.:::.:i. ).1....L:11: Llice7.:1;',..1‘)1"):,:iit::1:4;\;‘,,°:(11:•:,0:,14:1111,E.:(11:elti:i.71.,;1117:::::17:1g5.‘1.:.:::::::::.;:;:::::...C.71;:;7:11111:1111:4t:\ ..-.." ..[ 11;:f46,.11: 1 ..1)I-.- (..;-'.4,-* ; • -)" ) :\.‘;. tl .:n ••-•::::,-21. ( -7-'.. ,i ik•• I.r' II I) --riS•CA.1,1k. '0.:_.,\ -_-1.- ' I- ; uLeo i -• P' . if •' it 7-d.'a.1. ' \ ' . ' A:, i #(4i- %;:- • -,,d ii.)--,0- • i i - i-g-,\\ . ; z:•-••• l'irt;,1',% ) -L1,--•.• / e ' , , . t ,ci ... )iiit."...9 kik .F ., . . _a C., '.; -J.I•i';t-...,_,41:;567.1.:,' \•";• ;-.\',,e '.A.2c. 7 (.7 .:: 'I;. /..'• ',-, c _fa- •;.••• rib • r--\\i •"1;•:.!' K1 i.4 l.:Y.I."'....1 j - .., : - - %.?4>I . ' f ?CI k : "I-i•:,-C.. •‘,•i C -z) I 74,:.<3L -r-- i 0 0) ', • . , . . N 4, A / F. i JS t • -Ca. ‘1. :).,--1.,---10) ' ...., .st 1.7,- ini.,1.,0..A.. . A.-)kt:ivo. .-. ,. .13 : /`3.-. •/ ;:tir ,. " 1 ... .1 • CF ).1_,- r 'II ,-,..."----4 z C. r...- : • ??.• Ia) 'if/irr;:i; , -cC.c; '•! ..'-i :41 Ire • '. II. ) •;•:::-'• c. ‘, r ' ). 1-• ' II (.1 .. 'i•-,) ',, 4 11? fiok.\,' ‘!" \Q ) ,-A g,1 . „,,,,..-,..). .>.. ,......fi.!..-. '...s. (...-tl. - .\ ': A 0 1. •-) 1 1• ,--• .. (--- .- I:. , ) ,..• ..71,;,?.4.),.,/, ' . •• '.:-,A,:is - . )1 , •2 . ' ?it,'i ',...:•4)In SA l' c" ,..- .c ' •• .:'1-7; - r--"Izz:.--•':•"•41.f.•:/ 1,4I'l' f:• ......,'••\\-.:: .1,. ;!........,1,, cc- • 1 :: •<a, i . //) 1 (t''ft:.. . 1 ‘•-) -- Oq-. 1; .O.:›111- ••Th rf' •,•f2 ;:t9',... - • \ I lig •h•--.+1'. PCs • .;`,. t .--... . . :/,,,..fe, i , . :.-;.....-, zi .t.,,, k,txl ,.-. .., , .1; . r x q .., :.' 'S.,701 1 ;,. ,, .'d;fif: • '• ) ?: ,.. :••• 1-,, ::.-:l V;;-:-1:1-..e.." I.'" v., t ' .- •-?.../i ‘-'1'4 -7/ ' c't• * ' •tii,c ", • • ,' . j d ,r; . ? , ,v,-.1::y..4,.. - ..,,,, ( \clp,-„pi. " • , .- it id ( -.2.-rt-cfr . . ctio.; : , • ..; -2 , A., 40; .1-_,„- ;7,..' ' .1....t'' I' C LK ( `‘ "i-1-'2.'t- •? ..II : 'tr.\ - -. '. - ., :. ii , f'"'•'..n el. '-‘,;. -..4' -e-lit?? 1 .' .. ,In1 •• 2 • / • '• ' •0ir .4c)( ' - -11 '' I Z 4... il 1:74;a14.41):t;2.-1 i •4 ‘; . tf.,!........11. ..; . , . ;..:, 0) , yi• -,-__, ;-3- S -.... I • i.L\ ' or 1 .-;,/` .) /r.-4- P. 1 / • . ' ..• 1 • . ), • ;Ilik / r %,4.7-7) •„: .:÷'''S••• . .16 f. ..... yi Ai ree.,,,..1:-. 7.,..,,, ... .,---e'.L.‘,c Z.i../:!;1,.• i' : ' 1- . .12,tvci ••••;--2t-C -7,.. . lec. .e.:C' .....• . • ...-1:, J vt ) •• / - ...1.17:-\---:7-n-t....07.;',C1 .-7. .. et, 11 . :,•-ri ilk• IIIIJII a ..::-...fi,v,a). )• k oc .„ v i- I , 1 : .. i „c:-.1*-714.,f-=:%%, •• .•4 - . (I---.-0 •••••., - ...y:tc,-,:i cri,r c;;C.1.., r . .if ;, )1‘ 1 .‘) 7e eft .iff : If. i c 4.1 - i; - -.,.: at 1 . . 1 ‘r -•) stk,"\V- ( p is- c- ti ;- 'in i :2 .i / ..tC::::(4‘ 4 0 eV. •• 71:'S. ..ik--). 1.4-3.2.4. . I, h- -; , •\ • - '• - /s1. / ,v .1s-1 ,1_3'i ( k'e12.1-.. 1,fg- ...- -;/. i / 9.: _.„;,e--4....',.. • ..); -1 ''',. lic.._.,;*: ? ;;i.4 ‘ . if .J.:. ,rf•-•- )4,t ,:••v k,•$••44L2 • - • , / .c•- -... ci, ...:_•,...„- , .. : • - •.• . ..„, •.:••• • 1}N:t 74 ilel V41:'. -\‘ 1‘ L - -• i // ,' / .„ ..):3:L±}.... .•: . /1 JAI . \ )/ ; .- ) 1 t, • :I _,•-•<7,41. I i ..:r• • dr. .. - ' 4-aci?IS":0,---;:m b....ta 02IR 14;4\i -I ) I 4 A 1 .._/1 1 'H- I.. r.,...,........zr qi...,..... ,t• ,-,,, ,,r-fr--2 7 nr,-4S...4') .e'so 1. ‘ I ;A: . q.. , ,,-- , :," k., ;,... ,... . , .L„.„...,-t.:-___;;;-___;„-• _7._... . . • ,_ • 1. .A. • „-...,,,-- ,..,;„,,,.....„?.: ,..,„•-c- fr,,,,... ci, i VIC7:79,;------- intr•C`HS5/1/' CS\I'l., ;:ii r.. ..-N:"••••) At'- •: ' ?IC ''• .‘;':41 :•)0 .‘ ,,..e 11 ° 0 n',..--i- .--t:Lf.,4•.--, ••;A: ,,t, i qc.'-'' r- • I Z7- Q J;1R+"2.'rtic,•\- ". -tt' ...! '# i Ir." - ' 7. ••1 r I n'(t. 1,-.\\ ":ITy."5;,:rttir::,•;-4 .: -": - I . •.:,, j-Il ii •' ''. i..'• C, -ti V.341i14'‘'' • IC .4•?._,1 '4 €.41.ct. ' 1 ( ..tc 7f4)i( •Ci- t ->.60/ .i- , i • 45) • .-)1--.-- •°' i' . *P‘"arit“ . - :ir.4...4 .•"I ;•':/:1‘ ).: - It. I,:4-.*:.C: ,iPirgatSi ....i- s., t 1 7. gartaral,gitk\0-14:tra e '_ _ . -I 7 - t • • /IX: . . . . .......... -. -` :_::',"::: 7 - N :,. . • - • - : ' . .... - , . L \ \ I \\ \ \ !\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ k - , ,;••• k!, , ! i 'I I k \ i 1( I \ ! I i ' I \ ! ! . ! ; I ' 1 ' 1 1 ' 1 I I' ! ' 1 I 1' 1 ! 1 ' \ ; I \ \ it \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 't \ i '' \ \, \ I ; ! ! 1 I , I ! 1 1 ' 1 I ' \ 1 i \ t; il \ \ \ \ I\ LI! l't '', \ \ \ \ \ \ ..............................________...- -GEOTECHNICAL INVE STIGATION ljp \ 11 ; 11 ' 1 ! lik \ kill .i \ H \ . . INTEAMLMEcAuRLTA,ATcTAELMiFEocRuNLIAA 't 1 , 11 \\ I \ w !Ii ! tHH Hu 1. Hi, 1 , 1i1H110111 1 ; \ i mi 'll ‘ rii i. , , 11, I • L \ I ' l l ' I \ ' ii 111 ultlitil : ii. I \ i ! . I • 1 \ i , 1,.,Thmll Till ' I‘T, I , I. III ! . 1 1 (741, OCOlitil 1 \ I ' . • i4 iti-nt1 , 11 ip so Bi 9 11.1kTE. i 133I I I jk ! il:tli liniH \ k, PREPARED FOR H 11, bt TECHNICkdr \ \ i I TED k t.nti I l' Si WI lk+.-f;a01T,Si \ \ \ 'I j .. k \ iiirm H \ ' ' ! ' ' ' ti I ! - ' I 1 H H 1 „ 1 I PRICE ENTERIEPRGI0S;AINuCFOoRRPNOI:A SAND IW ' Ill, \ 1 II \ ti li !I I\ \ 11! \ tit il IL t ' 711 ; ' , 1 ; • ; ; ' \ ' Itir j1 ' , 111 ; t1j ; Iljt1 ; 11, 11111 ; ; 1t ; ; It ; 11 ; i1III ' 1 ' I ' 1111111 ij \ III ( 1 \ 11j11111111 • . _ 1 Ili ; . • ; ; ; ; 111 ; 1 ' ; . 11 , 111 I I1 ' 111 ; \ 1111 ; Ikki1IIIIII . kIllkk •k1kk \ II •• • 11ti111111 \ 11 ; It111ti ' ' • 1 ' • ' ' ' 1111I ' Ik .. ' 11, 1, 1111 . • . j1 1111j111 - ' ' 1 ' 1111 ' • , tt ; ; , 11i , ; : , 1 - ' ! ' , 11 MAY 1999 l ' ' ; 11111j ' 1 ' 1111, 11t1 • II 1111k1t11t1111 \ it ! ` � '' . . TABLE OF COS —^,^_'^'^^'.^^'~,'_^,^^~,~~~,,'~~^^^^.. \ S� /��l} SC[8'E—^~^^'—^^~'''—� 2 1. PURPOSE ,,^''_''^,,^~'~^,^'.,,,,,',^^_^__~'.—^^^~,,, � 2. • SSl�J�I}��v���/rnu' `^ � ~_,''_~'''^^~~-~^'_^~_',-'''-_^'~2 r�(�T [)l�SC}llyTUJ��^^^^'^—''~� � /�l�[) 9l�(�� 3 3. SITE ^'- _,^^,,~^,,.~^^^''''_,^_� [Jl�S .^^''.~^^~. _^�� lCC(}�U|u —..^~ ''—^^~'-.~ 4. SOIL �l�[) (��OL��u/ ''''''''.'..'—^~,__^^,^'.,,—. ',''.'~^~'_4 Compacted —''~'''' _^^^,^^,''^ 4 } Cno�� �v``' ,^,~.'—^^^^~� � � — � K}uU '''—^^—'� tAJk �`unn -`'—'^^� 4 4.2. Recent ,` -~_',^',~_,,'',^'—,,_^^^^,'_^_''—~..-~_^. �TEl� —~—''—''~^^—� � 5. GROUNDWATER ''-._,.~.,,^''-''~'''~_'-''_^,__^.^—''—,'''-. STRUCTURE � 6. GEOLOGIC '^^_~'—^~^'~~'~^� '..'^'''''~^^^—^~^^'.' —^'''5 S '''''^—' '''^—~— GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ''�^^.^'� '~^.'^.^_'^''',^^^'.~^^^^� '—'.~--6 7. uudS��aoiu�Y'''''—''^—'' '—''^^'^^—'^^� 6 7.1. Faulting _'^~...^^..'.'^'_^^~~� —,_'''^^'^'� ^^ ~'~~^'''~^^� 7 � 7.2. Liquefaction �o��udu|..''~^^^^'^'''_.'''_,_^^.'...~^^^^—^'-'' 7�]� t»u �uuvo "^ ^^��- .''''_^^'.._^^^,� � 74� lEf�:ctsof]Liquetuc�»nu --^.''� 8. SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ~'.'_,~_ _'.'^~~-'_,_,^ ,'_~^ ,---'''''- —, ^''' . 7 9. CONCLUSIONS � � } lEC }Myur /A»",S.—'--~~^^^''`—^-^'~—,''~'_^,,~.-.''^~. y / 9.1. General--^~--^~'^^~—~~^—._'.~''''~'' ,^,'-_,^'_~.~,,.�^,,`,,''^'..~�9 9.2. Sudand��cuvu6noC.»...»c�sdcs ^—''~—~^'-^'.^'—~^^^—^^^'~_..''''-.'~,.A 4.3. Grading^'.'^_-,,^'^—''^'^..''^'.^ .'^_'_,_'--^--~—~~^^~^--^'-~—'' lO 9.4. '~~'_'^~'—'—^_~'^^^,^.—'—^~'^''.~-..~.'—^.._^ l l e 9.5. Concrete S ^'.^._^^'^—^'—.. l2 9.6. Retaining� u|band Lateral Loads...~~—'--- \ 3 9.7. Preliminary Pavement ^-'^'^^^^~^—.'-''—'~^—..~_,'_^'_. \ 4 q.8�DruinageuodMu�tuuuuoe.'.'—'^-' .^^'._'~'',,'''''^^'~—~'_^~',',''^'^.l 5 99. Grading Plan Review.......^''_'''^.'^^''—,''_,,,-_.^^—^'__^`^,,,.—'—'^^^ l j LIMITATI � (}� [���c/�/u/n [8�� ��y�� or^/�`/"^,"^ � ��&PSA��lJ \lJ�ouTru�T '`� 1,\/ich�n/�lup Figure -�� ' (Map�^,ku� - 2, Geologic ��up ~--', Figure " APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION � Figures A-l--f\'0' l,ngsofBunugs TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Table B-I, Summary of Direct Shear Test Results Table B-II, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Table B-III, Summary of Laboratory pH,Resistivity,and Percent Soluble Sulfate Test Results Table B-IV, Summary of R-Value and Sand Equivalent Test Results Figures B-1—B-3, Gradation Curves Figures B-4—B-5, Consolidation Curves APPENDIX C LIQUEFY 2 ANALYSIS APPENDIX D RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF REFERENCES is r'. GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS Project No. 06298-42-01 May 18, 1999 Price Enterprises Incorporated 4649 Morena Boulevard San Diego, California 92117-3650 Attention: Ms. Lois Miller Subject: WALMART AT TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Dear Ms. Miller: In accordance with authorization of our proposal dated April 2, 1999,we have performed a geotechnical investigation for a proposed approximately 44-acre commercial development located on Highway 79 between Redhawk Parkway and Apis road in Temecula, California. The accompanying report presents • the results of our study and our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of developing the property as proposed. Based upon the results of this study, it is our opinion the site may be developed as planned provided the recommendations of this report are followed. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED • James L. Brown Gear! C. Copenhaver,Jr. GE 2176 CEG 86 ESSlp GCC:JLB:dmc � �SL8g0��� RED � � �E GF ;? Na 002176 \5 �( GECCGECALM (6) Addressee x EXP, 6130/01 * Q. qV s CF \Cv2 ¢I NI rgTFOF C LUOQ r% ENGINE RING 11/30/99 AOR y. CAUFD� 6960 Flinders Drive • Son Diego, Calihxnia 92121-2974 • Telephone (619) 558-6900 • Fox (619) . . - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Walmart commercial project located at the southeast corner of State Highway 79 and Redhawk Parkway in the City of Temecula, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). Our study was conducted to investigate the soil and geologic conditions at the site and to identify geotechnical constraints (if any), that may impact areas of proposed development. This report provides recommendations relative to the geotechnical engineering aspects of developing the project as proposed based on the conditions encountered during this investigation and during previous development of the property. The purpose of the update report is to provide comprehensive recommendations for the planned regrading, to provide foundation design criteria for the buildings and structural pavement sections for the parking lot and driveways. In particular, the major purposes of the investigation were: • To review in-house geotechnical reports, published geologic maps, aerial photographs, and other literature pertaining to the site. • To evaluate the existing site soil conditions and to determine the depth to the groundwater table. • To perform laboratory tests on selected soil samples to determine in situ density, shear strength, consolidation, compaction, expansion, soluble sulfate, and pH and resistivity characteristics of the prevailing soil conditions encountered. R-value tests of the near surface materials were also performed to determine preliminary pavement section requirements. • To provide specific grading specifications, foundation design criteria, preliminary pavement sections, excavation characteristics and remedial grading measures (if required), and other pertinent findings in the report. The field investigation was conducted on April 23 and 26, 1999, and consisted of a site reconnaissance by an engineering geologist, and the drilling of 8 small-diameter borings. The small- diameter borings were excavated to examine the soil and geologic units within areas of anticipated development and to identify surficial soils and underlying alluvial units. Details of the field investigation as well as descriptive boring logs are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performedon selected representative soil samples obtained during the field investigation to evaluate pertinent physical properties of the soil conditions encountered. The laboratory information was used in engineering analyses and to assist in providing recommendations Project No.06298-42-01 - 1 - May 18, 1999 for site grading and development. Details of the laboratory tests and a summary of the test results are presented in Appendix B. The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based on an analysis of the data obtained from the exploratory field investigation, laboratory tests, and experience with similar soil and geologic conditions on adjacent properties. 2. PREVIOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT Previous grading occurred on the site between January and August 1994, to construct the current sheet graded lots. The grading was performed via an assessment district established for the widening of Temecula Creek. In general, the Vail Ranch Commercial site was selected as a disposal site for excess materials generated from the grading and improvement to Temecula Creek. Grading generally consisted of removal and recompaction of the upper alluvial deposits and/or moisture conditioning and in situ densification of the upper 4 to 5 feet of alluvium prior to placement of fill. The remedial grading was performed such that a minimum 5 foot compacted fill mat exists across the lots. The remedial grading was performed in conjunction with our observation and compaction testing services (See References). Fill soils placed during this operation were compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The fill depths encountered during this investigation indicate that fills on the order of 7 to 10 feet exist within the planned development area. A portion at the southwest corner of the Vail Ranch Commercial site was left ungraded as it was classified as a dedicated Historical Site. Several old structures from the Old Vail Ranch remain on the site. Due to the Historic classification, no remedial grading to densify the upper alluvial deposits was performed. Review of the proposed Site Plan indicates that the proposed approximately 132,000 square foot commercial building encroaches into the historic site. Remedial grading will be required within this area to provide a uniform compacted fill mat. 3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The generally elongate, irregular-shaped site consists of approximately 42 acres of previously graded land located in the City of Temecula, California. The site is bounded on the north U.S. Highway 79, on the west by Redhawk Parkway, on the east by Apis Road and to the south by Temecula Creek Channel (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). A review of the referenced Site Plan indicates that proposed site development will consist of the construction of a commercial/retail center comprised of 8 individual building pads. A Walmart Store with a building footprint of approximately 220,000 square feet, situated on the eastern end of Project No. 0629842-01 -2 - May 18, 1999 I ,1 tenant. One 3,000 square foot building and three 5,000 (see Figure 2) will be the primary the site planned. Additional large buildings include a 60,000 and 132,000 1, square foot retail structures are k: square foot structures which are separated by a Historic Parcel. The remainder of the site will consist �', ? Q aved driveways,with potential spaces for the addition of other retail shops. Existing of nd and p with inactive stubs at various intervals around the easements follow the outer edges of the property, jperimeter. � gently southwest sheet-graded surfaces that sloperoxithwest Topographically,the Tem, the Creekte is characterized by elevations vary from a h to a mloat ly toward the Temecula Channel. Existingsite northeast corner of the pg property 1,08 of sparse growth of appy feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) iculh of approximately 1,060 feet MSL at the southwest corner. Vegetation consists and associated agricultural weeds and grasses. Several existing structures (i.e. farmhouse, barn buildings) are situated within the Historic Parcel.. Primary access to the site will be provided by the existing surrounding streets, such as Highway 79, Apis Road, Wolf Store Road, and Redhawk Parkway. descriptions of the site and proposed development are based project ite a general understanding of the 1 The locations and P significantly from those described herein, Geocon reconnaissance, a review of the referenced Site Plan andour presently proposed. If project details changegtt Incorporated should be notified to review the plans and evaluate the need for additional study and/or I possible revisions to this report of the conditions consisted of a reproduciblecopy te map The base map used a , Schemee the soil and geologic Architects, McKee, dated April 29, ' plan entitled Site Plan, /5, prepared by roximate locations of depicts the configuration of the property, underlying geologic units and the app the exploratory excavations (see Geologic Map,Figure 2).. 4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS at e One ral soil type and one geologic formation were encountered alluvialhedeposits. entrver e site teeis underlainlain by compacted fill soils, that are in turn underlain by recentolder alluvium that rests upon et ge Pauba Formation (see List of References) Each of the thick. Previous studies indicated that recent alluvium is underlain by Their mapped sedimentarydeposits bedrockandfoof thePleistocene-age onal u its iate su�cial formational units is discussed �emaplpo ket)w in rder of increasing age. extent is depicted on the Geologic Map (Figure May 18, 1999 Project No.062982-01 41. Compacted Fill (Qcf) Compacted fill was encountered in each of the exploratory borings and typically consists of dense, rained sands. Fill thickness varied from 7 to 10 feet as I sil fine- to medium-grained endix A). Field penetration- 1 darknbrown, ry, (see boring logs, App of the samples obtained indicated that the fill encountered in Boring Nos. B-1 through B-8 resistance in borings, as well as laboratory testing generally has should be planned such uniform density and moisture-content. The fill in it's present condition is considered suitable for support of the planned buildings and improvements. Grading gond surface to ensure that the building pad elevations are not less than 2 feet below the existing gr that a minimum 5 foot compacted fill thickness underlies the buildings. • T 4.2. Recent Alluvium (Qal) Alluvial soils underlie the above-described compacted fill and consist of medium-dense, light olive to medium-grained sands. The sand units are interbedded with micaceous and and to gray, fine- (see Boring Nos. B-1, B-_, sandy gravel layers typically from 1 to 4 feet thick i Appendix A). Boring No. 1 encountered Recent-age alluvial soils to a depth of 50 feet; previous studies indicated the Recent Alluvium unit extends to depths on the order of 100 to 150 feet(see List of References). drilling and laboratory test results indicate that the alluvium is on representative samples of the Blow counts recordedediduring a due loading � generally in a medium dense condition. Consolidation testing raised. In addition, little to no collapse occurreupon alluvium indicates that the alluvium should not experience significant volume change provided that grades are not significantly experience significant volume changeP saturation indicating that the alluvium should not ex graphically in onion of the consolidation curves are relatively steep increases in soil noted that the upper Results poortion the consolidation tests are shown o Appendix B. It shouldbe and due to sample disturbance. Each of the samples was saturated at pressures near their in situ overburden and the consolidation curves indicates low compressibility beyond the saturation loads. 6. GROUNDWATER borings (Boring Nos. B-1 at approximately feet, and B-2 at approximately 25.0 feet). These levels of groundwater areconsistent with Wet to saturated Recent Alluvium was encountered in two exploratory those encountered and/or anticipated in previous studies (Geocon ncorporatad general area of the site,groundwater depths controlled o trolled by hin th the adjacent, cecreeke1992).han1. the o ed the channel. Groundwater is not anticipated to adversely impact grading. . May 18, 1999 Project No.06298-42-01 `l 6. GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE as the Temecula-Elsinore Basin (Larsen, ;t basin within the Peninsular Ranges of southern Regionally, the site is located within a fault-basin known ' 1948). This is a combined structural/topographic and Lancaster faults. The Elsinore Fault Zone California. This northwest- to southeastst by Aguangarn stNcrural basin is bounded on the west by the includescludFaulte Zone andiv ' whereas the Aguanga and Lancaster faults are considered to be several "active" faults,nBedding in the alluvium units is horizontal, or nearly "potentially" active faults (Jennings, 1994). horizontal,with depths estimated on the order of 600 feet. 7. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 7.1. Faulting and Seismicity Based upon a reviewise of published geologic literature, and observations during the site opinion of Geocon Incorporated that no known active faults exist on the site. reconnaissance, it is the S ecial Studies Zones, Pechanga Review of the California Division of Mines and Geology P Quadrangle, indicates the nearest active faults are strands of the Elsinore Fault Zone,and are located j from 1/2 to 1 mile southwest of the site(see List of References). FAULT The distance of known faults to the site was determined from the computer program E Q updated 1997). A search radius of 62 miles was specified the in analysis and d 32(Blake, 1989a,tivep selecting 1984 and wesnousky (1986). The program estimates e known active faults were identified. Principle references used by included were Jennings 1994), Anderson ( ) probable seismic events. ground accelerations at the site for the maximum crediblee and maximum ed in the analysis. Attenuation relationships developed Geomatrix(1994) e results of the seismicity analyses indicate that the Elsinore-Temecula Fault zone and the San Jacinto Fault Zone are the dominant sources ofpotential otential ground motion at the site. The Elsinore- er Bound) Magnitude of 6.8 and Maximum Temecula Fault Zone having a Maximum Credible Probable Magnitude of 6.3, respectively, is considered to be the source of the greatest seismic credible earthquake" is defined as the ground shaking within the property. The "maximum maximum earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework, whileprobable earthquake" is the maximum earthquake that is considered likely ythe to occur during duram ring a 100-year time interval (California Division of Mines and credible and maximum probable ground ted maximum accelerations were calculated to be app Geology Note, Number 43). The esroxamately 0.46e and 0.398, respectively. May 18, 1999 Project No. 06298-42.01 Presented in Table 7.1 are the deterministic earthquake events for selected faults and calculated peak site accelerations for the faults considered most likely to subject the site to ground shaking. - TABLE 7.1. DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS FOR SELECTED FAULTS Maximum Credible E Maximum ent Maximum Probabl Eent e Distance Maximum paxPeak Fault Name From Site Site b (miles) (Mag) Acceleration (Mag) Credible Site Acceleration 1110111111111111 0.098SI .08g O.16g � 0.13g - liregli ii ©IM 0.29g ea. 0.21g 0.46g SI 0.39g ILT ®® 0.05g SIM 0.02g SI 0.04g Newport-Inglewood ® 0.098 ualce The site could be subjected to moderate to severe other regionalund faulua�in�e outhemiC°ali mrtaiararea.hgonWith respect any of the above listed faults, is °comparable to the adjacent commercial and residential _ to this hazard, the site developments. 7.2. Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated and relatively g the development oil liquefaction oitloe strength factors strength during strong pound motions. Primary include density and duration of ground motion, characteristics of the subsurface soil, in situ stress conditions and the depth to groundwater. 7.3. Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential suggested by Seed Evaluation of the site liquefaction potential was performed following procedures et al. (1985). Our general approach to the evaluation was to use field test data(Standard Penetration Blow Counts) and gradation characteristics of the subsurface soils, considering a maximum probable earthquake of Magnitude 6.3, postulated to occur on the Elsinore-Temecula Fault zone as the closest approach to the site. o 1 (Appendix A) was considered in the liquefaction Quaternary alluvial deposits encountered in Boringtestn analysis. For the analysis, the groundwater depth measured in the boring, standard penetration May 18, 1999 Proiect No.06298-42-01 f. i . dation characteristics determined from laboratory testing were used. Materials above the values and gra clay (CL) according to the Unified Soil f I. percentages Cla groundwater table and soils classified as silt (ML) or USCS) were considered to be non-liquefiable, due to the high LIQUEs of on fines. Liquefaction System p program fines. potential computations were performed utilizing the computerdix C (Blake, 1989c). The results of the computer analyses are presented in App A site acceleration of 0.39 g (Maximum Probable site acceleration) estimated from the EQ FAULT. e nm was used in the liquefaction analysis. This acceleration assumes ats shallow th Research (Seed and site exists on "bedroc P eriod, high-frequency seismic waves (as would be produced or that relatively dense formational materials are present Idriss, 1982). indicates that for short-p the presence deep, soft soil deposits tend to ground of acceleration of at it ground surface. by the "near-field" event assumed in the analysis), damp the seismic waves, resulting in a reduced maximum ound acceleration was used.ground s results Therefore, our analysis is conservative as no reduction in gr of the analysis indicates that a calculated factor of safety very near 1.0 exists for a layer between 30.75 feet and 34.75 feet below the existing ground surface. Although the calculated safety factors are technically greater than 1.0, liquefaction may occur. 7.4. Effects of Liquefaction the analysis. However, the effects of liquefaction can The above tabulation indicates that liquefaction in a relatively thin discrete zone could occur forme ground shaking assumed fill mat. Res intenseem levels byorpressure and a compacted h be mitigated providing an increase in overburden • presented by Ishihara (1985) indicates that the presence of a non-liquefiable surface layer may the surface. This can occur when the prevent the effects of at-depth liquefaction from reaching surface layer is thick enough to resist the upward pressure of the liquefying stratum. Based on a previous grading and it has been determined that the p rade elevations remedial reduces the chart presented offd by addIshitional compacteda (1pa5), point such that placement additional fill soils to the current sheet und surface to a potential for the effects of soil liquefaction to be manifested at the g probability for such manifestations is low. 8. SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS A settlement monitoring program was established at the conclusion of the mass grading operations in 1994. The program analyses were reported in our report ro ram consisted of the installation of 17 settlement monuments andPsurveying of the monuments between June and September 1994. Results of the entitled Consultation: Settlement Monitoring Results for Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative Tract No. 23172, Temecula, California dated December 5, 1997. The results of the monitoring indicated a maximum settlement of 0.04 feet (.48 inches). The monitoring was conducted until the May 18, 1999 Project No.06298-42-01 on last 2 to 3 readings indicated little to no movement.uvium due to the loads fillas essentially cothe survey results, mplee ddetermined that settlement of the underlying and the lots considered suitable for continued development. It is anticipated that the additional grading will consist of cuts and fills on the order of 3 feet or less. As such,, no significant increase in loading to the not betas adversealluvium timpactland should be withinre, settlement for the proposed tolerable limits for the types of structures proposed. • May 18, 1999 Project No.06298-42-01 1, 1 9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS , 9.1. General which would preclude 9.1.1. No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during our study the i recommendations dprecl e the development of the property, as presently planned, provided this report are followed. dynamically compacted upper portions of Recent Alluvium are The compacted fill and dy present 9.1.2' ort of fill or conventional structural loads in their • considered suitable for the Supp condition. However, it is recommended that grading be designed suchshaat additional is will al fll ad grae ne is placed or excavations are less than 2 feet to achieve finish o ed uildings. a minimum 5 foot compacted fill mat to remain beneath proposed 9.1.3. The surficial in compacted fill deposits typically have sheet graded surfaces, but have been nage which divert ace runoff into osseda numberf areas with drainage ditchestwill requireslocal zed remedialf grading prior to Temecula Creeek.. These proposed development. i partly within A portion of the southwestern proposed buildings are situated very near or P y ithin 9.1.4. grading occurred during the previous mass grading the Historic Parcel. No remedial gr g compacted fill mat across operations for this g_parcel. foot Therefore,, emedial grading in provide heafoermeof a partial removal and the entire building footprint recompaction will be required. 9.2. Soil and Excavation Characteristics siltysands in the 9.2.1. The soil conditions encountered generally consist of low-expansive, surficial compacted fill areas which extend over the entire site. 9.2.2. Excavation within the surficial deposits will require a light effort with conventional heavy duty earthmoving equipment. 9.2.3. Water solublestod ermine testing was conducted on a representative sample of the site sulfat of Appendix B summarizes the materials to determine if the soil contains high enough sulfate concentrations that could damage normal Portland Cement concrete. Table B- sulfate test results. The results of the owtsuaalet content and laacorresponding negligiblete concentration of 0.021 percent, thereby indicating a very May 18, 1999 Project No.06298-42-01 I . 1. i li e. sulfate rating based upon Table 19-A-3 of he1994 if visually Buid discernible Codle c It should dtbe 1 notedd that the presence of water soluble sulfates different concentrations. Therefore, other soil samples from the site could yield Additionally, over time landscaping activities (i.e. addition of fertilizers and other soil nutrients) may affect the concentration. 9.3. Grading 9.3.1 All grading should be performed in accordance with the Recommended dmDg Specifications contained in Appendix D. Where the recommendations of Appendix conflict with this section of the report,the recommendations of this section take precedence. the e Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held ngit ewi with 9.3.2. contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical in the owner or developer, grading Tans can be discussed at that time. attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading p eterious rial 9.33• Site preparation svdhould beegin with uch thatremoval material exposed in cut areas or sols to be used The depth of removalo in and/or site as fill is relatively free of organic matter. Material generated during stripping demolition should be exported from the site. Within the areas of the existing drainage ditches, preparation of the surface for fill 9.3.4. upper soft and/or placement should consist of the removal of unsuitable material (i.e. the eroded areas, and/or runoff silt deposits). 93.5. It is recommended that the portions of the building pads that are within the Historic Parcel fill mat below proposed be removed to a depth sufficient to provide a 7 foot compacted building pad subgrade elevations. The removals should extend at least 7 feet horizontally l and ly beyond the building en mum 7 footHistoric compactedefill zone cfantbetachietveo d.the previously graded areas so tha the m 9.3.6. After removal of unsuitable materials as recommended above,the base of overexcavations and ground surfaces to receive fill should be scarified approximately 12 inches, heavily moisture conditioned and compacted. e ons l acted 9.3.7. The site should then be brought toefitoal thes�tedarelsutable forwith re-usesasafill fill if free from in layers. In general, soils natty vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Layers of fill should be no thicker than . May 18, 1999 - 10- Project No.0629842-01 ed will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill densitynd arifiat or t ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry slightly above optimum moisture Conten' asaedstvI accordance STM est Procedure D 1557-91. Fill areas within-place stru indicating moisture to placing contents less than optimum will require additional moisture conditioning prior additional fill. 9.3.8. Where practical, the upper 3 feet of all building pads (cut or fill) and 12 inches in pavement areas should be composed of properly compacted or undisturbed formational "very low" to "low" expansive soils. "Very low" to "low" expansive soils are defined as those soils that have an Expansion Index of 50 or less when tested in accordance with UBC Table I8-I-B. The more highly expansive fill soils should be placed in the deeper fill areas and properly compacted. • 9.4. Foundations lightly loaded 9.4.1. The foundation recommendations that follow are for one- or two-story, a minimum commercial/retail structures. The recommendations are based up compacted fill thickness of 5 feet below building subgrade elevations and that low expansive materials exist within the upper 3 feet of pad gr ade. I 9.4.2. Continuous a footingsgrade. ade should Sped footings should be attde l least 3 feet ded square t least 2 feet and founded below feet lowest adjacentgr below lowest adjacent grade. 9.4.3. Foundations proportioned as recommended above may be designed for an allowable soil - bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (ps0• The allowable soil bearing pressure is for dead plus live loads only, and may be increased by up to one-third when considering transient loads such as those due to wind or seismic forces. 9.4.4. Continuous footings should be reinforced with four No. 5 steel reinforcing bars, two placed near the top the footing the project near strutthe bottom. Reinforcement for the spread en footings should bedesigned t 9.4.5. The above soifol tionsmonlyon oand are note ended to becused n in leu of thosrecommendations requiredq based upon for structural purposes. May 18, 1999 - ll - Project No.06298-42-01 7 of the s of es. that must be . i 9.4.6. Footings should not be located within feet such thatphe outer ottom edge of the footing I `',- located within this zone should be deepened is at least 7 feet from the face of the finished slope. 11 resaturation is deemed necessary prior to placement of concrete. 9.4.7. No special subgrade p as to maintain a -� However, the slab and foundation subgrade should such concrete placement necessary, moist condition as would be expected in any i 9.5. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 9.5.1. Building should or) concreeinforced slabs-on-grade No. 3 reinforcing ng bars spaced 8 inches onthickness cent r in both and be ng (such as t directions and placed at the slab midpoint. slabs be increased[n thickness to 6 inches. forklifts, or high stacked loading), the slab should k The slabs should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand and, where moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned or where slab moisture would be objectionable, a visqueen moisture barrier placed in the middle of the 4-inch sand blanket should also be placed. 9.5.2. Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with 6x6-6/6 welded wire mesh. The mesh should be positioned within the upper one-third of the slab. Proper mesh positioning is critical to future performance of the slabs. It has been our experience that the mesh must be physically pulled up So the slab during concrete placement. The contractor should take extra measures to provide for proper mesh positioning. 9.5.3. All concrete slabs should be provided with adequate construction joints and/or expansion joints to control unsightly shrinkage cracking. The spacing should be determined by the project structural engineer based upon the intended slab usage, thickness and reinforcement. The structural engineerac sho should eonttol spacing ration criteria of the pat American Concrete Institute when establishing t are tended to otential for cracking of 9.5.4. The recommendations of irfpo esent),ndifferent al reduce ettle settlement deep fills or fills of slabs due to expansive soils (if p varying thickness. However, even with the incorporation ohe recommendations such conditions presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-gradeplaced may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or in lage.chThe occur ence f concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper May 18, 1999 - 12- Project No.06298-42-0I h placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic 7 concrete ' intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur. • I } Retainin Walls and Lateral Loads 9.6. 9 1 9.6.1. Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be sure rte ity designed for an active soil pressure equivalent theothe b backfill swill bee nclinedby aatl no ste Pr of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pce. ere than 2.0 to 1.0, an active soil pressure of 45 pcf is recommended. These soil pressures assume that the backfill materials within an area bounded bythe wall lx nd a oless :1thplane n ne 50. extending upward from the base of the wall possess an Expansiondex eater than 50 and/or For those lots with finish grade soils having the above criteria, Geocon Incorporated Expansion n where backfill materials do not conform should be consulted for additional recommendations. 9.6.2. Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.00lB at the top of the wall. Where walls are restratuad from movement at the top, an ls the height of the retaining wall lof the the l wall pressure of 7H psf(where H eq feet) should be added to the above active soil pressure. 9.6.3. All retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system adequate to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic forces and should be waterproofed as required by the project architect. The use of drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes, etc.) is d be nuisance otherwise not recommended whto the asse of thepage lwall.a The above ecommendationseassumecta the property adjacent to properly compacted granular (Expansion Index less than 50) backfill material with no 1 hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. If conditions different than those described are anticipated, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for additional recommendations. f one may be 9.6.4. In general, wall foundations having a minimum depth and provided the soil with n 3 feet desired for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf, below the base of the wall has an Expansion Index of less than 90. The proximity of the foundation tthepof a slope than allowable bearing pressure. Therefore, Geocon Incorporated should be consulted wheresuch a condition is • • anticipated. May 18, 1999 -13 - Project No. 06298-42-01 9.6.5. For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.4 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads. 9.6.6. The recommendations presented above are generally applicable to the design of rigid concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 8 feet. In the event that walls higher than 8 feet or other types of walls are planned, such as crib-type walls, Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for additional recommendations. 9.7. Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 9.7.1. The following pavement sections are preliminary. Actual pavement sections should be determined once subgrade elevations have been attained and R-Value testing on subgrade • soils is performed. Pavement thicknesses were determined using procedures outlined in the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans) and the Flexible Pavement Structural Section Design Guide for California Cities and Counties. Summarized below are the recommended preliminary pavements sections for automobile and truck traffic areas, respectively. TABLE 9.6. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN SECTIONS Location Estimated Traffic Asphalt Concrete Class 2 Base Index(TI) (inches) (inches) Parking Areas 4.5 3.0 5.0 Driveways 5 3.0 7.0 Truck Traffic Areas 7 4.0 8.0 9.7.2. Asphalt Concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Class 2 aggregate base materials should conform to Section 26-1.02A of the Standard Specifications of the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Project No. 06298-42-01 - 14- May 18, 1999 i 9.7.3. Prior to placing base material, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The base material should also be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. t 9.7.4. Loading aprons such as trash bin enclosures consist ofloading m mini -inch 7hinch coutilize ncrete sectionPortland Cement concrete. The pavement should I reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars spaced 24 inches on center in both directions placed at the slab midpoint. The concrete should extend out from the trash bin such that both the front and rear wheels of the trash truck will be located on reinforced concrete pavement when loading and unloading. 9.7.5. The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent pavement distress. If planter islands are planned, the perimeter curb should extend at least 6 inches below the level of the Class 2 base. T. 9.8. Drainage and Maintenance 9.8.1. Good drainage is imperative to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Positive measures should be taken to properly finish grade the building pads after the structures and other improvements are in place, so that the drainage water from the buildings, lots and adjacent properties is directed off has shown that even street away from foundations and the top of the slopes. Experience with these provisions, a shallow groundwater or subsurface water condition can and may develop in areas where no such water conditions existed prior to the site development; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from an increase in landscape irrigation. 9,9, Grading Plan Review 9.9.1. The soils engineer and engineering geologist should review the Grading Plans prior to finalization to verify their compliance with the recommendations ecd n at ons of this reportons and determine the need for additional investigation, comments, analysis. May 18, 1999 15 - Project No. 06298-42-01 l I t LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS t�. $ I. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon E the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the k` investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during � construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The I evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in 1:- applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or invalidatedd e - broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore,this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. May 18, 1999 Project No. 06298-42-01 I I J'c0 _per it Iktr rc v 0J mfr' I j I. .\ 'RRr I I sir. M1r,;,W rs Ll' ,� i jim* ', 7. i / 9, . .41 jr,,1L ii lw''^\gig 5\J 1441 IX% = 0500' t� t F P n/off �A � vSs:.. d of -,�/fir __�i -iv?,. Jlln 'n `-r ���eh' g ©� "`H'°4.'PFa4 a;�[awD o � ��bs am " r 2 4 ¢�¢y�r�'.s >'•y <�o P• 4k . 3+ aE c• 1 pini h nt• . *76- .•a Sw° • g7 mow` s1° 4 1 '4l :'" v�i) -' d, J4r<0.,;to+•4�/ rq','it %g a t a''a. [s \�`/9 / � 3' 1 ' 4 •99 ] \O 1Mo 6 Y+ + 09 REGI s b`a. •t r it 7,0 •EEA - ?• .as 1_ ` A.j M A4ft tit•w. rBA •y. �. � ® .,GSE ai ° ��& _ — .. �S � fEB'I U1 0 r c% 'G-'� '? `% 4�¢;A 'r4 ♦P >� r, . i.49' u , / erawx r �s`.9 `44 r ., aeti ��L CUB -ear _/ Lt9, i; Fral T MECU LA, ', eii, lir, u.:A , r t - i " ct \ W \acr: c t —/ i .3 c, y'" r, eV1'\4 ;r• \ -_ .p.i y ' \sa si -r � c� 4. " rib __I t 92 ,el _ _ e e� r r 1 o+ ,,.` o- ' t7' ��d' PECNANGA \ 27 14 ..,lf '0 ;r ��' — `T INDIAN .- IMINE �' 28/, /. laik:/ 516 RESERVATION N IESERVAII, /_ N __ / \ et- I SOURCE 1999 THOMAS SAN DIEGO COUNTY,BROTHERS CALIFORNIACALI ORNIA REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION GRANTED BY THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS \' THIS MAP IS COPYRIGHTED BMTO COPY r THOMAS BROS.MS. IT IS UNLAWFULNO SCALE OR WITHOUT REPRODUCE A. R ANY NYNART THEREOF.WHETHER FOR PERSONAL USE OR RSAPERMISSION VICINITY MAP GEOCON `_�� INCORPORATED WALMART AT TEMECULA GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS , 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121- CALIFORNIA TEMECULA PHONE 619 558-6900 - FAX 619 558-6159 GCC/JB/TA SI DSK/E000D DATE 05-18-1999 PROJECT NO.06298-42-01 1 1 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on April 23 and April 26, 1999 and consisted of a site reconnaissance and the excavation of 8 small diameter borings. The borings were excavated to depths varying from 16 feet to 50 feet below the existing ground surface using an Ingersoll Rand A- 300 truck mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger. During drilling, relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch, O.D., split-tube sampler into the "undisturbed" soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. Standard Penetration Test blowcounts were obtained by driving a 2-inch, O.D., split-tube sampler into the "undisturbed"-soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. Bulk samples were also obtained. The soil conditions encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified and logged in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure D2844). Logs of the borings are presented on Figures A-1 through A-9. The logs depict the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depth at which samples were obtained. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. • May 18, 1999 Project No. 06298-42-01 . .. . , . • . ,. . . • •. :•:',I.C.1...--y.'11.::::: .;',..7:r..-;.r..7:::::.:•1:-.,:;.cf....',T.-:,'::•,:i:,.:X.ili::. .:: ..::.::;,'•/:....1-:•..,...,:5.•:.•:.,.:••,i"--..1..-::'..-:;',::::::..i.:: ?:".,...,...:•:::: .?, .•• :-...:;.- .i .., . : 6;•:•-:-. ' ::::-...; . -''':::: 7. -.:::Yfrit , . ::-.'"?.}Y •:/j'2;.'/•:1'-...:' ::..- ' .-';•,,'... .;ti''e::::4‘....J-.?..!...;'-'::,12 4,::'',.'iu'::',"-"'.:.'7.1i,,;-.',:::A:.• c?"::•• I. , :-,,I" :--f•..,::4::::: '.: '...-::......'.:..":„2":,.:.'::IC::l'..:::•;::;I,7:-..:.;::•,:'''.:: • .; • .;-,-;'--.:-..' -•:-..17;‘,. . •..-27;Th-v:4-:-• ...i''. .4'ir). - ..:.::it-.1;'-':;.-:;;C.(;•/;:17.;;;;; ;::t ;;';''''.:•.;"- :1;; ;',.. -'2:1."M'hY;' ' ”2 - ;1• ;)"-;; ‘'';!;;; i;;;'-'-;";;;-:-:‘.;':;;'i';;;;:,;:r.;;;;;;';'' ---..,--;;;;E:,.;-';'....;;;C; .';`,-; -''.'.--..;-'-';';,-;:•'.'.•';; ••••;;--;,;''.:,;•:--;;;;„'.;..;;;';'..P;;;;T • - :. :::::“';'''''?;'•1•1';':";.(;;.:C..;•;?;;;;r4;" •ill1:.;..;''P;ri'l •-'14;:;;;-;-).''..;!...•;';` • •'''... t • ....';k.''''..2 :ci :;.:';:'-'2; :i.V;• ; -t .- 2- i',;.;'...;;;;;V:?;±.1:•;;J::4;:;';'1":t;-;&6;`:;;;Trf:',4;3;-,;;;1•':!',;;;;..‘1;,'„! /;--,;'ti.--;;.•;.;',;;;;'''':•t;vi;;-;.;;.!:;;;;'.;:' ; i; -;,";,',..,,:::.••;T-..;,,,':-,;:r..,,...":,:-,,, -.'..);',:',•.;.';';;;;,..]..;:".,;;:, •. , II :;•:',14....-;;;<.:;;;;'''•';;•;:l'f'';''';''J? ".;t:-;""; :; ;;;.Y'E':;'';- ;'':"[;-;:'•C'it;'-';- 774 . ;;;;;;,-;;;;;;,`: ;;;;;;;;,;.::••?;iI;ciili;,.(;'..-':;;;;2,...;;;1-'.;;-,:i;4'',1;,;;;1-.!;;/1•":-;(...''.;-,;':,,••.,-'. ,;..;-,r; .;;; ..:;-;:r;';';!;':,;.';';,-::f;-;:;;.' : ..--"'.';;.',1-.-;.;../....`;l l' -..,';•:-;.f.;-;,;'...:. . '"4;';„, i;,-,--; -,;,-..'; ; :; ';nc.F.',;,..,,,,,:;;;; . ; i ...A,,, ,:.. : ::„.;.;;;;;..;',.,./;1;?;.;';J';'-`?ti 14';;Ce',1;;;';'-‘;;;;'...-..';i:; 1.7;;Vr;?;1:1;1:;;;; ',';','";;;';•;:'..:' ;!.;:• ,,;„:!-,,„;;, '1.'..,-, ,-,-.';,; ::;,:,..y...,..•,..;.',".:.,...."...,;;. .-',;".'ci--;','!-'42:;1.-i....; .;';V ';,,!: ;;;;,•5',' c;• ,, ;,,• ;:;-..::,;10.1'.1.-...k.i.1.h ..',--'1. .;',,;;.;•:;,:.:;; .::';•,?-.;;:.i.:''';,"..f.;.;;;;- I . ' ;' "''71 ,:ttP,;;;:; 4.Vii.': 1 ', 1,•;;; `ii.;!.i;•:;;;!...%; ,; ,,.-,(;,[: - ',.,; -.::-..-;;I: ;7: ..:i' ;',11";.. 1 Vi ,i/..i.'.;;Yri,....";11,,,1:;.•-•:-I .:;•,-.7;;•';J;;L41;v!j;;:.;",;'' ;;;;.i." '-'.:.';:-.',.. .;;?..,.;‘;;;!',:;1'ii;;;;'.,;-;:c:',..,:;.:04'.1 ,;;;;;;;' ; ,...-'"i,,..;;;;;;.1r.;;;--;:•, 7;;;.:4:;:‘•. ,,11;;;;•,.i.: ;;':.....;;;; ; 41:;,,;.':•;--4.:•:,;•.'..',..."..',:',;-.-C''..-. ;',!-;;;;;;;;;•??'-;;;',0 .--:- ,.•.; ; ;- ..';‘-•;;; .1'. ...‘;'.'.;,;c:'Y ,-:1,`..';'!;;;•::;;;;;;,.; , ..--.;,,,.„-;;..-::: , ;•:;'; i-:•'12:--;;; . , ? !;-..r.; .--•;;.- -;•;-;,:,t; :;;;•;;;, P-V'f';',t;,;:;;V.''..'''. i :; :;:-.:.., ''.,-, ..‘ir.,,; ,.-,;:. ,,,;"..:-;'.';':;...7;c-';;!.',:,;t" r;:';-/:;;;•;;;•"';•;•(;.;c:;' ;;--;"' ';i "': •;•7; ;..-. '-: 1!..;1;•.;- :i't;;-:?..:?;-t'.- '4.1;;'';;;'';'3.;; "41A-;:•;;•;-..;;;:;!.. :;;' "::'.:;•'117.;?;'''ir';.1,1; :4?..;.:1; ; '.0.••••`; ; ..;...;?:!•::',-;,;•:'-c ,.*' . :;", , , i'!,1,..;,-,..;.; ,-,....i„...,•,..;;.t.-vti.,,,..,- ., -;,,;;,-;;,, ..-,,t-,'...-,.;;:-,...;'',,ip.'; ;',,,-1:/':E :',..;;.1.',;-;'.5.;•';'.'-;.;,'. .'•-:.,,,•;;;;-..-..d.','-,;;;.:.'....;'il.f.;,,. ; ; ':.;;-;:" ; ,?,-..., .;?,:t, 4. ,..1 .; ;:;;;•;'-';'. ;'±,:: vg.;;;;;•'/:Y..;';';‘::ci V;;PL;;; :lS . ni,!•t;:.;-,,;‘";',"-rri . f , ; .;,7.',--;-•71 'Cc1;,.i.2.-;.-':,,,*‘•,:f„ ,,s.±. ...,.:,;-:,•:....:•7,-,;:?. ,.., ......,,.....,•:•,L,,,,,.... ,y4, •: '. •,...;,: ii....,.„ ...:-.. .,.. . ,,o. .y. ..:‘,..:.....:- , ....-.-:: .....::,•:;.v:,, ...,•:.::,-.,• . ;,..";:•,,,, ,,,,,,,.s.,I-74.,: . .:•.•:•.' . .-:.y .,,.. ' ,:....i., ,,, ".•'...;,;-iy, .‘,..,,,,.,...,,,..:,..,--,,,--i-c •i,::•o,...:',..-',-:.;;."1: :, ..-......,..,:',11.:Y..1,1.:,:-:•:.ret!:af.r.::-::;;,',. .i •- ?--.?,..", • -'131j'''.':t.-...fr--.1-1•1:-.1•:',';'7.4.-:I'il, i's:•11;•:lc",.'S'''' .•: :::' ,4:'•-: } ..,: .:".;; ?.7":: 1;4" '[.•;.:::'•:'::::/,::.':-....",".;)':;•' ''':'.''.;••:1.-• •::::•:;,;, .,,;..i..4..-.:i, : .,z :hel.:::-.',,h?-i:'-.;.i:•:?:::.•i":"-,-.,:.• 1'-:•..‘.".....-,..i"..••`%:•: - -7,,:•:(:-.J.:,;.:-.:..,.:,..::.A.p.ti.12,..,....:.",:,::;:.::;;,.:•,-...,,..,'.:4,:i • :",••••:::,,..''..•,":/:.r.,:•::::j-. '":-:',' ::::!•':,•:. r.-.::::','v.::ir,•; IA: -.:.;,•"..”.•-••••••••:::,-":"..- :.: VII_• '''.2:i '(:);t.:7; ,'qx-;„ii--„,..91/4.-":•.-....:-.,,,,:-:,.,A,,. .4:5....:I.,,H:',:....,,:::1:•.;-t,„-.:1-!-:,..,1:•;:?4,-%:.1-:zy..4,..-,J.,....,...":;.-0,-;.‘-.."..!:, .3.....-,‘.: . .;;,•-....4,,:',1:-(,:. E...0.!:, • :,,:,..:'..,..:,...,..-,,,,,,::::;•::::•,:-....:::::::-.: ;.--,-.......,, ,;!•,:,..- ,...1• (.: -;•:;.;:::„y,, ,.,,.„.,•••.,:i:.!:,:'•.:.....:,.::-. : c .4.;:•*•-•41..;.:;,‘'.:i;-1..1;:ri,'kui!.;',',•,!.'•'2'.4'a',-C.:',:-:'. 1/2';').•-•:•,;c:•••.•;et.41 ill.,72:4-'•?,i-!'4:1,;.-1.: 11 r I.;- ..',.-.."•dr•Y•,',''i.i.y.a I.;:•,'.::;•••••.-,'R•i'x-',?".:t.;:`,;:%,,;';•'.•'.;'•.• ''.t.''±.'''':.::•:Lfi.'''''?'''''•['!;.h •'1,..'''' 217••P.: :',1::/;I;;;I:-C'H':..:14:f;1• ‘:- r4:-...:•: •: •: '-',?':'•'. '''::';'...;::•.?-1 "..jr.:-13`61rz.:•L i;%,1?1:1:\?lit.ti;•3:4t'''''' ;•,S;;.4.9•Vc9.i`.1-:::''...'li,e17•1'1?'Vi'•• •:•.;/::4•1:?i'V],t,•••?'!:4,.!`:•':'1•4',;':;••• •:.-.;:t;•••'r,i;•••_'.1;.1:•::,::••i;•:.1;::''. .-if•A',•,''':,i.':?,',...cr.•;:cn;•-,'',1:r4,:•,?• ', ,••••'•••:111-.•;'4....i'-2•.'•'•. i::•••(•n:r'el-L'}I..; •1:;:.:::::"•S(?,-•'•:1:.•••••••• :•.•., :(• ...C;i:•1 i•*:',Zt.gi:dirli-V4.;:::i.;•,'..1.'; '-i•1.•K 4'.1k:•:,::',..4:••.Y::':!.Z.!q::;','t ll'f.V .'N't;:::,?.:;1'`-'!;4:!'' .14'144•••14...1,i.i,';:-;;4 L-:;D:•',...,7:-::::-l':.:. -i....:?';:.,,.'!'f:J•P.:t 1 r7.,.:: .'''i)•:•;.4:1-..,:!'••‘'j••,'',. :-.,X:ct:-.'.,;:•,';I:,t,';',:::7.."'l '147• :; •',-..:•,,."", Y.:,--,0"..,:-.,:ir,•:::•:::;:„7.,:::::c.,:::::;:,::::.,,::: :.":;.,...',.',.:..i.-,: .-, .,.. .,"....,‘•„-k.,..k.i.:•,::::!;...r.,..,,,•.:, ;,:,..it.?„€,-,-.„ii-i;AA-i,,R.-1..-r,j;.(e,J.;;,:f:3:;!?:,,f7:;..,,;.1..;',7,c.,:;:ryli:.:1-f..v!,L;i-•.!,;,:,:-,-,.;;:::-./•,:-.•:...‘.-:::.:c4..:.:c;.•,:.-?,;;...E..•,",?..,::,". .: :,-,-4f..:;:.,•••:;:.:•:".:. 1:.P.6t:'...`!././'1,',•.:•:'r'.ix'..•:‘:,i:-i::::•:.").,-..,!.-.:•:,::4-,,".4.;.,.2:-.‘'..-,..t1/2•-;..::-.:("6.-:..,,Yli•::::::.1:i;,?4:4•,$17-:-.:$11:)2,:,-:::L.:4-.vit.-...:-,':,::.-,-.-,i...ife.,..-,.i...:..-ho:..jt,.,,,:./g,,,i;,-,1,„.‘,;coi.\;1; ....I:h. ' s.-...::.,-....,-.....,,.•1,,,,,....y..,:-., ,:'.2-,,,..--:•-,:‘,;.:.,..-::.•".".":,,.:•;?.,-"4.-2,:,-.•:•-:l':. :::,,i,"•,..t.,,:•r.t.,.:,..,;.!. ,;•,,x...1.4.:i..7......,-.‹,,,. ,--,,,,,.:,„.rJ2i.:-,..A,•,::,.!,-y..;,,,• :,;cw: :,,...,..k.. 1:,;;;;;.„ .;,?."1;;3,11,;;;.:;;;;:•;;;;.;'.41.2-4;;;':‘,1i,t""fq;cr;;:k*..i??.1.1';'41,;;;;;;;'.i4"."i;;.(;•ti...W1;;;`4.i.7-3-',;?,•1, .2;:,;yfr,;,;;:,f2r;,,;,.,.;,:..,:;.,;;,.;,,,?.,;;;;;:•;,-.-;,., ..,.. AW;;;;;;-'J;'11‘;'....-."4'.i.r;.;;'il-•;'-'tii...;14.;1;;::'W,::!7-1,-; ;;,;;;;.,;:-'".:1',-;;;;',,,c,i,"-ii;;;;.4,'.fi,-i-„',74;',1;i10C?:,;:i;i:;1,"2b‘4.,;',.,: iir';1'.:;:i.):;-!;3:,t;;;';P:•,;.,;;/;t:';;.iits:';i'44'2111;i;p,"1 (...??.472,L,',cgi,•;,;;e46;',,Y,;/•;;;42i":1:.,,e1.7-,a1.i;t;V;;;:.y;,;,'ff.!",,i;,,i;"'f-i';;;;•-•:• :1.1. .,;.!:;;,i'i'...!;;I:;1.;:t;;;;;1";;;"•;:t,'!,....i.IL:c-'4.,;:r:''',f;Zt'i;;;:!;: y•V'1;?3;-,i-i!ilki-1;41;:li.s,:;,,"'"-;;;S.;;!ir;,4ii.•,..1, -1).;.;z;-:..i. .:'il ;';•;:f-;.; •-;‘;; .:;;;'4;:'-'''..;'-'• ;',-:;.;;;.;:;‘ ',!,:',';''';,:::',117,:l';;;j;;;:•,..V4.::-.re. ;.c,,,--;?,:;,1:ifel.).1c?,:;Pilir. -1.;.;;/,?`:;;".rti-,?.1FICI,..5,:11...5.;,‘.?it's.3. .(:-Y1-; ;;itirir;j1.;'-i;12:1;;;1.14;i::-;;,•09;i'•*;&;•;;?;);',;;: 4,-'.:,.1;r..): :,4CtciC.II,Ii; ;I:;;21:$,:f.,;.;1!;",`;');;),','.;.. .1T,;.',.;';'•;:..";,;..3.,;.,ti,;;,.:!. ..'1,'3,..',;l1::;;,;.'....,-,:•;1');;;.;:;;;;,;:'4-,.;..2;-;:::,;,!...;•,',,H:::;:,;;4:::11‘:',;;;;,'":::,;;Ij. ;.065-A.;&-;41,;; ;‘`,(,;-;•;`-k;f4;;341:ft?,!•ifj'',3/4}:K;';,!-!X'11;,.;; ;;;,,,./ .2,;;Ik';`,i',1,:,-.'Ee471:7p ,;41,r,s1,?,,Q;. , Z.;, ;?;,-, ,;.;;; t!'; 'irj.iTipli: 7=?;;' k•kiV-,,V.,;,,iiy• ;;17.14.;;;;;:'"•;i17;: .1..":': :!;;),-).!;kj.;',1 ;; ...%;4:li;--,;;;I :,..,";re;Lcl,1;c-;:1-21';:;;;;;;;;7:1.2;;.:;.',.:;•kr.;;;;h;s;',:f'.‘•1??...';';:::1:P.:. •!,.1.,:';;;;;;;,';;!,„;;;;;;;.:,;!..;;$3;_'; ..i,i.;-:;•;!...f.; l4i ;At;:r;>i'L;V-11j.5,1:',;;;I.:.'ift1;.;,t‘-;r1 ..'1';:i;;;;;;?;:;');:aC,'•........A‘;';;;;;;''rtilki ; , .?I;;;;;.• ;';. ; ;;I-1.•:•:,;;;.?;!.7';';;."C-f-';`,.";!.‘',;-;,'•;;'i,7!:;il' ...'';:- p , , .,Erz ,-, / .i..,;;;.!.t.j.•-i.,d,:;-,i2cF,:!.'.-,, :i•i: N;,-,,, ;.",i.; ;!..Ci;;;;.'-';i•,),...ir.:411;;-,,,:fl•Q,_,t;'!,',52.!!irl,;',2:1;;;J:417.1.i.liTi.i,i;.,,; 1.;!;;;,,,,;:ri.;','! :;‘,-.,2.-ji;;;;,3‘.-:;Lc,'?:-.±.,... .c,j.;;p...,;!.......!::;.2.,...;,.22.:::.,1,22,..2;i2.,t„.!{2.''y.:',,-;;',i'r" f -S. , ....;2r....!,. .;.:-X%.:V.Y.:•:•/;; 12.t.2! -.;';,,j$21',Iiril'it:i',.;:.";.I.2';'2',11.',;,; .•.;.22t,-.22.,!ii.2:;2',2';C,..22..:212.A..;":',2,............,22,.2,....;;',,,:c.:*,;)2,71:,../..2tiy...-..,,,..:,........:., :',.1./.....;.:...,..,p ; i.c.....7 : ::.;t'irt2r.41':itke.:,,LiL.i.iff. i:(-H...,;.,,j1,,,.A...4,7?.C11,:,...;:”:,;,?•,?It$,;(:5,..71.1"ill....,..e••, ,.! 1,.. ;?;i5,11;ikKele.2/5.2.222.;?tr:c../^,-:C ',..1.1„-.rifi 1.:;',:„!.,•,,,',i;•.y.,•!.:1;3•,•,•,-.":i.'....-1.:/;,,?...•:7!,',..,-; ..;,..:,..--,1:,!.:/-.-:-.1:-0.-:::>.i..:,::::::•.;::•!..:i.,•,,•".-..' ,::-,:-.:.:r.-,.;.•".4....."•;,::::.:.'''..-. t..•••••., ',:;‘\)>,%;•-;,;t:.?; MCI_;; ;; ‘ 9 ,!,; ;I.f...:%1:1;1*;;;;;,,IiIt'Si;},?;,)Czti,;,4‘:,;i:::•:-.,ts;:ii:fi.i..',":','W.,'l;',....;•;11;"-:;.PY44:14..einS;',.;!) ?1,1.;.:!:!?„- -'7;:f.:'-;,--71;t,.°);.; ;I-1;i1.1,.';.;- br';':".;1;;'••';, ..,'c;;-;;;',:;•;;V.7--.;;:.;,-*;:;ku,;;.;!-Cfj.; . .;:•;:-;-...."- ,;:-;;;-;C;; ; ;;;;',;'•':;:','/:::;''•?'47,.:. :::;\?•,•,:vi,c,---„,',.:.......:i:7‘..,:::::,-;!.,..:<-;-•••••-c•-,-4.5,:::: :;--44:isci:1 :t.:.:..",..:;•;,-..r.:1,-:';:iy,-1:1•4:::::i-4....-:/:Hy.,1.:;::•-i..":....5%,;!,•...,.:;f:iii'4,1.:0:,..k-::::f.:.4,..::-,•:::,:t.';,•;4......'4,.."‘v-.5.;,;•','"),:"/...::',",q.4.:',.:,•: :,‘ro::.:‘';'•::•--/:-:-',::::•;''•-:-: "0:.-••:",.:,•:.'i:-•:';::::,:..r.i.:•.::,-1.::-...::i T.!'.......‘'.....,...'2..22.,.t...4 :.,!....g:.a..2i ..,;"12.24,..i(s.C.Y:',./.1/4'4.17...,;"'t i',. .‘2,.V.2./.2'41.2.2..P,.,2"'n..1;.. ..':.0..22 1.-.2".'%';'.22! 1%Vt....1'1,2'1-2.2:'',Vth.irirr2.2'..2!',:;•/! S-;.l'i'Llir,',2"-V.'21: ',',"'.-c,....,' -.222:;21:2',...•2,.....I..H,L',22.1;'....:'i';,.,,•.'r;!-;•1..[2;.2':.k:t.??:;...-1:.','t'4,........22.•.2i ...1.g,.;•V142....(22V;r:1”-:CII.C,2'....C.:h..':(1..<Y;.2/.. .r.:i2.!!'',..k.rtit;r1,:dicf,..'PV;?..2.''':if:cli‘.'")):.:2,'"'2i1:".1-C'.142.9;:t.'2..2:2gi'22;....i''',:1222...;;;;;.2.Cr, V ,1:P.V.-.2‘>.2`[112tclOi:< e.2', I..:..)V...2',J-14.,;21,1;.,,...2,V.2-/:..i:',....;A•2;;"21V,c.';!::-.2,.2;i.:.11;:......‘2..;.:::41,2.,..,?!.2r.....,s;,.,..1,.,,.., . i.,. 2.. .(:-...,::(ity.i:2,,: 2.t.;52‘Ficir.f 22ir,!;!..F.1<.;•;;I:t%-ti:r2rk.??..ii....C*".1‘ V::-..-..-.h.,;!.:!..1..2(.2*!..F'!.)....-2'2.:2'il...,.ii,i;'..r i4.:j.:22.1:14A-.1.V2'.'..2' .'.--;";'-;;;;;-";;;,;;;;;;: - .; •.A14P:i'''--:i'i;•;'';'..•;',Aj-;`4:-? 1;"-ge4;?;;:i-W;';;;';; ; ;it.;-1:;)•;;-12,;;‘;.:-.;;‘;;;;•:;j:".;;+)- ?”- :21.'''fr-V,C..f'.1'....‘•;;1?2itN'2.1...1:1211.2'. 112f".". ...;1 '&i:,..2.. H:jtHI'''';:?"-:'''''"..%•:l '' /.'f2:221'.4..2 2 ''..•72.'2.''-'-;;.''''''''''::1.:•:2" 14...2 I../2;22'1 C.`.^;:i.1`1.34 „ 4).:;";,,c.';;;.'-'•;;' • ' ,',v .«i 4'2: ;...y)-;,;•-..?,;;;-,';',C1...; 4;:. t•-$1:?-1t-5;;:••••••?;:-.;4';:?;-';;;;;:•-;;h;‘'/:/-11';-; :;;;/"'L,Ii.';!..:1,:,;',: ', ,:,,,;',!;;';,';....:4:.:47:::,2 4,...1...E. ,.y.,:i.•,-cr';.:•,.i .•,,,,t±...:.:•,. ...:,• ..:4::,;,(,•,',:•1,,,,'.,0.',...9;4;1•?...tIV' x,c,...,...„:.;;.. .q. . ,,. ...,;;4•47.:,..;;y:•.,,,,,,a. ,:4:,•,-5 4 i....,.:::,..s,-,3,,•,.:•. -..;i,I.,,t..c.•.i.:;:q•;••,,,•4K ,, ;...:,;?ig(I'. **7`:::...;•'''''•••••:r.'')7•.7.7,:i:;if•'...;•::1tE :;fr:,-‘1,;•,1'...41.•,;'::.(:•P:;;:i''.;,'::.,''cAt]...1.....`:•i....1'.';;; ;±'•';i...'t'j.!.:%.C.:•."•;J0)3?•;.E•lc t,'../, •••.•f 1J2,-•.4' ',7lf 1..1,.."4, .::::;:r:i . ; ? f••!•"...,;OX':4Z.N..s&i,V ,';":.•.,';',',-!•),! 2j.21,i4,.!‘1c1i;'l:`s',7•:•.'1,'•..:i;.6.A'. 1• '‘,-4.., ,•1'.:1: „,1',,i.,.. . .-)J,'•;1‘.•;.:•:;;:;....1'„I;f:3•,;*:'../i•;.',',:•;",,,,.,:..i.-.”j,,.,•h';',K,••!:1;:i,;(ii 'A.''.'••, ','•i'•,• tt.•;.,1.3.1';;',i !6••,!;:it,3,',,,'•;,14raz•;',;1';':;1-•, !:•:'•,!..1:-',';,:;.••• ...:.'•`,;':'0,',.,c....,:•••.!:.'...').1.•.:.V,7),.i-•k.:::::i j•f..:,i•,,,4:ji.•:*i.:;;.1,15-31;',:".tljYt!tt,•• c,-;••••rr.::(V..1,:r.,';'‘'-' .:4-.1.:•:;:f.,;414.,i'll.;;;:::::::';!..-sei,,.. fri0•;fx 1:1''`•:'P-•,..4.ki1,)::;.:-(:A..-,';';'44y,;:q.1:;,%:F:,::::lf.,:•:..;{,h:'.,`,T..-ir.:1.1 -..-, 1.:-2: ',.:i-,-.1?:,;:;::'4:::',;•..,;;'-,::f:-.::::•'1C.:::::•.:, :1.•:.:44';-'fc.i',1..),„--!;;k:'::'?-:.•.:',•:-.•::::.:::•:;-.";.•?.!.'0,!....:,;•-&,. .r.,-,k.:::1:./..,:;::..-,f.•, ri,..!,,..y ;• !.,:... " . 44'irt:...r',.J;(:?..,',•!,......i..,,. .i,,,,•Jiii":71I:,,i,w11,: •-.54.-..',74?-; . t71,•, ,f;':,../,..,-;,,,,,,i ,,,,y..:•;,,.,y•, , ..`•.;Y:,•.4.,...-.:•,:••••<;:7.- . /..... c ,•...,..-t/..,.. .n.. .i.i,--,-•;•,.. ,,,,f.:;...,-„,....y.;:,,ii...,---,i',1 :',/.•:,:ir..:.;..,...?..,.::,,,,:i.:;,i,..,.:•,..(..-x..-Y.‘,,,i,...y. ,rf.. .,:-JA -4.,:,.,•;:d..,: .;:•---:',:,,,-,•:,,i'',Af.;.:.f.:J.,....1,• - !0:4•. 1,•;•,„:0.,I,1!,,,,,,.:/rik„..f..4,,,,i(;.te.s.71:,,,,s-:::•,,,:,,...;('-4:1y';;.1;,16,:i.4',-,:•it-i.1.::::•:,:f;...t..,:f.:.... t-,: •:,,:,.k.,:::',,,,f.„,: -,•..,,......-......:,;.f:',!,....),,...c.'(....•:.2. •,-41,,ysa.-4ii,ri..:7.,..,,,t;.,t,•,,-:....--....:- ..f.., - ?. :%;,,,,...,,y7y,;,..,,•;:.:t,,,,-14:iirl.;;;:c.i,;,:47::! ../.„,..,,,•,,,,•.,.„;,,,,.,/, ,.. . . .,,si. , - r.i: ,...;•-•‘• ,.c.:,...-. 1,11„,,....,,,i,,......:.,.4.":.•,,,-..7..:, .;..7,--;:•••.t,c,,‘,..:/.....,i;At,P.;,:i7:.:-.!:-,,,••!.',. .i.. ',,•,,...,'41•.-3;-,.•?::z.g...,?';',:-,;:_ii '&...;:;,5,,,14,k?'"...1....?;I::1!.::;;.',',C.5.1C'ili./, '..;',;21..;•••'?!:(1;3,t.141."'C'C'1Af-li\;1'.1ii' l;:11)..r;;;;;;22.;:,t.).:....V,:i..ittt‘): 1 ‘ . . "'.-1..:(4.k6:Sli'.:1-tf.(WP-7,4,.. :',:::i,'.:,?...:..,;;;:',-',:•:;;;?;', .,,:•.;':::::..1!i;,ii;,k.%11.,,:.•:,,:,:!;,,..:),I .' 1....:X„..-..,,. ::::::: :•,i;'•,?;,1.:::' :• .-?,;,:,i,•,?:.,ill...'•.1(.:Ii. t.:.1.1s- I (1.41?,ijt,?!..,';1' .;.k.4'',:!;,..•',::4„ ; ,..;:::. -,ThirL ' , ;;:i'.11'alt",:jtii,"1,\;:;Ciiiil.!!'):;111411:1.1i;!d,:;:.').,i.fl::: ::....,;•;;;/*:.?-'..;}!....;;,:-...:01:.,"c;.‘•-•. ;:,•,..4 -;;:t,t):!;s1:1?!I. .,•';', , =:. (;,.!}, . '..,1:•( 0.:,1.;:r:14:AC;11-t. .;.k.:--4.1.!:.,'),...!!•:.,:.i,;; ;::).,f;F:,',,•!,'„4,tii:le.:•i:•] c5.1 .i.,./ef.1:;;;,t,\-4;N;;•filr.li:-,;-::.:,;',,:l...,;;;:-;;;„...:,;ii „,..:,,•:.,,:•,-.4„ ,,f,,iA,,A,;!.;,,, „•:,-,Air. i.„.t,.ei...r.v;,!,,f,c?i,t,,,t,,,,,:.;;.,.'."9. .,:;',1A7:,-.10...,,,,,,..1'..,,,.:.i',yri!"),:•V:i.;',..:' :-.7L, ;.! '7 ,...ice,.•,J•;i1'.';?.'7.•::.•.-r•i:••::„.•-.-.47g.if).7.,'W••;;;;',10;;:FA7,7•‘:,:: e,:.:".1:r i,e.i.ii•p:.?..••;:„P.,-;•,'<„-- .•:;"1 1.!'-:Y•?•!.,Y,7•••,E--,A..6.;•-;,Iir 0.,•••;‘,..•,‘,"3,..i•-•-•:••.c.:.;',....:'ii ;••• ••:'f•'Y7\ii•:';.•P:•:::':::: iii".0 f':Firtelr 'r,'•-•tt:-.1-tr;T:11;1•??.'1,,viii,');:l•tvi.Po•iirM,V,',..:t ,•'ir•-• ,.i,”.l'il 1„,'v„,"q-,,„ ..!"ir-::44..„••••••:•!,•.,;.•,•••c!".•-1:7,•;!,,,:.::.A.;--.!..?;•••.:L,,,....,•.•:.••,'•'••.'o'iy -;€1:::•:'-2:! -'0•,••+.•••.i•F,'‘,',:<:••:••:,•iX";•,.'.:•1,:•,,....;:r...:rt-.•,10:(;;;:rA:1'.-9)1<cj;i''.::::1:•?!..s..1/4i?!.,.r-t i,::f KI-ii•':',i,i.:b.`,••fil.;i,;;;],-c4;,"c.K.'4•• -'.;.•:. :tii:.•',4,f'f:i.•\ ..,-k!,'IA,tt',''f!:,.. .:e.'i,;1..i.4 i 4-•4';''4.1•12•141c:47,...i-f:I\ ..1•;*•!'1;.•: •:.i5; •••••'11:•St',.-.,:,:.••,; a3 il ip,';2•,'Ai.]L k V?::!..,';':-....t. 'u I .:"..;;,i-..E...4 It.c,,•::-r...,e-fv•L.-•.'• i;i.• ,:,,e,,ii-2,-.4...,:idc,!!!.,:•••,,,•;,•,-ci:,•12.-:.•:;•..•,:!•.,-.15.,:•'iy:ViV'S.6'.:,).p., -•ce):•!•-,'",::15.S'.:7-cri11.1S...jvVf.'V,'•4:::;',1.1:! ,:,1 ,' .%.•'i l:•`..rf../..:•.;••f:Ai 4:71•*9•Ii •tiV:iCit..t.1 •;0::ii•A•v4.4.%:0',4:C••••2'.?it&r''i'i! ,1c:4;.?*•&':;fieti4?:,••••••`:;.;'1„',":.1,!„.,::f..•1' : •V ir,r:.;• ,!.-1/(t,l'::1-1,c,', .,•-•ift:':•••••:[4.,;;-..'•;N:',':•;::t!:',•••4“).: ,•?."-.1,:1-',..1:7.:''-:'-'•?..0".:•-.1,:::::::',..?..:;;;.,?,..itf:,•,:,..-:;,:•,?1-4,..,•,-0,:..:, ...ii.•,...;:;.•::;.?.1,:,:„:.:,..1•i:zi,;!..,-..:N:...4...;•!!,...t.i:.Anr,,,--..„,..e. ..1..-,.r, \1: fk+:.1 . •: ,,f4y .044..‘,,;c1 .,-,1,q44q40(N.i.'1',,..;,7:19,,;(•:.I.N.:,.=:','S,..-..7.,:..,:t.orrly,.t.•;:•-::-.*,:i.'...4::::...]:5:::-.-.;:i.::::„-,s‘.4. ,::::,...-4,..c.,....;,-.::::::.:.:•ii.....,:,•it;i:..;.:i .•.: ::,..,,....,..•24+...-:;-! y,-,:7,- ::-::;..1. •.:1....,',,,...•..1?...,-,.,3;..r -A,..t.itri' :, ••••:.1.:-..i,:,-ti.t.ic.feu, :,,,..R.-1,-...v,!:•:;::,,A•wt.,.:vbeA.,v.-to/1'41'a::v:"Iroc,":',':t--'4-:;;Ist1:14;:.:,A;"::,!`t:'\"?...-,P•i"'11-....;:iy.5.‘"1•';'-.4::'::r':::%,,,;;:e 1,-7/I!.in.':!"-:•,,--"..-T.:'. .-;:.:'t, i:z: ,. ,?•,&?1.??•-. .y:•e.\ 1?-::!"-}-.1c ;:' ,1.' !9'4...„:".!.e.::: . ..'s:}±.':::"•;.!,:.k.A,:-";V:if.,!".,:clifr.ii'll:,•4-ii,1::,...4..tt,:4:.sif;EV.:?-V)V,154:':'-'2•1'.‘g,. • :':e•-,*`..:C:47., :••,,,.d."-,,:::::,T.-,-.9.::'c.; (',:,';',,..:,-,...'•131';;:f! ..::Att7.\',A1.:::::.Xi;j: /;;C.;;..!;', iting.,,,,, :,....:1,:cr, ; ; . c ; ;;ILriefiet;41if;:lrelAq.1-;;;;:.;;.?4;t1;‘..a't;;&;i;:si.'4.,,:, -t7tfi:44Elii--6,1?-;k1;' -;;'..‘, .,; ;;j51:;;A,•';-:;!*;::,t;:;;,<!-.".,:;lit ':\;',';(7..,.;:i.;;;;;;±;.:.-;:...ci;i1- 11.1;;;.!.S;;I::15.;:,;111;;:itit-,:ii,'!,..-ii'',1;'• t jr,!,c,•;;;;;? ). ;,;?;t:',;yr,,;;c1;1"1•14.:i2;,,;;;;;;',71.5piir, litir.F.1:;,:',;. -1!).,;;;•)",:t. ;::•;5:::.; ;,;:;-•,li;;;;;It'!":1; 'X.Sf.,t.f.;-;;-!';;;;Iii;7::;,:.:1,;/, ';15,;11..!'is:;',11'f;;;;I?;;;,;3:;;;;;;!,/1/4ii:‘,?);;:1-;,,;,,:i1.1;,--.:1;.,•,:;;,;;;;.:::1):;,,f,;;;;,;:.;::;;;;/::>,;;;;V.,;:,,:,: „..;;;;;' ,..".,k .:1...--,,...„:::-.,;;;;;;;;,:i....; ;;',/,'i.,%t,-ii::;;;;i'fi...2.;:,t. i:,..(1,,;';,,,;•,. ,;;;;'.•/;:;f:Lr'i;,...21;.:;74i;;;;,;;%?:,..`i'!,'1,';',.--;,-;-:i.,CV; ;,,;;: ; `),;;-:•,; '1.."-S:W;1;t ;;;;:tiL,7'?i :1; ''-'1.';;-":; ;;7;;-- 1-';;'-.4cC;til.i1;'1411fai ;711;;;;I' .f. ';;';',;;,;(1,`P6rofiYtli,:.;;;:t-,;;;;; ;',Cli;;;;;....'4.;;;.:•:;-! .C.i'Vffil'il. (;;;; 'r---;;:.-f-;:;;;!;:;;;!,/,';',."4:;,;'..;,11:',..;;;;;:!.;q;.:;7:-; 10i!'?..;..,;;%•jc.",.2;;;;. ..:1';'./arif'.1.).: '-'; riNT';';11(7.*.:-'-`'..;,';1:::;;;;I;;;;j•';',i‘'`I''i::;',;';1:';;;;;I; ;-,.;;;;;-:0q.: .•:;';';-../12:;",.;;.•;,‘`';'.V.:-;;;;1;•;.]::4;:1".,ii,;':,;VS.....1,i-,;;;;',-;;;.i-',;,;;:';:.,Cir:P;;:?;,.5::;;;:-,:.(t•t;t1'411.7...;ii,', :t4;;;-',E;1-,,f'.....t.ci::rsamtv;i4:-;?:,?1,„:',., Ii.,‘;':1;1;';'•2!-,':---1;Y„',..-t- '`;„:,;;;,•,..;;;,;;;;;;.,',;:;;;,;1', , ,...9 5;,\Is, .i,-i,;,,.;: *!;;';',;' ;!:-'4.; 1" '.: ?.A.'i‘,21..?"'• ;.:„;;;P,"::::::',VR:5-';;;;1;...1;V:;C:tt.;;.;V,"4:,;:-.1;:;;,;.',.f-:./;Y:?-;'!--,:,;,),; ;;;;;I:f21%;');4;;:',4-1,4rAjp?ft:•.,:7:-. 64,21k; AFic; .;;;;;:ii,$"/` '..;;; ' ; /,;',"1;';';,,,Y;' •I. I. .':';;',...;-,'.;;:;;;.,:;',;;,;';;;;:ff..-NI.;;;:"7...'';;'i'!:F.;[•?":;; '.T,S. LIS''-?,. .:,..''''.4'1;'f's*;J;•;;;;;k'-:,':;'''.4`;;-•:::Y-','?.1:1;,c''il;;;;;11;',.-;./..";1„..t,::;ifc;e1; :tri:?;',:s,:;',1,1'-i;i?'ill.?;.1;i::!.c/c;''.;IV::Ari;] :1.1!..l'A.c4c1.:;?31,J;q;; ;',;:;;;.';;; t 9.. i ;(36;;:;I:,:i4i' ' t-''fli /I::)(:;?..4111.;;;'!'i).".--1t1f'"?'14;;;.;:f:•(,2;i1.' ;; :;;i;41; '''''.7('' '';:;t:•;.'.;;;;;;;;(....'31.. .1";';';‘:'1.:41;"!;.;YCH'''::\:••••• 1,.;:;,C,"7,;;PT,;-:'1/2;,;::.;.;;;,;:i'.;;I.: :;;.::::, :q;';''„;••••0;ii-i'll;4'A';'..t:i;;;;;),;.;;;,,I,-;;:. ';,:,";....;`'.;..-,(f :-!;;;;11;;I'l:;-?;:i:::;cti;-;4;;fit;li;,.',i;;?,-;A .;.;;?;;;;,;"';,;.;,;',;Y:;:,..,:;2;t:',V;./..;',',./;,1;;;t:j..);;;;,i1;;';;; :•;;;I:.•,•-fi'l,' ,.'....;•,I.:;',;;'),;'12."1:t...;.;,?Y;;'?,-,‘1:1';'-,;;;;!::•:;;;;,i;.;;;;.C.r.,.;:'-:,;;;?,;`-'•,;:/!..;:'.-:!i/..,!•;,,•!: :d.'!Y•;./1;r:\j-4t-;\'‘Cl'ird';;;;;;;i:: ::it2-';'-f7t7).;;:;.:"..;(44,-"?6?;4::C•1;‘,;:;J:.'t.'''.':•Y .C.,.;- . .;.. - il,iV,;',;1,i;;,';;!.,.,-;.1;;- !,......,•,.‘.;;',:h.;,,:•;;,!;J';n1-.;j-t-W;;;.P.:S'b1):;;;;;:;:::?i•i').1,;. (1.;...7;ksicr''; ; :s...7;C;. ! ;7 ;..`51, •!. . ..11!..i::;.;?;.r.:',t;:•';,-,;.:;;;••:: .. , ; ,j),;2,.- ; ,,;!;;;1r';':-.t.J:k11-. :;31:1-;',;!.;;;';-!;';-4;,.,1.''.-:;!,71,:;';;;;;;; iV- I. ;',..;,,,-.;(-;!,,zni;',Iii .li-:::;;;;•::,;':;;;Sc;it.4•::',..,..1-../.4'.31,',•-.^,:•,‘,`lift•i.i ':•,f-t•'';'•7[:':-:••;,,;;•••• •'•••';•f:G,i-irlt 2 ...1...:.I''.•-•.;"2..\-'2'I:2:Y15'1'1'C:2;1i; th',17,,t.,: 221:!.'")1.1•',:,.;:,/,',..,.,t.‘2.H.:R...:,12;1:;;.:,:..,:.r.1,;:"..1 :"..-41.ti ;2j2i„.L..:,.1.17;e,i1 ''-'45,t;2 fr I•411....trik.',".i'''.4-''...• i .-a ,,i t ;•161,,..,T.,,,..7„.,e,s,•,....,-; ,;,...,....,,....„.,,, ,if;,,,;<.;,..45. ..;,,,,,,,l....!,,,,..-,,„.!;,;,,,„.;.,,,,,,.1.....,,,,,fq.,,,..F,....,.:7,„;,i,,s:.,,..,,,,,,,•,,,,.-},-t,:.,-..-Ai:,...:.-,,,•J.,.r:-1,:•/..c.:-,...,-1,.::tr. ,,v.,..ii. ,...,,,,,,i•,,,,,,iy.,..ti...t.,,,-..,,,,,,..4„:,,,,..1‘,45,,,....,,h.i.,,-,Ed,,,,w:r‘,— ..,,,,.t.,.,(),,•.,.41,41.4,...rA.k.ro,..•1; i`. , I\r-,... '' !r'•,;'-11:;•;;;Qtri..ii;;;;-;•j:::1..r'z;-',:'.;-;!.-;,.,', :---.';".-4:1-'th--,:4":.h',.'°;' .-,?;',',-e , ,..:,..., .),,',-;:, '1'.';''''; ;.•-•'-;;:-.>'-'-';';':•';' ; ;;;''41' '''''';:kc9<;itt1/4e4triti''-'1•;;-: .."-?;;:.1;;I;t1,:l'Irkei. ; - • 4'• ' 1 - I'. 4.:i i.•11'1:46-• ..•(;,ir-2;4:4'' : '.f. g4‘1/4;,;.;•";.';;;';;;', ,:-;;:•:;',-,... •::;•-•;i(1;4. 4‘,),',:i;;;-,-•:':;:1-;;;;;;;:? .:::.;;•.! c!•:::•;'-'eat;ii f,•:,,, ;;1•;•,_,f(i tilers%',':-,i'l f/AI.:id'Ic'f'26 fli';j1V...;-\;•-,,- Fr '''';'4?) ..t, .cr,;4;f1,4,-2p ;;,,t,l,-„..ei',.„ :11s:;: ;-'.:i;;;,,74;1•;;;.4;r., --;1/4.'';:••':-.;fR ;'.3...;I:-,;;:i.Nri-til';;;?•:;',';..'•;. .1 :-;;;; ;;!':;;;;;;.t.?;-;!.;;;;:.:< ;.,?!;,......:7:...;:., :,,' ,'.,' .:. -;‘.,1?.'-(..12..../,`',1,',;4••471;.i,';',VivItifi,;;'; i-,A4;',. tA. r 4•1/4 .'.• ...,i...-......./.-•FL*.i3O,7:.t Li,,.!....;•- ..-.--- ..,,,.... ._..._._.__ __,..._ . ' _..._. •-!'ctl.:.f,.1 '.f ....i......c1.1c.?....-:....,'"!.. • 1;:'c•',......;!:ii.'',... :'" ,-l:%!311.'Lls,l,k,';;it'P..i...'111..•'';';••,...'{'E-..2.1'.1.;••,1t....;;•..1.1;,-4.1i)‘',1,.',..v.1,,;:f1...„4,,vi'.,,,•.!...,a'4,‘.:1,,,,t,ssif,.,}y,.,.1...,,44,111irs,ktgitl, ;t. .7.;‘,......-.'.,A•it,M.,:".4.4)...,'.!..:',.i9,54r,.?!.,tsit.„ ‘:+.4.,.,,L.,,;.',.-!',.,!..4,..e. ....',. . (II.;::-...-•••••.,•`.;',:•1..j.‘A;.,--'.'s'.}'•;;.:......:',Ict..T...'C''.';'•;;..•'''.'''.',Wi.,ce... "'- '''. (:ec;O:1"):‘',4'...'.'..).7: j/Q:''-';''.'c'ilreQ41`'iji'Vr.4. 'g''':'4'.. -‘4::-V.tA'AN't5K4 aatZlIkai.e6.1 . 1.1.01Ai ''''''''''''.k.ct:'‘'O'f't:5•1"'it.e-Viel'i.01,..iSkc:.,r7,2-4‘f‘9110.1fit'sia.444;rattP i. die • t • I APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING f Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected samples were tested for their in-place density and moisture content, direct shear strength, expansion, . An R-Value test was gradation, consolidation and water sofabeems terials c The resultsulfate sof the tests are summarized also on performed on a sample of the near sur Tables B-I through B-N. The in-place dry density and moisture content of the samples tested are presented on the Boring Logs in Appendix A. Gradation and consolidation test data are shown graphically on figures B-1 through B-5. TABLE B-I SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Content Unit Cohesion Angle of Shear Dry Density Moisture Sample No. (pct (%) (psi) Resistance (degrees) L 400 MS I . TABLE B-II SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS Dry Sample Moisture Content® Density(pci) Index No. Before Test(/0) ®■ 20 IINEEMINIIIICISSI 114.0 TABLE B-III • SUMMARY OF LABORATORY AL OF HYDROGEN (pH) AND ESTIIITYTEST RESULTS ® Resistivity Soluble Sulfate (%) SITS Sample No. (ohm centimeters) 0.021 9.49 TABLE B-IV SUMMARY OF R-VALUE AND SAND EQUIVALENT TEST RESULTS R-Value Sample No. Location 111111EIS Southwest Corner of Walmart Building Pad . 11111111101S May 18, 1999 Project No.06298-42-01 1 \t i f PROJECT NO. 0629842-01 -$ SAND SILT OR CLAY 1 OARS= MEDIUM FINE COARSE FINE U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 8 16 0 30 40 50� 100 '-� ■�nn 1 100 1-1/2' 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 90111111nnY Iilllnnllllinnih�llllll�ll�lllln }i 8 ni an nnn JIIIIILi1IIII11-_ilillill :iii!1111uu1u1n z :jjj3Ifr7f1112k S . F_ i a 20 1 10��nn�rirrt 010.001 AR10 1 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SAMPLE Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION MS LL PL • B1-10 31.0 (SP-SM) SAND-Silty SAND 1.1S - 1e1�n�n GRADATION CURVE WALMART AT TEMECULA TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA Fieure B-1 WMTEM PROJECT NO. 0629842-01 SAND SII,T OR CLAY 1 OARS MEDIUM FINE i CORRSE FINE U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE I 8 16 20 30 50 �111■IIII111/■11�■ 3. 1-1/2" 3!4' 3/8• 10 I 40 60 100 200 1901n 11111110111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 jlllILIiuhIMMI11■■I1111 3 1111■�IIIII1■■11111 60 IIn11�1111111v11111■■ W 50iu�l�inin�■� In ni■■111111111■III�IAIII r 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111I����n11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 • '11111111111111111111011101111111111111111111 )llIIaIuhuhIaIll'IiMlihIlIII_llIllIIlaM1010.a0. GRAIN SIZE I ( MILLIMETERS Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION 45.0 (SP-SM) SAND-5„ SAND ===— • _-_- 1111111111111111111r GRADATION CURVE WALMART AT TENIECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Figure B-2 UMTEN PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01 1111110252511111 SAND SII,T OR CLAY �� COARSE FINE ORRS�, MEDIUM FINE U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE si i10 li 200 3i 40 5060 100 200 3• 1-lR' 3/4' /8• •r �\'�'amn,orma 11111111111111111111 iuarn '11111111111111111111111111111111 i 1iu n11u i1iarn 0 �iirn� aiiru�iaiitrn�irunn-aa__ 0aiun�iunr1�iiuiwusuuuIlRii ®� wL 111111111111111111111111 rnim111iu 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 aiinrn�aiiirnaiiinry j ziimarnn1111iaiiuirar1�aiinu1111niin1111iin muu11 10ur/111111111r1/�I11niirn�iiun0.00 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS • CLASSIFICATION SAMPLE Depth (ft) 1111111111,11111a11111111111111111--_ 111111111111111111111r GRADATION CURVE W ALMIART AT TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Figure B-3 WMTEM PROJECT NO. 0629842-01 1 SAMPLE NO. B3-6 isivI-:4E3 0 0 1111111111111111111 '1144 I�, w 0 0.1 1 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) 81.9 Initial Saturation (%) I 0+ Initial Dry Dens (t( 100+ 43.7 Sample Saturated at (ksf) Initial Water Content (%) CONSOLIDATION CURVE WALMART AT TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Figure B-5 VMTEM . ic PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01 SAMPLE NO. B24 -4 i -2 s 1111111111111111111111111110 IYIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJNIII H Z r ! c0 H J au, U zce Q al111111 I 111111111 11111111 ui zlalltjah.11111111mia Billtallai 3 1111111111111111111111.:iiiIiIII!IL I 11110 ) 10.1 1 11111111111111 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) 100 1055 Initial Saturation (%)Mill I 1 Initial Dry Density (• fl Satu,le Saturated at (ksf) Initial Water Contentt (%) CONSOLIDATION CURVE WALMART AT TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Figure 13-4lJM7EM • APPENDIX C LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Included herewith are the results of the liquefaction analysis performed for the project. The analysis was performed using LIQUEFY2 (Blake, 1989) a computer program that calculates factors-of-safety against liquefaction using procedures suggested by Seed et al., standard penetration blow counts recorded during drilling and gradation characteristics determined from laboratory testing. • May 18, 1999 Project No. 06298-42-01 ******************* * * * L I Q U E F Y 2 * * * ******************* EMPIRICAL PREDICTION OF EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL JOB NUMBER: 6298-42-01 DATE: MAY 14, 1999 JOB NAME: WALMART r TEMECULA LIQUEFACTION CALCULATION NAME : BORING 1 - MAXIMUM PROBABLE SOIL-PROFILE NAME: BORING 1 GROUND WATER DEPTH: 30 .5 ft DESIGN EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE: 6 .30 i SITE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION: 0 .390 g K sigma BOUND: M • rd BOUND: M N60 CORRECTION: 1.00 FIELD SPT N-VALUES < 10 FT DEEP ARE CORRECTED FOR SHORT LENGTH OF DRIVE RODS NOTE: Relative density values listed below are estimated using equations of Giuliani and Nicoll (1982) . LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY Seed and Others [1985) Method PAGE 1 I CALC. I TOTAL! EFF. ! FIELD lEst .D I I CORR. ILIQUE. I IINDUC. JLIQUE. SOIL! DEPTHISTRESSISTRESSI N ! r! C J (N1) 60ISTRESSI r ISTRESSISAFETY NO. I (ft) I (tsf) I (t-sf) I (B/ft) ! (%) ! N I (3/ft) ! RATIO! d I RATIOIFACTOR -+ + + + + + + + + + + 1 0 .25 0 . 016 0 .016 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 0 . 75 0 . 046 0 . 046 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 1 .25 0 . 077 0 .077 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 1 . 75 0 . 108 0 . 108 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 2 . 25 0 . 139 0 . 139 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 2 . 75 0 . 170 0 .170 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 3 .25 0 . 201 0 .201 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 3 . 75 0 .232 0 .232 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 4 .25 0 .263 0 .263 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 4 . 75 0 .294 0 .294 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 5 .25 0 .326 0 .326 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; 2 5 .75 0 .359 0 .359 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 6 .25 0 .393 0 .393 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 6 . 75 0 .426 0 .426 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 7 .25 0 . 459 0 .459 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 7 .75 0 . 492 0 .492 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 8 .25 0 . 526 0 . 526 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 8 . 75 0 . 559 0 . 559 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 9 .25 0 . 592 0 . 592 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 9 .75 0 . 624 0 . 624 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 10 . 25 0 . 654 0 . 654 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 10 . 75 0 . 684 0 . 684 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 11 .25 0 . 714 0 . 714 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 11 . 75 0 . 744 0 . 744 15 - @ @ @ @ @ O, @ 3 12 .25 0 . 774 0 . 774 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 12 . 75 0 . 804 0 . 804 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 13 . 25 0 . 834 0 . 834 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 13 . 75 0 . 864 0 . 864 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 14 . 25 0 . 894 0 . 894 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 14 . 75 0 . 924 0 . 924 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 15 . 25 0 . 954 0 . 954 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 15 . 75 0 . 984 0 . 984 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 16 .25 1 . 014 1 . 014 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 16 . 75 1 . 044 1 . 044 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 17 . 25 1 . 074 1 . 074 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 17 . 75 1 . 104 1 . 104 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @ i 1 11NDUC. ILZQ - 1 CORR. ILIQUE 1 r STRESSISAFETY nFF. 1FIELD IEst.Dri C 1 (N1160ISTRESSI I TOTAL\ gRE5S1 d 1 gATIO1FACTOR I DEpT??115 (ts ) 1 I N I N 1 (B/ft) I 1 • SOZL1 --+--111+1-" (et) I (t5f) I (tsf) 1 (B/ft) 1 (%) I ---+---Q I @ I @ 1 @ @ NO. I --+1111 @ I @ @ I @ @ 3 118 .25+ 1 .1341 1 . 1341 15 1 - '1 @ i @ I @ i @ 11 @ 1 @ @ 3 118 . 751 1 .1641. 1 .1641 15 1 -- 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ I @ I @ 1 @ @ 3 119. 251 1.1941 15 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1@ I @ 1@@ 3 119 .251 1 .19412 1.2241 I 3 1 20.751 1.2241 1.2541 15 I - 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ @ 3 1 20 . 751 1 .2541 1.2841 30 1 72 I @ @ 1 @ 1 @ i @ I @ @ 4 4 1 20 .751 1.2841 1 .3151 30 1 72 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ I @ 1 @ @ 21.251 1.31514 30 I 72 I @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ I @ @ 4 122.7s1 1 .3471 1 .37 1 30 1 72 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ i @ @ 4 i 22 .251 1 .3781 1 .3781 30 I 72 I@ I 4 1 23 .751 1 .401 1 .401 30 1 72 1 @ I @ I @ I @ I @ 1 @ @ 4 123 .251 1 .4401 1 .4401.4721 30 I 72 1 O0 1 @ 1\ @ i @ 1 @ \ @ @ • @ I 4 123 . 251 1 .4721503 1 .5031 30 I 72 1 @@ 1I @ 1 @ 1 @ i @ 1 @ @ 4 124 .251 1 . 534 30 1 72 1 @ \ @ I @ \ @ @ 4 1 24 .7515 1 .5341 1 .56511 30 1 72 1 @ 11 @ I @ 1 @ i @ 1 @ @ 4 i 25 .251 1 . 5651 1 .5971 30 1 72 I @ 1 @ 1 @ 1 @ \ @ @ 4 1 26 .251 1. 6281 1.6281 30 1 72 1 @ I @ I @ I @ @ 1 . 6591 30 I 72 I @ i @ I @ 1 @ i @ i @ @ 4 126 .751 1 . 651 . 6901 1 1 6901 30 1 72 1 72 1 @ I @ I @ 1 @ \ @ @ 4 1 27 .251 1 .7221 1.7221 30 1 72 1 @ I @ I @ I1 @ I @ I @ @ • 4 1 27 .751 1.7531 30 1 @ I @ I @ 1 @ @ 4 128 . 751 1 .784131 30 1 72 I@ 1 @ I @ 1 4 128 .751 1.7841 1 .7841 30 I 72 I @ @ 1 • 4 \ 29 .251 1 . 8151 1 . 8151 30 1 @ 1 @ I @ I @ I @ 1 @ @ 72 1 1 , 05 4 1 29 . 7s1 1 . 87 1 1 . 8471 23 1 60 1 @ 1 @ 1 0 .24410 . 9161 0 .2331 1 . 9101 1 .878190 60 10 . 6931 15 •.9 10 .24410 .9131 0 .2341 1 . 04 5 1 . 30 .251 .23 I 1. 9101 1. 9031 60 10 . 6931 15 -9 10 .9101 0 .2351 1 . 04 5 1 30 .75 I. 23 I 0 .2441 0 .2361 1 9421 1. 9191 60 \ 0 , 6931 15 -9 I 0 .9071 1 .03 5 1 31.251 23 1 0 .2441 5 131.751 1 . 9741 1- 9351 23 I 60 \ 0 . 6931 15 .9 1 0 .24310 .9041 0 .2371 1. 03 1 .95216860 0 .6931 15 . 9 1 0 .2381 1 . 02 • 5 1 32 .251 2 . 02 . 00381 1 .9681 23 I 60 10 . 6931 15 .9 1 0 .24310 .9 21 0 .2391 1 . 02 5 132 '751 1. 9851 23 \ 15 . 9 1 0 .2431 1 . 01 5 1 33 .251 2 . 0701 0 . 6931 0 .2401O1 5 1 33 . 251 2 .10212 . 134 2 .0011 23 \1 60 \10 . 6931 15 .9 10. 242110 . 89611 0 .24110 1 a 2 .01714 60 0 . 6931 15 .9 I 0 2421 1 .01 5 134 .251 2 1661 2 .0341 23 1 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 1 0 .28910 .8901 0 .2421 0 .2421 1 .10 5 134 .751 2 .0491 28 I 19 .2 1 0 .2891 1 .19 6 1 35 .251 2 . 1981 10 .6841 0 .28910 .8821 0 .2431 6 1 35 .751 2 .2281 2 .0651 28 28 I1 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 1 0 .28810 .8781 0 . 2431 1 .19 9 2 . 2591 2 . 0801 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 Ias 1 .18 6 1 37 7511 2 . 2901 2 . 1 28 1 62 10 . 6841 0 .28810 .8741 O..2a4� 1 . 1E 6 12 . 1101 28 I19 .2 I o .zealo .a7o1 6 37 .251 2 . 3211 2 .1251 28 1 62 62 10 .684141 19 .2 119 .2 1 0 .28810 .8661 0 .2441 0 .241 1 1E 6 1 37 .751 2 . 1401 28 I 19 .2 1 0 .28710 .86216 1 . 1 6 1 38 .251 2 .3821 28 1 62 0 .6841 19 .2 1 0 .28710 .8581 0 2451 6 1 38 .751 2 .4131 2 . 17111 28 1 62 10 . 6841 0 . 6841 19 .2 1 0. 28710 .8581 0 .2451 1 1 6 \I 39 .7511 2 .47411 2 -18611 28 0a 11 62 110 . 6841 19 .2 1 0 .28610 .8501 0 .2451 i 1 , !1 CORR. ILIQUE• I 11NDUC. ILIQUE. 1 CALC. 1 TOTALI EFF. ' FIELD IEst .Dr1 C � (N1) 601STRE551 r 15TRESSIIQUE. N 1 (g�£ti1 RATIOI d I RATIOIFACTOR I SNIL1 DEPTH 1STRESSISTRESS1 N r __A (ft) I (ts-- (tsf) I ---_- I (%) I ---+------+-----+ --�--+------+-----+--- 0 .28610 .8451 0 .2451 1 .17 --6 40 . 751+ 2 .2161 28 I 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 0 .28610 . 84011 0 .2451 1.17 62 10 .6841 19.2 6 1 2 . 53612 . 5671 28 I 0 .28510 . 8361 0 .2451 1.17 6 1 41.251 2 . 23112 .2461 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 I0 . 2451 1.17 6 1 41 .7512 2 .59718 6 28 I 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 10 .28510 . 8311 28 1 62 10 .6841 19 . 2 0 .28510 .82611 0 .2451 1 .17 6 1 42 . 251 2 .6281 2 .2621 28 2 .2921 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 10 .28510 .8211 0 .2441 1. 17 ? 6 142 .751 2 . 6591 2 .2921 28 I 0 .28410 . 8161 0 .2441 1 . 17 6 1 43 . 251 2 .6901 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 I 0 28410 .8161 0 .2441 1.17 6 1 44.251 2 .7201.251 5 2 .3221 1 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 I 0 .24314 1. 17 28 I 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 10 .28410 .8061 0 .2431 1. 17 6 1 44.751 2 .7821 2 .331 62 10 .6841 19 .2 10 .28310 .8011 z 6 1 45. 251 2 .8131 2 .3521 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 10 .28310 .7961 0 . 2421 1 . 17 2 .331 28 I 28 62 10 .6841 19 .2 10 .28310 .7911 0 .2421 1 . 17 6 1 45 . 751 2.8431 0 .2411 1 . 17 6 146 .751 2 .874190 2 .38318 28 I1 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 10 .28210 .7861 0 .2411 1.17 6 1 46 .751 2 . 9051 2 .3981 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 1 0 .28210 .7811 0 .2401 1 . 17 ',..! 47 . 751 2 .9361 2 .4131 62 10 .6841 19 .2 1 0 .28210 .7761 0 240 1 .17 6 I 2.9661 2 .4281 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 10 .28110 .7711 I 6 1 47 . 75128 1 0 .28110 .7651 0 .2391 1 .18 --"( 6 1 48 .251 2. 99713 .0281 2 .4431 28 I 62 10 . 6841 19 .2 10 .28110 .7651 0 .2381 1 . 18 6 1 48 . 751 59 2 .4591 28 I 62 10 .6841 19 .2 1 0 .2381 1 . 18 6 1 49 . 251 3 . 0591 2 .4741 62 10 .6841 19 .2 i 0 .28010 .7551 . . 6 149.751 3 .0891 2 .4891 28 I ---_----'--"'_ . . • .; ' •'.,':7 ,j. ".. ;It,..;: • '. • • •• •'-•,;,• • . ..* .;',...; , ; 1 -... •,.., •.•; . .. . . . .. . . , . , •.. . . . . . [ ., •. : - . • , . . , .. ; .. .,- ., .. , ., . . .. .. , . .. .... , .;;.; , , .,. I • • • • •• ..... . ±..••••... . • I' 1 • • ••e.,." .• . . ••• . .• • ' . . . . .. . .. .. .. ...... .. ... .. i• • . . ., , „ • , . ... . • . . . . , . .. • .,,. „ ,. •, , . , ,.... . .. . . ,. . ... ,. , • . • . • . ,... . . • . . . , • ,.. • .. . . , . . . , . ..,, .„ , . .......,,..„. . , ,..•.. . .. ...... , ... - ,. . . ., , . ‘• .. . . . , .. . , . . . 11...:.:.:...!.:. ::.'.. 1).;;•,.......',.."( -;:-.ft. c::':.:.e.,:Ti:'' ..1. .•:--.' 1111. :::::: 1-:::(...F ,.:::::::::;:',:.! .'.:;:•:i:::::111.c...,:„:......‘; .: :;.::::....;.'i:::::: :'.,-..-_: .:: :' . . ......:.. ; 1 VI .41 'iiSl:.:.4f), ! ., . „.!,,...:,,..j....;;;...-.....:.,....;:-,..,; .....,,,,,.. ;;;; .:..,,';.:...1,;.14 :..: i -;..1i:,;; r..:C?'•,, ,.€:...".!4::'.;i;::::;•:..;E;; ,;;..t...;(.1;::..'.(.7.:,; ...-•5n;• j." :.j (..:.:,. ...';•:.• ...;!';i; .F.% . ..,.., .;. ',::'...-..;::..'.:;: 1•i,:4..:',::'.';'.?;;f.,,;:il',;.;;\ . .„!:•...:;;;;I::.,-,•Y'.,1....':;;;'-:.;::;'IVil;:1::.:•.'..!::.-' ; . . ..',lc',...1';1•.:;;- . ‘:'.•.:: , .-:..1. '':...;.:,::::*4•‘.t: !I '..'.;: ,(1..„:'.f.'. ." ":‘ ,::;'%IL ::....; : .ki . L..'.....•-5.'L'..::''',.:).;!:'• '':...'-'' .‘:: .:::::.•-.1.:.1:.:-...1:4;:•,..Zr.).,. .;;;;A--.,,..;t'yi:ti', ::.: V 41I 1/;;I:;,•••:.;-f.;',..,..(/, .: : -..: :4.1•.tL:...(r...1•.:.1.•;:.;•... •.....'' ktP:1::; i. ;ji,.1 '.4 iL.' ':,' .!: ;fr.': • l ' , ',:•{H.''.i:;.r.-;:?; ,:.:....-:,:.!.::'‘.:.S.E:.7.C:.;;:e':..1:i :h;;I:1;11'.:i.:;;.::-1-6:•::::;:.:-;:.; -qi.ri 1.'..:''.7.[; V,...!:. '.:'',./:'...i'il:J.•:. . ;I:..:'.. .', ..-‘:.';...) 2':•''.;...;;•l'....;34: ::.:',:-....,A., .;;.'!.'..'i..‘/:::"1-;:.-72..g.t.i. I': ; :.:.,:l.:1 ;-.;.:If -ifi'....4„..' . .'; •"•1. ';/).fi :;..;.;:;;) ,,;',.. 744-ill:;;;;;; ;..C;. . ..;:i 1..;f- 7':!.., '.' Rf.;!;•i:5;;;:. :. :;:?..';.2j.';',..', .---. . ::•;;; ::!..1 '- .(1:•L',..;::t:;;:::;.% f;,?..•::::"..:1/2‘.:::::7,C'c;1.!:•i:?2!:'::::.., ?,'Sii:;(,:::::';it.?:-.';';''.;:;;;• IF';'? ;:',.P;;,:..1 :::•1.1 ?:,1:•.;'...'I ff.:t,•11,--,...:.:211.:‹;4-'..•:;. :::.''..-...;!..1=1:1;0 :;... '.c• ' 'k:' .;%. }:...;.:: ,7.;-'•iIii;;!',17:ii‘1.J. 1/4: ;; , ,.,: ;';;;.6 ';-!•••,..;;;',; :ic;U:t!f:,''.]:-;.c;?:;'.....:::':..•....:1/, .:;.:' ..CL,.? .;,..... ..f .:” '1,,''';•;7.1 {'-,.: :.:A .t.;; 71 ;. 1 ..,'.:;1.A..:...;7.1.C-; •:.- . . : ''z'ttill4.:-.1;.":. .... ;;.; :;C-j. '.-:Iff.;1I ''...FS. ''':-.''''';''H:..1 , ..-7,:,:..'":;?... v.L,4,.:;!3 -:, -,i:c.;ti;:::1.k,"..fjj;:!:.i...f7.1.. :, :,;.u.'Iii V.9):1)::::'' :;:Li.;;-:..1.' .'?-7 ir. •'.:',:::''...',:: '.;: -.tR,‘..1.*:2;. I I ' ,.::: ::.:'.. ,:: :'..'‘?:',.:: . ;.,..:L1.1:tc:.:-.1.:,, :: •,....c4,7?',.;.-Y). •;;. ',.L:.;.:•;.'i:-:-...;:...1.,.:. ;,,,z, ...:. i6-7.::;,.:,. :1.,.,',--:-, .7..:,z .-..--;: ,: ../..-..,,, , ,.,...,.-:-., . ',. .,.;.;,',..,:!....Y..c. . i:v., ::::' ..' ;-..,Y. t F' 1r .' :.,i.....,2!. “-1;::.:iic; ':,-;?j1): .. .!.;i:,....),•,? :. 1.1:::::,.*9 -filij-iliC4;.7‘,.ff''.1.-.../...'3.,''. ' ': '1 ,, .:;!..•.f.. ',:`?,.. ‘i:!';;. •.; •;,.;;;;;.,4;:;-j!i.;145s;',!;,.1•,?...;:k.f.:.rki.g..7.411.eY,'!...-::.1;•.1:.E' ....(. ' .2-'...11.,..ril.i:HJ.Y. .;.•-:.: ....'.... r;.1...:'.C1"71fI1::::trz,..:.1;11- .;.` 1;f.:1;44fLII.: : .*:..;7"‘::::.1:!:;:::: 11-;.lit:''.'^...%7:!1!1);'4. i/ill'.:.•:';.!1...fli5:.:''It:4'i.!11::;:'-.11 .;%.1:1;:;?...\ ..;.:,1;,1t41.4:•jA.%7>.. ,4,4,;).iii.it ;112. 1.1.;..:11.i...7;1.(1.. ....1::11; '..),- * : :. 11L'. .•,;..:.;:.;Ic);;;;;;;:.:;711::;.-4.;;; :::.......:1•11J,... .j; ....;-';Iii.::::::.;;"...;;;.:••:;::1.:".:1':;.;,‘-;'.?....;....,.‘ Pil.rg':"fil- ::::<it' ;;?,'2!'i ;;;: „‘1:;I:e fi, 1..:,...11,.;,i:: •:,;:•,'..;' ‘.., .:;.. l '"::1:::::'.L'i ::::#:,-.).-i:?:::•.,:.•:', . ." V-l-!: *:..70,,.,,c)..;::)•ly?.,.1ly:q.,?{".?4,4\i'.):::, ,‘;::::.::::;1,t,I.,,...i'4c,":;•:.:;1:::::y.1:/..-*civil:, :!:.• ".. •'': . ,. .::: 10..1?•:.;::.;‘' ,') j‘ ifi:c•• :-.C'1....:•:,!;:1-.1.:43.:•.:-,.4??,!:/,,.t.:..,':.'91. I i,•:);': ::,, ' ) ''', '',' ''' , '., , .•,• iS4'.."..',*.•.'':Ftl..."•-•,', . .. 1;,. : "..I;., .2, ',......"..:,.., J: . 1.,,:': ,..,..: i'lit •-:i.;',..:1!i' llit.i.•:;:f.:';;J::i'ti‘ fj( 1. 1, : '.:•;: Y. .1'.40:1;# ,i..T1';1.:,'',.',.:'.,,-:•::,-,z.Z.I.I.Ti.i?..41.:.•'.fi• .:, ; - . ,:iv;.•:;:;..:(k-r:Y„:".1.1.,r. 'i:1„..i,r,.,-,:7'/•!,1fii:::!),:NIV, ,',.; .,11,..i.;c-Scl,:•... ,, .?: ....:. •f.l.:4: Yl•-..,.;.,%.i.,:t.'•!,&:.',:.;•?:',?....7i''',' S1,‘:}. . :l* ' :1: Ti1i.t;. .{:.iff"..... 1;:?4,Aci.itf:4.i-A1- 171:. -',:::::..,...:;;:.;',1!?•:::;:::1'S. ,...i:-\Zki): 1:Z::•11,; ;:;;;I,Ii:ifig;•::--.S4f.:::::;.1,i14. 11J.1q111,;... ,I ;'41:".„ .'cl.).14):1•; ..,...; ,•,;.,?:,;:i';:-..-:•/..:;:•••;S :1:!'i,,;;;;!':•.• : '.. . ..!::.,;:::!..4.:r.,;:?: :,:''..::.:,......, vtil' fli....i,l,;}..:?,!..ii...;;I: , :-. , ,,,-;:::•:., :.;; !i .1 ,:frt,,jr1/4.ge ..:1•.:,: , . IL•:::, .: !4,jtl,„ i :'•;;; ;"1.:•'•j,'1,:„. E ' ;' -: I:ci •i.:12:i,..:::-'..:.:.::.,f.'.:::;.'‘::...',.,;j::.:ti'l,.7,::-....:',±,::, !..:::-.;•;.;Y,I.,,:-..•::.:;. .'1'....: !:i ,: ..-[, '..!;" :•!;:.;', ..i1;.4:'::.:.:;,;•,:,14.t-i,f.:. ,::::),14-11.f'::,./4;;;;,r;.`4•;•:.:::':-.-.;:•:',... 1 : !.:1r1)1::filt1i.401:P;C:-i. ;.:1.C:::::::;;.2.:- .i.:4'..);;,',1:;±..!:-..• "..i',....-1;17,:-:.:::71 -:•!,..;:i' ;.1.•;:5--?!...-,:::.,1 ...-. •: :[:•-•::.: :::. :" '.. "i .:;.r.:.::: ::.l. ::'.;::; /1.•:".e......i .1,,il'....cc-7.--1.;Y.q43;,;;•'iK•Af,f;.2,:,;(....g; .•.4.,:',: (' :"-.1;. .,'[..i;,,„, 4..,6, , ;-'12R1 ., !. ' ;,.::..;•;..,:;'-.t..‘':. :••:::::i: ."..: , ,E' ::. .'.• C. :.• ''..;' ''. '' . . . ' ' '. ' " . . ?.,11',E14.5,!.,!..•,,i12f.q.:::.„'/Li-9'..,%.'...:7-yi,:,,::cz:,: if.,:lf.c.!..:,1cd41,i-,..i!.„•,•,,,,,t,.,,,-;;;',.:4,,y,,..; , ; t....".'1'21,,,','(., .'„'.::'',.. ......, :22;•.',.1;;Ic•-:. :i';:• .'",!..?:',ti':i.V'''';;':::; .•;:!'.4.-- '':.:':! .:'.,...i.:•::': ...: •; . ' . . •. ..... ' . ' '' ' .'' ".:.: '...'L.:: ;012-''-ii` .'4.g-:;::::€:::::::•:ifj.ITIL:C".:;:.;Y:;:?::;':::,:" .-‘,..:!-4113%.: .:. .i.:;;;1;:t'.'i-:-...'.;'":;:.:'''."..if^.. , 3 ? 1 !...1-:'. .-??:•,••;.:':;v,--..- --... . ;•%:''' ''': -::;;:..?:;:::::,':: !:1-.."?:%,:c::.,: ;',',.. '-,;`;',,... .1...1--'' ',:;,,,i.•: •.---•:..: :. . •. '. ..; ‘-'1: '.•':';;;;•7 I.''• ''..1- t.k,i',':iS-il-!.•: :C.-..i:';?1,1....::.'..1'.1.:t(..:-.-.1-.31:-', 7,Miii,Y:Ac,.:20P;!?}I,C;f:.;.: !:•,<111...:'!-..cijc:CV,..1,1....-.., ;)....:.,,.: ,.:'.:',::.,*.:•:;.' .j ; Ati-11;,1 . , - 'i,..;::.:,::;l1-.::•1:.•.7:,:',:1-:. •- .1.:-...:I .':-. ,,•I.". •-•,- . .,..„... -..: ..,..... .,',. .,......, ..::L',.•:::.::',.',.,...14':::::,),,iliii •,•?Lct.,c.,Cti,.1--,,f.,;1,. .:,‘‘‘.?:',:-.4:.1-.;',...:•-...:?:::1/Ci:'.qA.?,....f1;"?! ...••::•1!<!:; i5...r.\:Yr:..l- 11..',.::Y-',C. ..:.:.' •'''..:!,' ..1-'::. -.±-:,''.".•'''•'-';''-'• ---j... •s' . "'' -.. ;•'7 i' •. : '„... - — : `.. ' '' v - : '' ?"" 09•'`1t4IIHI'7'14.kk • IFI ‘.,&.??.e.i j..r.tri;:.'it,fil-,•,r..,....•,',Li,,..:.:::',.. c.,..:11.,,, :':,<;!;.f.....-.>, •:,.. I',s.,:..?1.V.,Th,:',(5,,,riH .,•i .. ' ,;'.::"....',""' ';••,,,-,'..'.."..•'. ...:,-...•'.,":''..:: J.'. ‘..' : ". '' . ' • '; ,.:'...::. 1.-;',.... .;Y ;-;i:;• t'.::../..,...i;41::0;:r.:,3.1:;:v4frabat.i.Aeil,Vr 1.1;.47.ii .47. : ' :1'.::',.. . .1; 4, 2)..).:..."?..: '..;:i /....,f..;;L,l 4.' eY....--,':.1±1:11..:....-,:';'.."';:.::.--l'-±: .';'/',.. ,.r.'..‘i:',1 '...'-2'1",t':::' ..1-.i...,.;41,..::",./..'-' .,:,.;:, -....;''',.';'1 '''.•:.1:;-:,•Ii.P.•; -1.---:-;/Z:.;.--;:, ler':;/-:"...)::::;;:llirC.::;S::11,111M401.14'5U)11;::, --.- ••:;`;.::‘: /...: -..-...:•;.,;1:.:.i,!';':',•Eil.:`,,.fl ,;...e?.Pitirlf..N.;•;f1k;iViiiiYhetii394.fq*Y4- --------- :1V;JLA{L).):.:1'itiF%6.Q'.-Ci'Vrii,!;41Allet'':4.7!),9•.''7741:'''''''' . ,--.•'-- --.'".- 1/4.1,t1OP iAit.lt!,ric:.1,...,'•.1/4 1::..7:;:C.!.J1.:;?..:.;:l.:):,';',:;.;:.:<1:;;;':;::.:.::;;.:'.. .:::::'..!;'..:;•:;::,?...C::-.1.:;-;:-*L.:.illf:'1:LI.' '•,:;......,..:J.,";......1' ;'..:-....!.!: .. ; :'...: :.;.;;' .,.;::,::! ;S. '10' Prfrigi VS i.31114,,j 1:14C'\....':.•' . - . i.....^:,?4''' ' .• i.k.,i(•;!!'-;:.'.:.:Ci•::; :'.::1..... .. : -'.- ': 1::':.:'..'-.•., '..." '.. J. : ;....•:. ..:"':'''.:•';';'•:...•'::::'.i l:::.;.;•::::•.4,..4;12.."‘'':"11?;;AIr rAiL101 • f APPENDIX D RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS for WALMART AT CALIFORNIA TEMECULA, PROJECT NO. 0629842-02 II 1 7 l RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS l 1. GENERAL 1.1. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the 1. Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom- mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict I 1 2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be M employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these • • specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion,the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicablegrad ng codes desmon ofr ency the ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result in a quality of work not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will d uempowered the ed to reject t the work and recommend to the Owner that construction be stoppe • pta conditions are corrected. 2. DEFINITIONS . 2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading . .. performed. 22. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3. Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-graded topography. GI rev. 8/98 V , i ,l 6 ;t oeoloe consulting firm Y 2.4. Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineenng � [ retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. f Civil 2.j. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California of eotechnicalengineering Engineer The Soiled by the En ineer ha 1 be ' . who is experienced in the practic responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. 2.6. Engineering shall licensed Geologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observationsandrecommendatiosduring thsi site grading. 2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report(including all addenda) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are • intended to apply. - 3. MATERIALS 3.1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills,soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3.1.1. Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/4 inch in size. 3.12. Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill.to allow . for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 inches. 3.1.3. Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. GI rev. 3193 it : lI • ongy or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the i 3._. Material of a perishable, sQ �. • l- Consultant shall not be used in fills. hazardous as Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site. shall not contain 3 materials0. Artialss s • Regulations. Title 22, Division 4. Chapter 9 defined by the California Code of and 10; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to recast from the Owner suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may q the termination of grading operations within the affrtctedt e area.CPrior r to indicating resuming dthe ing suspected materialsthe Owner shall provide hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. suspected are not The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to approved by horizontal:vertical) and a soil theslope face, provided 2:1ed that the slope is not steeper thanpurposes. oil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping I... This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3.5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory m density, optimum moisture content, by the Consultant to determine maximland Qradation characteristics f the soil. where appropriate,shear strength expansion, 3.6. During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the r. Geotechnical Repots may be evaluate the snt�ttficance of the unanttered by the o ipa deconditiolnant shall be notified immediately to 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grabbed. Clearinoo shall consist of man-made a complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man--maade e uried structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, ll be ed in areas hs r eunsuitable d gal 112 inches rial and ain diameter shall be removed obe to a depth fed. t3 feet otherthsuprojections exceeding below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide suitable fill materials. GI rev. 8/98 • i I . �l a erasions should be properly i Any asphalt pavement material removed during clean° which are free of reinforcing �` disposed at an app roved off-site facility. Concrete fragments steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of this document. 4.3. iabe and vsu bbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous by a representative of the soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depthof removal and compaction shall be observed and approvedof Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or 4 Where the slope ratio of the original r the original ground should be benched in • where recommended by the Consultant accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Original Ground Finish Grade 22 \ 71 t Finish Slope Surface Remove All • As Recomle enMatded _ _ As Recommended By Slope 7o Be Such That _� -. --7>.-1S.-------------1 Soil Engineer Sloughing Or Sliding Varies _ Does Not Occur I ee ote t See Nate 2 • No Scale w o used. The d the DETAIL NOTES: (1) Key width p et should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, sufficiently etbase e to key complete aded e with the compactiondequipment key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable srock is urficial tional exposed in the bottom of the key,ethe depth nse aand configeuration rial. of the keWhere y may be . . material nd at least 2 feet into modified as approved by the Consultant. • GI rev.8198 to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be The area d.5. After areas disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniformoaedmQ free from large clods.content, and compacted should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper ` as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications. • 5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT ented-steel 5.1. Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segm es el vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or othe t types be of wheeled rollers, Equipment shall be of such a design that acceptable compaction equipment. action at the capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction specified moisture content 5.2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6.1. Soil fill, as defined in 1'aragraP h 3.1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: ers that, when compacted, should 6.1.1. Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in lay be generally not exceed 8 inches. Eat obtainlayer sun fortuity of materialand moisturell be spread evenlyy and shall thoroughly mixed during spreading as a unit in nearly level lifts. dimension shall be placed in in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the 6.1.2. In = ASTM Dl557-91. optimum moisture content as determined by 6.1.3. When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant. water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the came specified. moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the 6.1.4. When the action, the soil fill shall be aerated by Consultant or too wet to achieve proper comp the Contractor by bladinJmixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within the range specified. GI rev. 3:93 1read evenly, it shall be thoroughly placed, mixed, and sp percent. Relative 6.1.5. compactedp layer has been action of at least 90 l by the Contractor to a relative comp ercent) of the in-place ` ex ressed in p i Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed density as i dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory hallbe continuous determined in accordance ance`Ni actin equipment shall make sufficient passes so that over the entire area,and comp the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill. 6.1.6. Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content l generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6.1.7. Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. Tat o achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be berov r builtibyret least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. ack-ro with a 6.1.8. As an alternative to over-building of slopes �o Pe fat maxirnmay be b4 foot lfi 1 height heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a dozer track coven all slope surfaces at least twice. Soil-rock fill,as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be 6.2.1. Rocks larg . incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area meas or 15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish ga 3 feet below the deepest utility,whichever is deeper. 6.2.2. Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be r rtain individually placed or placed in windrows.im nsionemay be piac°ed using or fragmenu up to 10cc feet in of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in methods. The acceptability of P o grading as specific cases arise and maximum dimension shall be evaluated during shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. Gi rev.3:99 Iindividual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow tt 6.2.3. For P I� for passage of compaction equipment. E the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in - 6.2.4. For windrow placement, approximately 5 feet wide and 4 properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be app feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around uan�bbeS o t Dock shoor uld be and filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Eq utilizing an should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed "open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant 6.2.5. Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either . on the site parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending feet geometry. The minimum horizon versa offscing et rfrotndrows shall be courses t12next center-to-center with a 5-foot stagshall cal overlying course.ethe op f a owernimum rnwind owr to the bottomg between nofothec nextes hitter I be 2 feet from windrow. 6.2.6. All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative. 6.3. Rock fills,as defined in Section 3.1.3.,shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1. The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-construction infiltration of water. be k 6.3.2. Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet a lace cemene shall oll b currently rock trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to tocfinentSeWatengg fthe rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during p consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current roar[liftfaacge and pra i with water continuously during rock placement. Comp compactive energy comparable to or greater than that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable enerey to achieve the GI rev.8/98 i ' I h6.33 shall be f' required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragmp • utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in ifh paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional 7 rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill. 6.3.3. Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D1196-64, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in to be p lrformired in If performed a minimber of um of equipment passes of the compactioncompacted soil fill three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly omp shadll soil 11 e (minimum relative'compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing testsperformed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes bearing tests for he rock he fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of • passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment r lesill s thbe an performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are eqquio that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required • number of passes be less than two. 6.3.4. A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to verify that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is ! being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The ermined by the Consultant during actual number olte aat bearing least oneests will be test should bete performed for each approximately grading. In generals 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock fill placed. 6.3.5. Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in his opinion, �c t n voids largerockre _ properly filled wtmallerrock material. In-place density testing will not be th required in the rock fills. • 6.3.6. To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying ste fill l material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below theg. rock ock should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing g • gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is d be the being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill shoo deb filter t tteo to to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the o _ • commencement of rock fill placement. GI rev. 8;98 . . I, o lacement by 6.3.7. All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during p representatives of the Consultant. it i 7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during 7 1 action operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. • 2 The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock 7. fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any ratay yer f fill of shall onion or n e b e be thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas rep reworked until the specified density has been achieved. i 7.3, During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.plate The bearCoingnsestsant t shall the 4 pits and may perform � : } request the excavation of observation placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing ted an opinion as to whether the rock filldisproperly atests wall biep rformed randomlymoisture has eon applied to the material. If performed, plate bearingg tests will be performed to provide the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing d. The a basis for expressing an opinion fill determined in to whether e rock Section16�•3 is �h llequaibey less the maximum deflection inrock the compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria maximum deflection of the properly cted indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specifie a thed auffix end layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately moisture applied. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of 7.4. of the monitoring program shall be as rock fill placement. The specific design ro ect and ecommenations section of e Geommencain thor no the finals report of testing and observation services 1performed Geotechnicall Report during grading. GI reg. 3;93 that the drainage devices 7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. it 7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 7.6.1. Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: 7.6.1.1. Field Density Test, ASTM D1556-82, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. 7.6.1.2. Field Density ate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth).od, ASTM D2922-81,Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate 7.6.1.31 Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-91, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 7.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, Uniform Building Code Standard 29-2, Expansion Index Test. 7.6.2. Rock Fills 7.6.2.1.Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196-64 (Reapproved 1977) Standard Method for Nonrepresentative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements. 8. PROTECTION OF WORK 8.1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. • g2, After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. GI rev. 8;98 9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 9.1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 9.2. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a fmal as-graded soil and geologicreport satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-gradedreport should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications. • i } GI rev.8/98 1/1:113d [ 3 XIGN3ddY ExpLORAT1ON LOG I .. BORING NO.: B-1 I . PROJECT: PROJECT NAME ELe/ATION: MSL LOCATION: PROJECT ADDRESS DATE: DATE DRILLED I JOB NO.: PETRA JOB NO. LOGGED BY: PROFESSIONAL III DRIVE WEIGHT: LABORATORY TESTS EQUIPMENT: TYPE BTRE DRY OTHERCCM DESCRIPTION Foci MOISlDD(%1M D( � TESTS DEF?H LITH- (FEEn • OGY Symbol indicates silt material. 1 Bulk sample 2 --_ 3 / i Dashed line denotes jraduational change or litologic change within same unit Sm 4 bol indicates day material • 5 / y • • Relatively undisturbed ring sample / 6 / Solid n e d enotes fm ation change • 4I / 7 8 Ground water table or as note Symbol indicates sand material - 10 11 :�• 12 : Standard Penetration Test sample 1 13 IIt Symbol indicates bedrock material 144 Standard Penetration Test 15 p 4 Relatively undisturbed ring sample no recovery o 16 �•• Bottom of excavation (may be practical refu - 17 Total Depth -total depth of excavation within the excavation Cavingr - noted areasdo caving water and/or perched Ground Water- depth 18 water encountered. Other notes as needed. 19 PLATE B. . l EXPLORATION LOG BORING NO.: B-1 '- PROJECT: PROJECT NAME SL LOCATION: PROJECT ADDRESS ELEVATION:DATE: DATEMM DRILLED JOB NO.: PETRA JOB NO. LOGGED BY: PROFESSIONAL DRIVE WEIGHT: �..� LABORATORY TESTS I EQUIPMENT: TYPE Warms MOISTURE DRY OTHER !J CONTENT DENSfiY lH8 Per PJ T (PCF) TESTS , IAB MATERIAL DESCRIPTION DEPTH 'LOGYri- (FEEn Symbol indicates silt material. 1 Bulk sample 2 _ 3 Dashed line denotes graduational change or litologic change within same unit 4 Symbol indicates day material 5 / Relatively undisturbed ring sample li 6 Solid line denotes formation change�/ 7 8 Ground water table or as note Symbol indicates sand material 10 11 IIP"1 • 12 :: Standard Penetration Test sample / 1 o • 13 o Symbol mbol indicates bedrock material 1 , 14 ?d o �� Standard penetration Test or 15 � / Relatively undisturbed ring sample ♦• no recovery 16 �•�• ma be practical refu Bottom of excavation ( Y 17 Total Depth -total depth of excavation Caving- noted areas of caving within the excavation Ground Water- depth of ground water andlor perched 18 water encountered. Other notes as needed. 19 PLATE B-1 KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND TERMS GROG P�YM32L �vo1r L NAMES • ON _ I. COARSE GRAINED,more than halt of material is larger than No.200 sieve size. GW Well gravels,9reve1- CLEAN GRAVELS sand ird graded g little or a fines More n GP sand Poorly gradeds gravels,Wo9r Is G us or no fines. Mere than half of aller than sand mixtures, ri graded fraction Is larger than No.4 GM Silty gravels,poo y sieve size but smaller 3* GRAVELS WITH uINES gravel-sand-sift mixtures of fines) graded (Appreciable amount GC Clayey gruels,poorly finea s) gravel-sand-day miRures. SW Well graded sands,gravelly CLEAN SANDS sands fide no fines. gravelly�NQ$ SP sanPood.y 9radrrnonde . gravelly More than hater coarse sands, rad d no fines. • sieve siz smaller than No.4 . sand- sieve size. SM Silty sands,poorly graded SANDS WRH mNES salty mbdures. lgppradahle amount • of fines) SC Clayey peony YeY ograded sand- • day mixtures. '� . II. FINE GRAINED,more than had of material Is smaller than No.200 sieve size. Liquid Limit less ML inorganic silts and very fine sands, 3�d_„untrss — rock flour,sandy silt or clayey- .. ... st'tt-sand mixtures with slight plastidty. than 50 to medium CL Inorganic days of low sandy days. plasticity,gravelly clays, . silty days,lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty days • of low plasticity. MH Inorganic silts,micaceous oars diatomaceous SIL uid nND CLAYS _ fine sandy or days soils, elastic Liquid Limit greaterfine Inorganic days of high plasticity, than 5000OH Organic days of medium to high plasticity. • HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils - Water level at time of excavation or as Indicated. • WAL-MART AT REDHAWK TONNE CENTER • DWG. BY: RJR DATE: 05-30-00 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JOB NO. 208-00 PLATE B-2 _` EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B- 1 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1071 Redhawk Parkway 79 & Date: 5/22/00 Location: SEC Highway Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Logged • Jerry Redolfi Job No.: 208-00 Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop By: Driving ' Method: Hollow Stem ®' Dry Other Blows Moisture Lab Content Density Peit Tests Material Description Foot I'�°l Depth Lith- - p (Feet) ology �" Dark brown; slightly moist; loose to " Cilry Sand_(SMa:- 1 medium dense. .0/16" , 6.2 114.4 2.5 Feet: Gray brown• 3 it A 4 39 1 50/5" 5 p 6 7 )�IDd 8 5.8 98.3 COL Gray-brown; slightly moist to moist; 24 Cie& 4and_nse4t- fine grained. 36 8 medium dense Darktr dense;ramedium grained. " `;= © 7.5 Feet: gray-brown; grained. 8.0 Feet: Light gray; dense; fine 9 10 ' --14meiumdenso 31 ' " Light gray; slightly moist; 11 dense; fine to medium grained. 12 11113 14 II 26.3 94.5 . - 1 11 Dark grayish brown; moist 4 �' 15 -w wet; medium fine grained. 46 ' to dense/firm; 7 16 17 11118 19 • I PLATE • Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. t EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: 1 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Eonlig n: B- 1 Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5/22/00 Location: SEC 10igh Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 208-00 �� Logged By: Jerry Redotfi Job No.: 1401bs130 Drop Driving Weight Samples ed Method: Hollow Stem w D� Other a Blows Moisture Lab ContentDDry ntillill c Perepos Tests Material Description r Foot (%) 44.4 76.8 Depth C.ith" 3 (Feet) ologY • 3 10 '21 I 22 II 23 `• : . . 24 12 , wet; medium dense to dense; fine to 111 23 25 25 Feet: Light gmagrained. 27 medium gr 26 Il = I 11 27 �' 28 '1 29 10 30 - ( VJ1. Light gray; wet; medium dense; fute grained. 14 31 - -Total Depth = 31.5 Feet Ground Water at 24.0 Feet Other Laboratory Tests: Collapse Potential t . PLAT Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 1 EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B 2 Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1067 Project: M'�' ,' Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5/67100 Lob No.:oa SEC 0 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: LoggedJerry Redolfi Job h 208-00 Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop By: Hallow Stem Driving Method: Dry Other BFoo[ Moisture Per ' Content Density pcfl Tests le11111111 Material Description 1�,) Depth Lich- " (Feet) ology ail gray to gray; slightly moist; loose to „ 1 medium dense. 9 37 2 50/5 3 3.0 Feet: Becomes dense to very dense' 4IN 14 111S 5.9 112.1 25 ' 35 c. 6 . 9Id 1�� . u � Dark gray to gray; slightly 7 I ,, 9 7 moist; dense to hard. 12 8 - c Light gray; slighty moist; medium dense; so medium to coarse grained. ' 5 ' 26.8 81.3 11 10 - - - --Ve -moist; very stiff. 13 ' - 4iMi l: Dazk gray brown; rY . 11 II12 111113 14 4 ' 4 15 7 ' 15.5 Feet: grades to interbedded silt and silty sa . . 16 II17 11118 19 II PL ATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG • Boring No.: B-2 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 2 Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5127100 I. Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: Job No.: 208-00 Logged gy. Jerry Redolfi Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401hs/30"Drop gg Method: Samples Blows Moisture Dry Other 111111111 Per Content Density Lab Material Description Foot • (ntt) pe0 Tests Depth Lith- 2 ' (Feet) oloBYsilt. _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 20 Feet: Wet to saturated; dark gray _ _ _ _ - - 36 ' c nd (S Light gray; moist; dense. 21 -- _ " 22 — — 11123 _ _ " 24 17 �, 25 °rained. = 42 25.5 Feet: Saturated; fine to medium C ' 28 26 a 1' 27 = -=7. 28 - - II 29 s II 20 ' 30 35 31 Total Depth = 31.0 Feet Ground Water at 26.0 Feet . \ ' PLATEI Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG 3 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Censer Elevation:Boring No.: B-3 1 Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5/22/00 Lobation: SEC High 1 1 I Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: Job No.: 208-00' Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Driving g 1 Hollow Stem W Dry Other Method: a Blows B Moisnue Lab Content Density 11111111 e Per l ensit Tess Material Description r Foot k me Depth Lith- II (peer) ology cid(s l Dark brown; slightly moist; loose. ' 1 3 2 50 • 3 @ 3.0 Feet: Becomes dense to very dense• 4 .' 1 11 5 12 �' 6 moist; medium dense; fine to 11 Light gray; slightly silty fine sand at 6.5 feet. 7 medium grained; grades into very tY 6 g --- @ 8 Feet: Loose to medium dense; sli tly silty• 7 , 9 — = 7III I 10 __ 13 • I 1 12 -� _. 1' 13 14 6 /' II 15 a moist; very silty fine sand. 13 ' @ 15.5 Feet Dark gray; 16 17 _ iii _ 111118 7 19 - - - - -- - - - -- -- - - - -- - - - - - " PLATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG 1 Boring No.: B'3 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center 1071 Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway DeElevation:te: 5171 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 Jerry Redolfi Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Method: w Dry Other a Blows B Moisture Lab t Per . ' Content Density Material DescriptionTests i Foot - k (%) (!x� Depth Lith- 3 ' (Feet) ology gray; wet; flt'm. 3 Cla< - Silt (ML1-.Dark 5 a21 11122 " 23 II 24 13 '' 25 - - - - - -sil fine to - - 27 2 /1 - Sand-�sp�Light gray; moist; dense; Blighty ry; 26 • medium grained. II 28 i „ 29 "13 7 SA 30 15 ' @ 30.5 Feet: Gray; saturated. 15 31 Total Depth = 31.5 Feet Ground Water at 29.0 Feet Other Laboratory Tests: Sieve Analysis • PLATE . Petra Geotechnical, Inc. • EXPLORP- , . Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center E1ev„- . Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: Job No.: 208-00 Lo oed By: Jerry Vie"' Driving`......ght: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged act.,LaboratoryTe.. Method: Hollow Stem �T!� �foisnire Dry ' ^'n... Blows B Le Material Description Per 1 Content Density I Tests 1 Foot k (%) Depth Lith- (Feet) elegy E'tuv Sand- SM1=-Dark gray brown; slighty moist; dense. 1 29 1 27.0 94.4 2 50 3 IFI : 191 5 23 ' 23 ' 6 .'7 19.7 93.5 7 Ai 1TVII1M lightly moist to moist; ' �i_1TLight gray brown; 9 8 medium dense• 16 • 9 III4 10 8 ' @ 10.5 Feet: Slightly moist; more fine to medium grained 8 11 • sand. I 12 II 13 14 • 10 ' 15 --- - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 - ca.,d(SP/SWL Light gray; slightly moist; dense; medium to 165 ' 16 a coarse grained; low cohesion. . 17 .® 18 1111 II 19 r. - „ PLATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. i EXPLORATION LOG i.. Boring No.: B- 4 f Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1074 Highway 5/72/00 Lobation: SEC �� 79 &Redhawk Parkway ac Corporation Date: Client: Excel Legacy Jerry Redolfi Job No.: 208-00 Weight: 1. Driving � : 14O1bs/30"Drop Logged By: .. . . Method: Hollow Stem Other • ,a Blows C B Moisture Dry Lab t Per ° I Coisture Density Material Description e Foot e t (%) epst Tests Depth Lith- 2 /' (Feet) ology - - - - - - - - ' 3 • - - -Silt ( l5ark brown; very moist to wet; soft. 3 ' lav v 21 " 22 " 23 I 24 10 , - - -3r 13 25 - --wet; medium dense. 11 ' c:ih `d (SM] -Light gray, ■ 26 27 11 PI. 28 II 29 • 30 SilL(ML1 Dark gray; wet; kin-. 4 Ii 31 - gand (SP1. Gray; saturated; medium dense. trace to little silt; • medium grained. Total Depth = 31.5 Feet . Ground Water at 25.5 Feet PLATE 1 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. I EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B- a Project 'Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1075 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Deva 5/75/00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 Lo ed By: Jerry Redolfi Driving Weight 1401bs/30"Drop Logged Method: Hollow Stem � " ' ' W Dry Other a Blows B Moisture Per B Content Density Lab Material Description r Foot ki (pcf) Tests Depth Lith- ' - DLL (Feet) ology � Sa slightly moist; dense; medium II Sand/4P1. Gray brown; g Y 1 grained. ' 2 32 • 37 � ' 3 �' 4 1 -- - - - 12 , 5 - �q�, Sand7SM)_Gray brown; slightly moisi to moist; 19 mediumdense to dense. 20 ' 6 6 ALlUYILDA SiltILand Sa Light gray; slightly moist to g '1 moist im dense to dense. 11 q " 10 7.2 94.4 6 ' @ 10.5 Feet: Moist; medium dense. 1522 ' 11 12 13 ill II 14 1 15 @ 15 Feet Gray brown; fin5 e grained_ - - 10 j' -Syph: Light gray; moist; medium dense; trace silt; 13 ' 16 medium grained. 171' 18 11 19 II PLATE f Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 5 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075 • Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows c a Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests 5 7 9 Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 12 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B- 6 1- 6 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: i wa 79 &Redhawk Parkway Teva 5/23/00 ,I Location: SEC Highway ac Corporation i Client: Excel Legacy 3� Redolfi I Job No.: 208-00 Logged By: Driving Weight 140113s/30"Drop Method: Hollow Stem wille Dry Other a Blows C B Moisture Lab [lOn t Per ° l Content DensityTests Material Description ° Foot e k me (pep Depth Lith- (Feet) ology 1 R,� .1 111 � Dark brown; slightly moist; dense. 11.' 38 112.1 2 50/4" ' 6.1 ;' 4 firm to stiff sandy silt. ' 15.8 104.0 ® 4.5 Feet: Reworked Alluvium: g 5 28 Light gray brown; moist; dense; medium 308 ' 6 grained. 6 %1 7 19 11 10 I 10 wined. 22 a medium to coarse gr 20 ' 10.5 Feet: Light gr Y: . 11 " 12 " 13 14• 4 15 - cii.� ,md (�Mti Light o ay; moist; medium dense; fine 8 grained. .' 16 II 17 II18 I 19 PLATE i Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. . EXPLORATION LOG No.: B- 6 I Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring Elevation: 1070 Job No.: 208-00 Loggedl Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redltawk Parkway 5/23/00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: Jerry Redolfi Driving Weight 1401bs/30"Drop By: Method: follow Stem \wit:Mete. D her a Blows Moisture Dry rytY Lab t Per Content DeP it Tests Material Description e Foot (�) Depth Lith- 3 , SA (Feet) oloBY 5 19.4 106.8 20.5 Feet: Moist to very moist; more silt. 12 21 Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-7 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 17 Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Tevate: 5/23/00 069 1 Lobation: SEC>0 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Jobo No.: 208-00 Driving Weight 140lbs130"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Other Method: Hollow Stem vi Ito scare Dry a Blows C Content Density Lab e Per r (%) en°fl Tab Material Description r Foot e Depth Lich- „ ests (Feet) ology %9s2ThusNn .Dark brown; slightly moist dense. ll 123111 En 23 2 5015" 3 ' 4 9 ' 16.3 90.5 111 El 11 5 rctvnrgray brown; moist; stiff to hard; porous to 18 ' 6 8.0 feet. 8 %' 7 8 ' 8 moist. Q8.5Feet: moisttavery - - - - - -- - - IIII 9 Sand (S Light gray, slightly moist; dense; medium 8 ' 2.3 102.8 10 grained. 20 ' 11 12 •'' 13 C l '1 14 - - moist; firae Stlt(Mi 1 Gray-- m brown;very . 4 4 1115 5 ' 16 '1 17 Int 19 Il PLAT' Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG i Boring No.: B- 1 Towne Center 1 79 ,l Project Wal-Mart at RedhawkElevation: 'i C Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Devate: 5/23/00 Location: a Corporation Client: Excel Leg cY 11 Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Job No.: 208-00 Driving Weight 1401bs/30 Drop Samples MINEether Method: Hollow Stem W Moisture ' Dry a Blows Content Density Lab he e (To) (pct) Tests t Per 41 Material Description t Foot Depth Lith- 5 (Feet) ologY S a brown; sandy. 19 20.5 Feet Dark gray _ __ _'_ _ - - dense. - c nd(S - gray brown: moist; medium 21 1 ry��— Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No Ground Water e.. • PLAT Petra Geotechnical, Inc. • EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B- 8 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center florin Noon: 1068- S wa 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5168/00 Location: 208SEC Highway Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: Logged By: Jerry Redo16 Job No.: 208 00 Weight 1401bs130"Drop Drivingsamples ' Method: Hollow Stem w Dry Other a Blows C Moisture Lab t Per ° Content Density Material Description e ( te pcfl Tests r Foot e I Depth Lith- " (Feet) ology mL &rel Dark gray brown; moist; dense. II 1 2 50 ' 7.4 115.7 3 ; 4 18 I 25 5 121 5.5 Feet: slightly moist to moist' 6 AI"LI)$� h t gray; slightly moist to moist; medium 11 -11 7 Cilty ; clean sand; low 17 ' dense; clean sand; cohesion. 18 it 31 11 very© 11.0 Feet: Interbedded clayey silt and silty sand; il ' moist II 12 I 13 • III14 12 1 15 @ 15.0 Feet: Medium dense to dense; fine grained. 12 10.0 103.0 113 ' 16 17 11 18 19 p• PLATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: .B- 8 i• at Redhawk Towne Center i project: Wal-Mart Elevation: 1068 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Job No.: 208-005/23/00 Method: Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: LoggedBerry Redolfi • Driving Weight 1gOlbs130"Drop By: Hollow Stem Other Moisture Dry Blows Lab eataillil Per Content Density Tests Material Description Foot (%) (P`fl Depth Lith- (Feed ology a brown; very [Hoist to wet; stiff. 8 Cla- eTSilt (MLLDark gr Y21 1111 12 Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No Ground Water I • PLATE B Petra Geotechnical, Inc. . EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 9 rElevation: 1068 is Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk ParkwaY Tevate: SI28 I Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 LoggedJerry Redolfi Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Method: Hollow Stem Dther Blows Moisture Dry CiOII Per Content Density Tests Material Description Foot (%) (p`0 Depth Lith- - ' (Feet) ology 1g slightly moist; very dense. ll 4iltt� /g�Darkbrown; g Y1 ' 2345 36. 50/4" 36 j' 3 50 as 4 1 11 5 gi LIL�IIIMmoist to moist; c,,tr Cand(SM1:-Light gray; slightly medium 11 6.0 98.410 6 dense; medium grained. 10 All 7 13 U II fi 9 14 p),Light gray; slightly moist; dense; verylow 26 ' 11 cohesion. III 12 II'� 14 15 jyyih(M? )'-Dazk gray brown; verymoist; soft to firm• 3 ' I' 16 11117 Lli 18 19 111111 PLATE B Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. I EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-9 it . Job No.: 208-00 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1068 4 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway 5/23/00 1 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 111 Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop' Logged By: Jerry Redolfi • i Method: Hollow Stem Other Moisture Dry BFoot Density Lab Per Coater Tests Material Description (%) ipeil Depth Lith- ' (Feet) ology Light wet; medium dense. 5 7 28.4 93.9 4it,�artd1S11'tl= gh gray; 16 21 IIIII Total Depth = 21.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 1 EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-10 • Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center 1-b Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway kway Date: 5123/00 a ation I Client: Excel Legacy CorporJerry Redolfi Job No.: 208-00 Logged By: Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop gg Method: Hollow Stem Samples B Moisture Dry Other Blows u Density Lab Per ' l Content Depci Tests Material Description Foot k (�) Depth Lith- „ I (Feet) ology I EU L u u Duk brown; moist; II 1 medium dense to dense/hard. ' 2 17 44 s % 3 10 12 4 11 Al 13.1 113.0 5 21 , 23 .' ' 6 5 7 Duk gray brown; very moist; stiff. 13 11 1 gSandYa' 9 11 10 Light gray; moist; medium dense to dense; 19 me grained; low cohesion. 25 ., medium gr it ii 12 13 ii 15 • 19 �' 27 ., 16 „ 17 - - - 18 t u u • Dark gray brown;very II moist; medium dense to dense/hard. 19 PLA7E 1 Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 1 i EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-10 H Project • Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center tion: 1070 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Teevava 5/23/00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 LoggedJerry Redolfi Hollow Stem Driving Weight 1401bs/30"Drop By: Method: `y Other Material Description a Blows B Moisrure Dry t ` ° Content Density Lab e r Foot k (%) (pcf) Tests Depth Lid- pei 10 (Feet) ology 19 25 , 21 ,1 22 11123 - c tai frPl• Lighc brown; moistto very moist; dense; medium grained. III24 10 '25 17 26 26 .' 1127 '1 28 II CI\1 _ - Dark gray; wet; firm - - medium 19 30 G nP�Light gray; very moist to wet; dense; grained. 47 , 31 • Total Depth = 31.0 teet No Standing Ground Water PLATE F Petra Geotechnical, Inc. . EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-11 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center j Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00 i Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140 lbsl30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redo Samples Laboratory Tests wOther a Blows C B Moisture Dry . Material Description Per o o Content Density Lab e r 1 Depth Lith- r Foot e k (%) (Pct) Tests (Feet) ology �• Silty Sand (SM) Dark brown; slightly moist to moist; dense II 1 — to very dense. — 2 —: 1 . i' 25 35 15 % ' — 4 — 3.7 Feet: Dark gray; moist. 20 ' 18 ' 11.9 120.8 — 5 —• 21 29 II ! AIi�JM ' 7 — Silt ((ML) Dark brown; slightly moist to moist; hard. 110 II _ 8 - II — 9 Sandia Light gray; slightly l moist; medium dense to II— 10 —1: '. dense; low cohesion. 8 12 11 .. 16 I' — 12 — II II — 14 — II — 15 - Cilt� _(M14:-Dark gray; wet; soft. 2 V' — 16 2 4 III — 17 — — 18 — II — 19 — 111 Continued Next Page PLATE B-23 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring B-11 1 Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.:on: 1-11 i, wa 79 &Redhawk Parkway Devate: 5/23/00 Location: 208-00SEC Highway Client Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: Weight: 140lbs130"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Driving Method: Hollow Stem Dry other Blows �fl Moisture Lab Content Density Per Pui Tests Material Description Foot (%) Depth Lith- 6 All 15 (Feet) ology Gra brown; very moist to wet; medium LO I I � Ct �a (SML Y 15 dense. 21 Total Depth — 21.5 Feet No Ground Water • • PLATE. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-12 Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1070 Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Date: 5124100 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 LoggedJerry Redolfi Driving Weight 1401bs130"Drop By: Method: Hollow Stem 1111 ' Other Blows Moisture Dry Lab Per Content Density Material Description ( te%) ensit Tests Foot Depth Lith- " (Feet) ology I IgJ �� u . Dark brown; slightly moist II .,. di stiff. 1 to moist; medium dense to dense/very . 13 2 2 , II 4 III %, 5 16 '9 12 $ 6 '4 lgi 7 Al L t—NIIrtil. a slightly moist to moist; medium 13 ' $and f Sp);.Light gray; g 15 8 dense. 9 II �19 101 15 ' 1, II 13 14 1' • 15 6 II 14 I 16 II 17 II- -� - LI 11�� Gray brown; very moist to 18 w medium %I wet; medium denselstiff. 6 19 PLATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-12i lva at Redbawk Towne Center �: Project Wal-MartWal-MartEetion: 1070 ,. Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Date: 5/70/00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Job No.: 208-00 LoggedJerry Redolfi Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop By: Method: Hollow Stem Samples ellallill Other Moisture Dry Blows DensityDtyLab Content Material Description Per Pofl Tests Foo (%) Depth Lith- (Feet) ology $ 21 11111 Total Depth — 21.5 Feet No Ground Water r. • PLATE! Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG it Boring No.: B-13 Towne Center Project Wal-Mart at RedhawkElevation: 1069 wa 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5/69 Location: SEC Highway LegacyCorporation Date: i Client: Excel Jerry Redolfi Job No.: 208-00 Logged By: Driving Weight 1401bs/30"Drop gg • Method: Hollow Stem I Other W Moisture Dry a Blows DrLab Material Description t Per Content Density Tests e (y) (Pol) r Foot Depth Lith- „ (Feet) ology -„a d (S Gray brown; slightly moist; dense. " I\ I\ 1 . 23 .a 2 38 /' 3 4 " 13.0 101.3 24 ' lens of dark 25 Light gay; moist; medium dense; ., 13 3.4 101.2 6 brown silt. 20 ' 7 27 8 " 9 '1 10 @10.5 Feet: Silty. 0 I 11 15 ••I' 12 II 13 : ll c^dam Light gray; moist; medium dense; medium to 158 '' 15 _ -_ coarse grained; low cohesion. 10 f.' 16 e• - II17 III = II19 - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - PLATE Continued Next Page Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Boring No.: B-13 Project Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Elevation: 1069 wa 79 &Redhawk Parkway 5/24/00 Location: SEC Highway oration Date: I 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy CorpJerry Redolfi Job No.: Logged Hallow Stem Driving Weight: lgplbs/30"Drop By: Method: Other Blows B Moisture Dry Lab Per ' j Content Density Material Description (ped Tess Foot k (%) Depth Lim- 3 /' (Feet) ology graybrown; very moist; firm• q Silt /ML .Dark tIII - ,�qy— +—� - - - - 10 A 21 4�T - Sand 7C1v11 dray brown; very moist; medium dense. Total Depth — 21.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B- Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-14 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests W _ Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other o Depth Lith- a Per r 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pet) Tests PH1 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown; slightly moist to moist; dense to very dense. — 2 — — 3 27 IF 7.4 123.9 50/5" — 4 — 22 ::: 0r — 5 — — 6 — 41 — 7 — ' ' ALLUVRTM Sand (SW)`Light gray brown; slightly moist to moist; 8 47- medium dense to dense, trace to little silt. 20IL : a+ 25 — 9 --_-- — 10 — : T 11 1 Silt (MT.)• Dark gray;moist; firm to stiff. 7 j T: ▪ Sand (SW)• light gray brown; slightly moist to moist; 15 j • medium dense to dense; trace to little silt. — 12 : - 13 — ' — 14 — .'" • 15 - I_ 36.0 88.2 Silt (MI)• Dark gray brown; wet; Firm to stiff. 11 — 16 — 9 8 — 17 — — 18 — — 19 — iContinued Next Page PLATE B-29 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG • Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-14 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066 • Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stein Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry RedolB W Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- e Per ° 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests 2 V —21 —.-7 -. 2 l Silty Sand (SM)- Dark gray; very moist; medium dense. • 11 • — 23 — —24 — ® 25 Feet: Light gray; dense; less silt. 10 — 26 — 25 A —27 — • —28 — 29 — Sand (SP)• Light gray; saturated; medium dense to dense; • — 30 - medium grained. 6 7— — 31 —:•••.:-•.•: 15 • 23 t Total Depth = 31.5 Feet Ground Water at 28.0 Feet • PLATE B-30 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-15 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description i Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per r Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests FI1 J — 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown; moist; medium dense. — 2 — 9 11.2 120.9 — 3 —: .' 15 — 4 —: . : 24 — 5 @ 5.0 Feet: More sand. 7 14 A, — 6 — pi.T.T1VTTIM 16 f — 7 Sandy Silt/Silty Sand(MT /S M)• Gray brown; very moist to wet; very stiff/medium dense to dense. 8 16.9 96.0 COL 8 —: : • ; : 10 — 9 14 10 11 Sand (SP)• Light gray; moist; medium dense to dense. 21 6 11 — 19 — 12 — 13 - - 14 — • - 7 Sandy silt (MI)- Gray brown; very moist to wet; firm. 4 16 — 5 6: — 17 - - 18 —. SiltyS Sand (, M)• Gray brown; very moist; medium dense. — 19 Continued Next Page PLATE B-31 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-15 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- Per Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k - (%) (pcL) Tests —21 6 Total Depth = 21.5 Feet • No Ground Water Other Laboratory Tests: Collapse Potential PLATE B-32 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-16 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1064 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24100 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolti Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° y Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests : FII.T 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense. — 2 — 16 — 3 17 �:.:. — 4 — : .[; — 5 @ 5.0 Feet: Gray brown; dense. — — 6 — 23 30 — 7 AMM i • : : Sand (.SP)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium 11 j — S 1: dense to dense; little silt. 14 @ 7.5 Feet: Medium dense to dense. 17 — 9 — — 10 4 — 11 102 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • • PLATE B- 33 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-17 Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C s Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests FIT.f l — Silly Sand/Sandy Silt (SM/MI )• Dark gray; moist; medium dense/very stiff; interlayered silty sand and sandy silt. — 2 — 1— 3 — 11 — 4 —: : . 17 • — 5 @ 5.0 Feet: Less silt; dense silty sand. 18 / — 6 30 A — 7 • AT.T.TIVTTTM — 8 _ Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; trace to • little silt. — 9 — 10 — .'. .: 6 13 — 11 — 14 % Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B-34 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-18 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolf Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests ETI — 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; moist; medium dense to • dense; little to some mixed silt. — 2 — 3 14 22 — 4 —: : 18 — 5 @ 5.0 Feet: Dark brown; dense. 13 — 6 — 26 • r 7 ---- Ai. LLWRIM - - $ — Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; very moist; medium dense; 7 little silt. • — 9 — 10 — 10 @ 10.0 Feet: Light gray; moist to very moist. 6 - 11 -:. :> . : 9 8 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B- 35 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-19 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lath- e Per r°. I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests FIT.T 1 — Silty Sand (SM)- Dark gray; moist; medium dense. — 2 — @ 2.0 Feet to 3.0 Feet: Rocks. „ 3 — 4 — 5 — 27 7 t Sand(SP)' Gray brown; moist; medium dense to dense; — 7 — trace to little silt. I — 8 —: 14 — 9 17 A1J.11VTTTM • Sand (SP)- Light gray; moist; medium dense; medium grained. — 11 — 6 pie Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 36 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-20 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests : FQ.T — 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark brown; moist; medium dense. • — 2 AT.LTTVTTTM Sandy Silt (MT)• Dark gray brown; moist; firm to stiff. — 3 — 6 7 cc-: 7 — 4 — — 5 Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; 11 occasional thin silt lens. 11 — 6 — 17 g — 7 — f — 8 - — 9 — Silty Sand (SM)- Gray brown; very moist to wet; loose. 3 - 11 2 - 5 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 37 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-21 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab (Fret) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct Tests FRJ 1 _ Sandy Silt/Silty Sand (MT /SM)• Dark gray brown; moist; firm/medium dense. — 2 — — 3 — — 4 — ALLLIYIIIM 13 Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; medium 5 grained. 4 ,74 — 6 — 4 — 7 — • 7.5 Feet: Gray brown; very moist; loose; some silt. 3 'T 6 V 9 J 12 9.0 Feet: Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense. • r 10 —• 8 V/ 11 — 11 — 14 4 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • • PLATE B-38 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-22 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077 Job No.: 208-00- Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests W — Material Description a Blows u B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lim- a Per r 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pd) Tests FLU 1 — : Silty Sand(SM)• Dark gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense. — 2 6 — 3 — 21 V — 4 — 26 14 19 — 6 — 24 — 7 — — 11 — 8 —' 18 5 — 9 — — 10 — 8 — 11 — 12 to j ALJJTVIITM - Silt (MT)• Gray brown; very moist; stiff. Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B- 39 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-23 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolf Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° i Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests FlU 1 _ Silty Sand (SM)- Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense. — 2 — — 3 — 17 — 4 26 — 5 11 J - 6 — 13 — 7 — 8 — --- 9 - - 10 - 13 — 11 — 29 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 40 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-24 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests MateIial Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° 7 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests : PILI • 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense. — 2 —: : 1 : : SE — 3 —. : :' : 11 �'' Ise. — 4 — ��— — 5 9 17 — 6 — 22 — 7 l. — 8 — 9 — Al.1AIVHTM Silt (M1,)- Dark gray brown; moist; stiff. — 10 — 7 7— x- 11 — 1 8 f Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water Other Laboratory Tests: • Sand Equivalent • • • PLATE B-41 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-25 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1073 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (9O) (pcf) Tests FiI J 1 — Silty Sand (SM)- Dark gray brown to gray brown; slightly moist to moist; dense; occasional thin layers of silt. — 2 I 10 j' 21 28 A— 4 — 5 14 V' 24 — 6 — 31 V.:' 111 — 8 — 14 %1 27 ' — 10 : : 5 12 - 11 — 18 97. Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B- 42 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-26 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows u B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per r 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests FRL 1 — Silty Sand (SM)- gray brown to dark gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense; with thin layers of silt. — 2 — — 38 : 15 W — 4 —: 15 — 5 — 8 — 6 9 19 4 — 7 — — 8 — ALI.INTT TM 11 • Sand(SP)• gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium 10 — 9 dense; medium grained. 11 6 — 11 ® 10.5 Feet: Light gray; slightly moist. 2 • Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 43 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-27 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redol£t Samples Laboratory Tests Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per ° I Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests FTI.I 1 — Silt (MI.)- Dark gray brown; moist; stiff. — 2 —: , . . SE. — 3 —' ' . : : 7 11 ,7... — 4 —: : '.I 15 — 5 — 6 - 6 — ALIJJVTIIM 5 Silt (Ml )- Dark gray brown; very moist to wet; firm to stiff. 7 — 7 — 13 ' — a — / Sand(SP)- Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense. 8 11 7 47, 10 — 11 — 14 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water Other Laboratory Tests: Sand Equivalent PLATE B- 44 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-28 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1072 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30'Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests _ Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- e Per ° i Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k _ (%) (pcf) Tests FIT.T 1 _ Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense; occasional thin layer of silt. — 2 — — 3 — 33 F 34 — 4 — - 5 — 10 — 6 — 18 f — 7 — _ ALT.TTVTTTM 3 — 8 Silt (MT )• Dark gray brown; moist; firm. , 10 _ Sand (SP)- Light gray brown; slightly moist; medium dense; 12 — 9 medium grained. — 10 — 5 67 A Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B-45 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-29 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1073 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Material Description Depth Lith- a Per r l Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests ETU — — 1 _ Silty Sand (SM)• Gray to light gray; moist; dense. — 2 — — 3 16 F — 4 —: 21 — 5 — — 6 12 12 — 7 — — 8 — A7.i.T1VIi1M Silt (MT.)• Dark brown; very moist; stiff. 7 jf — 9 —: Sand (SP)• Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense; trace 12 to little silt; medium grained sand. 10 — 7 9 — 11 10 4, Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water PLATE B- 46 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-30 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077 Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolr • Samples Laboratory Tests • Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other Depth Lith- a Per °° 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology - r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests : FIT.I 1 Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; — medium dense to dense. — 3 — 9 9 17 25 — 4 — 10 23 A — 6 — 26 — 7 — • @ 6.8 Feet: Moist; medium dense; fine grained sand. 10 V. — 8 ALLIIViIIM 10 I — 9 — Sandy Silt (MI )• Dark gray brown; very moist; stiff. 11 — 10 —.. : Sand (SP)- Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; little to 8 some silt; medium grained sand. 10 ' 8 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 47 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. EXPLORATION LOG Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center I Boring No.: B-31 Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075 lob No.: 208-00 • Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00 Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi Samples Laboratory Tests a Blows Co B Moisture Dry Other Material Description Depth Lith- a Per r 1 Content Density Lab (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests ELLL — l — Silty Sand (SM)- Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium dense to dense. — 2 — : — 3 — ' I : 28 — 4 - - 5 — @ 4.25 Feet: Dark gray brown; moist. 10 — 6 17 — 7 — : ALi.iTVRTM ` ; — 8 __ Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; moist to very moist; medimn 6 dense. 8 / — 9 — 8 — 10 • — 4 @ 10.5 Feet: Light gray; medium grained. 6 - 11 — : ; : : 9 Total Depth = 11.5 Feet No Ground Water • PLATE B- 48 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. APPENDIX D J t PETRA _ * L I DUE F Y 2 * * Version 1.50 * * EMPIRICAL PREDICTION OF EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL JOB NUMBER: 208-00 DATE: 06-29-2000 JOB NAME: Redhawk Towne C SOIL-PROFILE NAME: 20800i.LDW BORING GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 16.00 ft CALCULATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 16.00 ft DESIGN EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE: 6.50 Mw SITE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION: 0.550 g BOREHOLE DIAMETER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00 SAMPLER SIZE CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00 N60 HAMMER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00 MAGNITUDE SCALING FACTOR METHOD: Idriss (1998) Magnitude Scaling Factor: 1.442 rd-CORRECTION METHOD: Seed (1985) FIELD SPT N-VALUES ARE CORRECTED FOR THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVE RODS. Rod Stick-Up Above Ground: 3.0 ft CN NORMALIZATION FACTOR: 1.044 tsf MINIMUM CN VALUE: 0.6 NCEER [19977 Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 1 File Name: 20800i.OUT CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC CORR. LIQUE. INDUC. LIOUE. SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY NO. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (B/ft) N1_60 N (B/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR ----+ + + + + + + + + + + 0.25 0.016 0.016 50 - * * * * * ** 0.75 0.047 0.047 50 - * * • * * ** 1.25 0.078 0.078 50 - * * * * * ** 1.75 0.109 0.109 50 - * * * * * ** 2.25 0.141 0.141 50 - * * * * * ** 2.75 0.172 0.172 50 * * * * * ** 3.25 0.203 0.203 50 - * * * * * ** 3.75 0.234 0.234 50 - * * * * * ** 4.25 0.266 0.266 50 * * * * * ** 4.75 0.297 0.297 50 - * * * * * ** 5.25 0.328 0.328 50 - * * * * * ** 5.75 0.359 0.359 50 - * * * * * ** 6.25 0.391 0.391 50 - * * * * * ** 6.75 0.422 0.422 50 - * * * * * ** 7.25 0.453 0.453 50 - * * * * * ** 7.75 0.484 0.484 50 - * * * * * ** 8.25 0.516 0.516 50 - * * * * * ** 8.75 0.547 0.547 50 - * * * * * ** 2 9.25 0.576 0.576 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 9.75 0.602 0.602 15 2.00 * * • * * •* 2 10.25 0.628 0.628 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 10.75 0.654 0.654 15 2.00 * * * * ** 2 11.25 0.681 0.681 15 2.00 * * *' * * ** 2 11.75 0.707 0.707 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 12.25 0.733 0.733 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 12.75 0.759 0.759 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 13.25 0.786 0.786 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 13.75 0.812 0.812 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 14.25 0.838 0.838 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 14.75 0.864 0.864 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 15.25 0.891 0.891 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 15.75 0.917 0.917 15 2.00 * * * * * ** 2 16.25 0.943 0.935 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.966 0.348 0.73 2 16.75 0.969 0.946 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.965 0.353 0.72 2 17.25 0.996 0.957 i 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.964 0.359 0.71 2 17.75 1.022 0.967 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.963 0.364 0.70 2 18.25 1.048 0.978 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.961 0.368 0.69 2 18.75 1.074 0.989 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.960 0.373 0.68 2 19.25 1.101 0.999 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.959 0.378 0.67 2 19.75 1.127 1.010 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.958 0.382 0.67 2 20.25 1.153 1.021 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.956 0.386 0.66 2 20.75 1.179 1.031 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.955 0.391 0.65 2 21.25 1.206 1.042 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.954 0.395 0.64 NCEER [1997] Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 2 File Name: 20800i.DUT CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC - CORR. LIQUE. INDUC. LIQUE. SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY NO. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (B/ft) N1_60 N (B/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR + + + + + + + 2 21.75 1.232 1.052 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.952 0.399 0.64 2 22.25 1.258 1.063 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.951 0.402 0.63 2 22.75 1.284 1.074 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.949 0.406 0.63 2 23.25 1.311 1.084 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.948 0.410 0.62 2 23.75 1.337 1.095 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.946 0.413 0.62 2 24.25 1.363 1.106 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.945 0.416 0.61 2 24.75 1.389 1.116 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.943 0.420 0.61 2 25.25 1.416 1.127 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.941 0.423 0.60 2 25.75 1.442 1.138 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.939 0.426 0.60 2 26.25 1.468 1.148 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.938 0.428 0.59 2 26.75 1.494 1.159 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.936 0.431 0.59 3 27.25 1.522 1.171 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.934 0.434 0.66 3 27.75 1.551 1.184 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.931 0.436 0.66 3 28.25 1.579 1.197 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.929 0.438 0.65 3 28.75 1.608 1.210 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.927 0.440 0.65 3 29.25 1.637 1.223 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.925 0.442 0.65 3 29.75 1.666 1.237 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.922 0.444 0.65 3 30.25 1.694 1.250 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.920 0.446 0.64 3 30.75 1.723 1.263 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.917 0.447 0.64 3 31.25 1.752 1.276 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.914 0.449 0.64 3 31.75 1.781 1.289 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.912 0.450 0.64 3 32.25 1.809 1.302 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.909 0.451 0.64 3 32.75 1.838 1.316 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.906 0.452 0.63 4 33.25 1.866 1.328 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.903 0.453 0.37 4 33.75 1.894 1.340 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.899 0.454. 0.37 4 34.25 1.921 1.352 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.896 0.45 0.37 4 34.75 1.949 1.364 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.893 0.456 0.37 4 35.25 1.976 1.376 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.889 0.45 0.37 4 35.75 2.004 1-388 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.886 0.45 0.37 4 36.25 2.031 1.399 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.882 0.45: 0.37 4 36.75 2.059 1.411 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.878 0.45: 0.37 4 37.25 2.086 1.423 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.874 0.45: 0.37 4 37.75 2.114 1.435 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.871 0.45: 0.37 4 38.25 2.141 1.447 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.866 0.45: 0.37 4 38.75 2.169 1.459 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.862 0.45: 0.37 4 39.25 2.196 1.471 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.858 0.45: 0.37 4 39.75 2.224 1.483 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.854 0.45: 0.37 4 40.25 2.251 1.495 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.849 0.45 0.37 4 40.75 2.279 1.507 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.845 0.45 0.37 4 41.25 2.306 1.518 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.840 0.456, 0.37 4 41.75 2.334 1.530 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.836 0.456 0.37 4 42.25 2.361 1.542 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.831 0.455 0.37 4 - 42.75 2.389 1.554 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.826 0.454 0.37 5 43.25 2.418 1.567 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.822 0.453 0.68 NCEER (1997] Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 3 File Name: 20800i.OUT CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC CORR. LIQUE. INDUC. LIQUE. SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY NO. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (8/ft) N1_60 N (8/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR --f I. + + } + + + + 5 43.75 2.448 1.582 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.817 0.452 0.68 5 44.25 2.478 1.596 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.812 0.450 0.68 5 44.75 2.508 1.610 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.807 0.449 0.68 5 45.25 2.538 1.625 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.802 0.448 0.69 5 45.75 2.568 1.639 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.797 0.446 0.69 5 46.25 2.598 1.654 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.792 0.445 0.69 5 46.75 2.628 1.668 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.787 0.443 0.69 5 47.25 2.658 1.683 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.782 0.441 0.70 5 47.75 2.688 1.697 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.776 0.440 0.70 6 48.25 2.717 1.711 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.771 0.438 0.54 6 48.75 2.746 1.725 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.766 0.436 0.54 6 49.25 2.776 1.738 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.761 0.434 0.54 6 49.75 2.805 1.752 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.756 0.433 0.55 6 50.25 2.834 1.766 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.751 0.431 0.55 6 50.75 2.863 1.779 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.746 0.429 0.55 6 51.25 2.893 1.793 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.741 0.427 0.55 6 51.75 2.922 1.806 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.736 0.425 0.55 6 52.25 2.951 1.820 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.731 0.424 0.56 '6 52.75 2.980 1.834 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.726 0.422 0.56 6 53.25 3.010 1.847 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.721 0.420 0.56 6 53.75 3.039 1.861 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.716 0.418 0.56 7 54.25 3.069 1.876 50 - 7 54.75 3.100 1.891 50 - - - 7 55.25 3.132 1.907 50 - ' 7 55.75 3.163 1.923 50 - _- 7 56.25 3.194 1.938 50 "' 7 56.75 3.225 1.954 50 - ' 7 57.25 3.257 1.970 50 - -- 7 57.75 3.288 1.985 50 - 7 58.25 3.319 2.001 50 ' 7 58.75 3.350 2.017 50 - - - - 7 59.25 3.382 2.032 50 - ' 7 59.75 3.413 2.048 50 - • 7 60.25 3.444 2.064 50 - - - - 7 60.75 3.475 2.079 50 - - LATERAL SPREADING DUE TO EARTHQUAKE SHAKING Free Face Condition From Bartlett and Youd, 1995 (revised 1999) Log D(h) = -18.172 + 1.586M - 1.522LogR*- 0.011R + 0.553LogW+ 0.546 Log T(15) + 3.989Log(100-F(15)) -0.934Log(D50(15)+0.1 mm) Where: M = Magitude R`= Ro +R Ro = 0.89M-5.94 R = distance to causitive fault (km) W= 100(h/I) h = height of Free Face(depth of channel) I = distance from channel T(15) = Cumulative thickness of liquefied layer(s)with (N1)60 less than 15 F(15)= Percentage of fines of liquefied layer(s)with (N1)60 less than 15 D50(15) = Mean grain size of liquefied layer(s)with (N1)60 less than 15 Given: M = 6.5 R' = 1.845 Ro = -0.155 R = 2 W= 18.75 h = 15 1 = 80 T(15) = 3.05 (in meters) F(15) = 8 D50(15) = 0.8 Log D(h) = -18.172 10.309 -0.405 -0.022 0.704 0.264 7.834 0.043 Log D(h) = 0.555 D(h) = 3.59 Meters = 11.78 Feet SETTLEMENT DUE TO EARTHQUAKE SHAKING Layer 2 (N1)60 = 16.2 Thickness of Layer= 10 Feet Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.348 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.431 Average of layer= 0.39 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 1.42% Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15) = 0.0014 Feet 0.0170 Inches Layer 3 (N1)60 = 18.9 Thickness of Layer= 7 Feet Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.434 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.452 Average of layer= 0.443 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 1.33% Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15) 0.0009 Feet 0.0112 Inches Layer 3 (N1)60 = 18.9 Thickness of Layer= 7 Feet Induced stress ratio=Top of layer= 0.434 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.452 Average of layer= 0.443 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 1.33% Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15) = 0.0009 Feet 0.0112 Inches Layer 4 (N1)60 = 11.3 Thickness of Layer= 10 Feet Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.453 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.454 Average of layer= 0.4535 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 2.25% Settlement= (V(s)/100)`T(15) 0.0023 Feet 0.0270 Inches Layer 5 (N1)60 = 21 Thickness of Layer= 4 Feet Induced stress ratio =Top of layer= 0.453 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.44 1 . Average of layer= 0.4465 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 1.29% I .. Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15) 0.0005 Feet 0.0062 Inches Layer 6 (N1)60 = 16.5 Thickness of Layer= 6 Feet Induced stress ratio =Top of layer= 0.438 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output) Bottom of layer= 0.418 Average of layer= 0.428 Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987: V(s) = 1.42% Settlement= (V(s)/100)`T(15) = 0.0009 Feet 0.0102 Inches Total Settlement= 0.0828 Inches