The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParcel Map 30180 Parcel A, 13-14 Geo Report.pdf Eart,� 5truta �entcrhnrc�tl5�rti�ices, ln�. February 3, 2017 tit�.�tz:hnical, E.nrirunmrnraJ�n,l:slar.:ria�s T��ir��onsu�t.��rs Project No. 171610-10A Mr.Judd Kessler Oil and Water Pechanga Parkway, LP PO Sox L Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Commercial Development, Assessor's Parcel 1Vumber 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed commercial development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, located on the southwest corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway in the city of Temecula, Riverside County, California. This work was performed in accordance with the scope of work described in our proposal, dated January 16, 2017. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties,and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services appreciates the opportunity to offer our consultation and advice on this project. In the event that you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, �A��.�r�H� ��r��r� �c��,�o»r��c�H«�<<c�� E��v�<<c�� p��5rp� ' ,�-,;�_'�_��:; . , � . . . J�^�' . • " . � �� ,y�c P�q �r�� 'c�� '- . . . � ��.�� .� � . '.s L .�`. i }�. �n. G3� Q y . � L'�y�V% �74�• � n� �''rr•. ��.:ti�t� � _ ,� �` �� Y � / . _ 1 �_ j �, ��Q�,.�x ':iJ. `.ir�;C�l ' Stephen M. Poole, PE, GE �'��,q��di.A�a�� Aaron G. Wood, PG, CEG '��>�r=� Principal Engineer - ��'�` f Principa! Geologist ; ��-�_� f�`� ,`-�" �-�.___--�' ;�� .'�-;. ��1�r.�`�'�f �ti�;��r..�. :� SMP/snj/jcf Distribution: (2) Addressee 42184 REMINGTON ,�VENUE, TEMECULA, CA 92590 951-397-8315, ESGSINC.COiVI TABLE OF CONTENTS Section � Pa�e INTRODUCTION...........................................................................�------••------............................................................1 SiteDescription.....-----•-•.........................................................................................................................................1 Proposed Development and Grading.............................................................•-•-•--................. ......1 ..................... FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING.................................................................................... FieldExploration.....................•------�----....................................................................................._.........................3 LaboratoryTesting......................•---------------.......................................................................................................3 FINDINGS .............................................................•---•---•-----................................................ ............__..__...3 ............... RegionalGeology..............................................................•--...............................................................................3 LocalGeology.......................................................•-----------.............................................................._....,....._.........4 Faulting.................................................................•-••---•-•-............................................._..._._.............._................4 Faulting............................................................•---------.................................................---•-...................................6 Landslides....................................................................�----..................................................... CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................•--••---•-...................6 General..................•---..............................................................------��-�---...................................................-•-•---•....6 Earthwork..........................•�---�---..............................................-•-•---••--•---•--•---•---................................................6 Earthwork and Grading.....................•-•.....................................................--••-----.................... ....................... Clearingand Grubbing............................................................................•---•---•-----------.. ......................7 Excavation Characteristics ..............................................•--........................................................ .......7 Groundwater...................................................................•--••--••---................................................---._....--�-�---...7 Ground Preparation for Fill Areas .........................................•---..._..............................................._...._.....---..7 OversizeRock......................................................................................................................•---•--�--.................8 CompactedFill Placement.............................................................................................................................8 ImportEarth Materials................•---••--•---..............................................._......................................................8 Cut/Fill Transitions...................................�--.............._......................................__....--------•---...........................9 CutAreas..................................................................--��------------..__...................................... ................10 Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence............................................................................................................10 GeotechnicalObservations................................................................•----.....................................................10 PostGrading Considerations.....................•-----................................................................... ...............10 Slope Landscaping and Maintenance....................•-•-----..............................................................................10 SiteDrainage.................................................................................................................................................11 UtilityTrenches...............................................•----•-•-----------�---......................................................._ ....._..11 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................�----•--...................................................11 GroundMotions..........................................................................................•---•--��---•--.......................................11 SecondarySeismic Hazards..................................................................................�----......................................12 Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading................................................................................................................13 General..................................................................................................................................•---........................13 AllowableBearing Values........................�------•-----.........................................._................................................13 Settlement.....................................................................••-----------------...........................................-•-------.............14 LateralResistance..............................................................................................................�---•--.......................14 Structural Setbacks and Building Clearance..................................................................................................14 FoundationObservations..................................................................................•-----...... ..............................15 ExpansiveSoil Considerations...............................�------•--..................................-•-------..........._........................16 Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50)..............................................................................16 Footings................................................................�---------.......................................................--•--...................16 ��ll�'7[']H[ �'7f'1[��'7['1� �G��O�'7['��C]H[l�](cC�g. �]E][�.�/][�C]E� Page i February 3, 2016 Project No. 171610-10A BuildingFloor Slabs ............................•........................................................................................................16 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations......................................................................18 Corrosivity........................................................................................................................................................19 RETAININGWALLS...........................•-•---------•---.....----......................................................................-------•-•-••---....20 Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures..................................................................................................•---•..--�---.20 SubdrainSystem...............•-•-------................................................_.......--••---...---•--••---•---•--........._........................21 TemporaryExcavations................................................................................................................. RetainingWall Backfill......................................................•---•-•---••--•-...............................................................21 CONCRETEFLATWORK......................................................................•---�•---•--•--..................................................22 Thicknessand Joint Spacing...............................................................•---•---•....................................................22 SubgradePreparation.............................................................................................•-•--------•--•-•-.......................22 GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES.............................................................................22 REPORTLIMITATIOIVS ..................................................�--•---................................................................._...-•-•-•---.23 Attachments: Figure 1 -Vicinity Map (Page 2) Figure 2 -Regional Geologic Map (Page 5) APPENDIX A-References (Rear of Text) APPEIVDIX B - Exploratory Logs (Rear of Text) APPENDIX C - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text) APPENDIX D- Seismicity(Rear of Text) APPENDIX E- Liquefaction Analysis (Rear of Text) APPENDIX F-General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text) Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (In Pocket) ]E,��k'7['1H[ �'H'�1�'�'� �G�E�'Y'��C�l[l�l[�C�1L �E][��1[�CE� Page ii February 3, 2017 Project No. 171610-10A �NTRDDUCTIQN Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties,and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations based on the plans you provided. The general location of the subject property is indicated on the Vicinity Map,Figure 1. The plans you provided were used as the base map to show geologic conditions within the subject site, see Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. S1T�DE5 RIPTI�N The subject property is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway in the City of Temecula of Riverside County,California. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The subject property is comprised of approximately 1.9 acres of partially developed land. The site has not been graded,with the exception of grading associated with the previously existing Pala Road.Topographic relief at the subject property is relatively low with the terrain being generally flat. Elevations at the site range from approximately 1,000 to 1,020 feet above mean sea level(msl),for a difference of about 20±feet across the entire site. Drainage within the subject property generally flows to the southwest. The site is currently bordered by commercial developments. Most of the vegetation on the site consists of sparse amounts of annual weeds/grasses, along with some scattered small trees. PR�P�5EU UEVE OPMENT AND_GRADING The proposed commercial developments are expected to consist of concrete, wood or steel framed one- and/or two-story structures utilizing slab on grade construction with associated streets, landscape areas, and utilities. The current development plans include two (2)building pads positioned throughout the site. The plans provided by you were utilized in our exploration and form the base for our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. ��lt�'7[']H[ �'7[']lbl�'7['�. �G��'�'�cC]H[�][cC�i. ��1[�C�� 1 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A — : — � � { J yy sa � s' a - � l�y 'q � r � �� o. x�j � � � �ti �^.'� •:�• .��yL ,,. �n _ 'i` `4 � r. � ��r• �•� � ',�a;� Y a . ia a. � � �- _ �, _ •t.�.,,ax �*sr� �,� _ � l - � �' r` j �• a�.,='�';{: i F � -. .j � =y�>'"[F ,. . ` _ < < � n ,�::va �- v •y�=..y '' _ �: � ..� • - y° �,,.-c- � ' ? �Y �„:•:�e. . .y_a''"''� `��•.'. � �1�- 'z,;4. �"- '4 . `"''� .� ! ,� �;_ y� � ;�� ..�, '�e:,. �.:��:;.Fy I � �'f 3 'a. ' r� �a _��—t—....._..} . � _ � - .�. s r- ,'' S �� tY _ � - " 3' * � '°fjc � � ti �� l a�; .:r � ��n ��` �,�, � � -�; l�� =� - . � � �`„�. :-� g a :1 � �• ' � ,�** ,a y`' �.-- �k�' . � a+ !15 ti_� . G�i9 .f� �.alr i � �A` A � ; .-, f,� �'� ��Y-Sa�.+C��. � ..� w ' �� . . •� ' 4� .'� cr.r� .+'. � , '.r� ry . 1� i 's�;�'i� l. { .f.. � r_ . '• - � . _L•� � - � •� .••. ir i ., � 'y�+ . .-. i � -- �. , fi .�l ��` �-'.� k�� •F�� . _ `��i ? c. ��i c .� y x. . I __� _ `-. _ v [ 'y -a�-t. ��. -'S�-� r R':Tl..iJ, '4y �1�. �•ry "4 ..''y �� j ,-"�= '�. =.. ,_.�•= j . � ; - �. �.., "� �� I ' y n$i .. � • � Ta4 :�� •�:e�' �. -� s �'`' ,�.. c;�nt�a.:tr,r � � ��^� /,1 � , `� 43_ -a L: �', '�i�'i� �a , �. �n �.�,��y �! � ��`f'wc� I 1 �4� �� ; R� � ' �-,'y.._ ..T -' ` ' � ;+�~.�'� ._ . !n �� .eq' �i �� .. � '��,.' . .a��!. L .� ,:�.: ' "!�. � - - I. . .1 �-`. .� � i �,. � :� v, IG: � T '4 . 1 � - u:zc=r yS` � /f � �. " .1 �-. i `'�y F�.'�`'� � ,�+�, � - � �,:.�� f '� ..� i- �._`�,�' � � ��,� � � �.a'i� .��*�.� � I; 1 . �� i. �s , G T � y •;��, '�� '� 1716�0-10A Pechanga Square= � ��., ..��4 J C � ' �'� � F .�:. "��Approximate Site Location ,�� x .�� ' ; f :� - ,��, , '��. `� � � .. � .� .- - � � "� � .��'�� s ' � � ��p �" 'F � ,; { 4�. C . r� � � G �'t r :�� 1 � �rr�y � ^+{�F * 5 � � �. � � �`_ — r � - 1 � _ w °--- _� " �� a � . ' {��,, � ,.� ._., , `:��; „,;,. � r �Pi°4F� 1:.=a � ' � �. ,�, '`c 4 }� .�i3 �� ^�•J �-� 'T- F "• r; . ��' � f,�a� r.. �- -t�-_'._ '_r�_�.�. - - . --.--=..� --- �--�—�"h-- ----' '�� _"' 'w,�i -�v'_��.. �TaW � ' •--^ r �.nJ....�i �.�f . '� � � .�•�. [l-�'r'a � , ` }q y �'. '�{ .r°.r I '� �: _, --� 1I _ r;� _ }�i_' � � �� 1� Yi:�S�VI[L G � �.k M1�f � '-(. S� � �r.r,'+StynK�' _ _ J r ti ' .•.. � •.1 �� , � �� x � � �� 4r ,� � v�� Y7 ��)�' :'y ��`k F:=v �. V .� r Y� � `•� `L \ i� 1 '��J� .j � �.�P �o �' `� � �#��*' � ] � '"'�s ` � S r ��• F kr 'l [( j ' �� '> • Y � C• �#V_ �_� .,. , ' .T �.�..�- � � �_ � �_�"�� \ � r�fl•(y_� '� � `'' .v�� . i Z � �l� `'�i � � �i� '. �`��. 1 "� � • � ` `k Y � r • I Y '{ }r '4• ��" t,�� F �� p� ��.7 � y. �Yri 4 v� ; � r� � �L . r SI � 41C;+r � � '+ , .M1{��`� � , � r . � � ., , . I � r'�'. �.� . i � y r': , � I i �: S• �r� .t �• .��:4'�i. . I ` ..�i.,.._.;:._ -.�� f . -----•-- ��.r '� .i.T �,� v=' � i � , ? .� `�,. I �r'� ' ai �� C, . i �� y.:. ,�`. r> � � } �� !.� t�� Y � �N��' �L'�� ,�atl i ��%' `��': R'R"�--�fR r � .- � `i �� ' �0 �� - i :p� Y� 2 'rr ` s-�--- - ----- -- -.._,.- - -- __ . . . .__. ----��:�' �. ._• --- -- -._ ._-- - -- ---•---- - --._ ._ - --- —� - -- � , � � �, � ,f 3 � 1 � �,�I �,� '' x � � s'' ,' ��i'y` }�r iN� � � �41Ts'r'�:. �. .�� ' :/� _—:: .. _� . — -'� - — -- - • — — — - � "OO 2007 DeLorme(�vNJw d2lorme.com)Topo USA"' �N� PECf�A�!GA SQlJ,4RE 171610-10A SCALE 1:40,625 � �edt��hi�i�,��,�nviroi7m�i�t��, ��C I�� P ;�i�� (V��erid��Lii��c�i7�u��n�� FE�. 2fl17 FI�I�R� � �IELD EXPLORAT� N ANU S RAT�RY TIN Field Ex inrat'rn Prior subsurface exploration within the subject site was performed on January 21, 2000 by EnGEN Corporation for the exploratory excavations.A truck mounted hollow-stem-auger drill rig was utilized to drill four (4) borings throughout the site to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet. Additional subsurface exploration was performed on January 18 and January 25, 2017 by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services. A backhoe was utilized to excavate four(4)test pits to a maximum depth of 12 feet. An underground utilities clearance was obtained from Underground Service Alert of Southern California, prior to the subsurface e�loration. Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing,exploratory logs and sample descriptions may have been reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Associated with the subsurface exploration was the collection of bulk (disturbed) samples and relatively undisturbed samples of earth materials for laboratory testing and analysis. The relatively undisturbed samples were obtained with a 3 inch outside diameter modified California split-spoon sampler lined with 1-inch-high brass rings. Additional samples were retrieved using a Standard Penetration Test (N) split- spoon sampler. Samples obtained using a hollow stem auger drill rig, were mechanically driven with successive 30 inch drops of a 140-pound automatic trip safety hammer. The blow count per one-foot increment was recorded in the boring logs. The central portions of the driven samples were placed in sealed containers and transported to the laboratory for testing and analysis. The approximate exploratory locations performed by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services are shown on Plate 1 and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B. La Testi Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, expansion potential, shear strength, pH, resistivity, sulfate content, chloride content, and in-situ density/moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed and bulk samples of earth materials, considered representative of those encountered. An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report. A brief description of laboratory test criteria and summaries of test data are presented in Appendix C. FINDINGS Re�ianal Geolo�r Regionally,the site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The Peninsular Ranges are characterized by northwest trending steep mountain ranges separated by sediment filled elongated valleys. The dominant structural geologic features reflect the northwest trend of the province. Associated with and subparallel to the San Andreas Fault are the San Jacinto Fault, Newport-Inglewood, and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. The Santa Ana Mountains abut the west side of the Elsinore Fault while the Perris Block forms the other side of the fault zone to the east. The Perris Block is bounded to the east ]E�]l�'�']H[ �'7['l[�1�'7['� �G��'7C'lEcC1H[I�][�CI��, ��,��1[�C1E� 3 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A by the San Jacinto Fault. The northern perimeter of the Los Angeles basin forms part of a northerly dipping blind thrust fault at the boundary between the Peninsular Ranges Province and the Transverse Range Province. The mountainous regions within the Peninsular Ranges Province are comprised of Pre-Cretaceous, metasedimentary,and metavolcanic rocks along with Cretaceous plutonic rocks of the Southern California Batholith. The low lying areas are primarily comprised of Tertiary and Quaternary non-marine alluvial sediments consisting of alluvial deposits,sandstones,claystones,siltstones,conglomerates,and occasional volcanic units. A map illustrating the regional geology is presented on the Regional Geologic Map, Figure 2. Lacai Genl[�g,y The earth materials on the site are primarily comprised of artificial fill, Quaternary alluvial materials, and Pauba Formation bedrock. A general description of the dominant earth materials observed on the site is provided below: • ArtiFicial Fijl i]ndocumented ma mbol Afu : Undocumented artificial fill materials were encountered throughout the site within the upper 3 to 4 feet during exploration. These materials are typically locally derived from the native materials and consist generally of brown to dark brown silty sand.These materials are generally inconsistent,poorly consolidated fills. • uaEer Y un Aliu�ial Fl od Plain ❑e osits ma s mhnl a : Quaternary Alluvium Flood Plain deposits were encountered to a maximum depth of 20 feet. These alluvial deposits consist predominately of interlayered yellow brown to dark brown,fine to coarse grained silty sand,sandy silt, and poorly-graded sand. These deposits were generally noted to be in a dry to moist, loose to dense state. . �uaternary Pauba F�rmatinn [map symt�al Qpfsl: Pauba Formation bedrock was encountered below the topsoil and alluvial materials to the maximum depth explored. These materials primarily consisted of olive brown to yellow brown, fine to coarse grained sandstone with varying amounts of silt and clay, and interbedded claystone/siltstone. These materials were generally noted to be moist to very moist, and moderately hard to hard. Typically, the upper 1 to 3 feet of this unit is slightly more weathered and not as hard with occasional lenses of less indurated rock. Faultin� The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system include the Newport-Inglewood,Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. ��lt��C'1H[ �'H'�'7['I� �G��b►�['�cC1H[�I][�C��. ��ll��][cC�� 4 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A � �l ��'_ ... "'�-,'. _��.. , _ ` , - �� -- - - --- - - � �i ,.. .__.F ;,�. ,3 3��':��, � �'1: . � f�� ,��" l �� r ,, � , r�-. � � `'��. _�. �—,,�.�� `�� .� �� j �• _ � _ . , .• .—' 171b�.u-1QA Pecha��ga Square �, - . . . . -.�,-�'�� . '_..�.,. -: -�, - - i-� _ ` '�-� �r�Approximate Site Lacation ': - - • �_ _ � � _ - - �--- --- - - ..�� - _� - �- , � . - _ _ .- _ . . _ . -------.�__---- ' I � �' ��f�` r` ...•._ • ,-` . - - . . . .`-f r � rr�` s �-�^} j � ,1'.�--�r ; �. � . . - . � '�. . �•��~ • . i r, �� _ i ��_ �f�_—�-�`�__� ��.. :.�-- r��'�. - _-_--_�� . r : � -. � . �� :3�,.�� : _g.- �` .-..- -_�. .� : _.. r`wJ= � ��`4�--�--�� . , . . '.�. _ ��I . � 14�,� ._�ti�� r - .�,.�:� �` 11 " .- �� , . � �' � I �� ` � � �:� f'�_�-� ..` .��, ' - � :��``•!'� ��`` �-``` '� �` —= _ '.i '' - ---{ . ----- _: I. �� - -- --'=�4.�_ ... _ �=- , ��;,.�' � i� � �i . - 4'•r r�L� _ r = M1��' � '�:' �. � `�•�//� �� 7r �; I _,---��-. -- � "K. � .�, �1.r •� `�� - - . . .� .' ��/ 1 I a]� . - ��_. � 1 . . I .�� - . � � .ti � 3 r, � � r . :� �� '�ti � 1 -� � �� ,� - - �= �� , . � � � , , _ �� . � - � , ��:. ,�l, " f, _ �,, . _ _ , ��,- .� : - - - - . - �Y ,_ _ .�� - ��♦ �r" � ...;.. 'i•. "" "��- •1 j� . •� I . �— 1� "�'`+ ' f ,�� - �':. � � �` l . � : �' � � - � � � � � . . � i_.� . � . '� '�-r . , �� a . �: , . � �� . _ +� . ';��, i: � � - _ ' � ' �r`^ , � -� � Ir� � �- `� �� -~` 1 + 1 , r �� '• f •: '` �`� �� j�r� lA - .�, �.;� .; 1 ,r;�.x. _�-_� _-- - . r�� ; , �� - � - -t ,� '�' i^� �~T � �:�'�� i S _ •`�'- �� f �_-.� �- . •- ��i'�� j �� l�� ' —-,r';� 1� -�-- � `k. , - .ti � �• -��--�� .i - i � i :: �` ' • ' ' r _ { � ,t � �� '~ti � y _ � � �• ,r; �:�11..�{ � -1��' ��.'ti�, ?I� .'Ik lf ..�� - �,''tii ;' (.,��_`�_ � �- . - �, ,... — rI � I �1 '�� •�! �,' �j� 5 ',4'�� •�f � 4 ��. �t r � 5 •_ ��l1 �./,. ��' �� ,�,� •�1 �;, ��, �, i�_�� E. „f� i� �r'',`.r,�� ! I � � '�'` t ' -� E �� t� � . r {' � . �t � ' _ �' � : ��r.�. ,,�� r,� � ,-- -;�i - ' �r''��. ;�,- � ' i - �" '1� � ; fr � ;��, y,, �; , '-, , '� . � l 'w '�� `~ =f� , tt,, '4 !� � 5 / � .' L ; �,-r . � �[ � � �':�`i � } ', ` �{ r- � •• � ,S� tl�' '• : , '�_•` � . ,�� `• l�` � _-- + � �f ."' � � I I 'r } ''.,/� �.�, F� '�� r�1 � i ��r `�A '�� '-- 1� __ � � � . � � f I . � ' - � � �r- �� "�1' rff ';� .�f�r ��' � -. �• � �-+r �`1 -� _- � ' l' �� _ • ., s �. �r � '� - r.`��..—� � ' } --� -� --'� — -} j! 5�` !' _ � +�� .�• ,,i�L 1 'l ,� r �� . ,l!`E7 �� r r-1ti \` rf, :` 1 �} �� r S'`,.�\ �� . ` � I�� . <L ' � ._ �, � �. � (:t � ;,,> ,'` .;�,,�� I[� ��_ �, �;�.,��:� �-. �li�e ;�L�� r;;: � i� � 11�\�':� ';�; .,�; rJ �-,= ,�_ � ` ., � j;..�r.�� '`. . . , 1 ��• . '�-1� ,--•':�� `_�� _ l` '.ci r � I�� 4 I fI� L_ � j ti. `' � r�, t l� � •:'' �' S _—_ l,� % ` 'i y: � . � ��. :4�� ,' � k `� =' , _�r . �,,� �` _�y i 1` l� ,:; Y� I � :� ��; f�:-� !_ r,�' �J r( 1�! � � ;r, _ j �� ; ` � .��: , r, � � f ;-;� ` �� '' � ��-:-� �" �� ` �� _.� `� , �. ,� � �=� .4.��` �. '�� , �r � t �} �; ` , .'; , r�� '�' fl` ��ti • �"� �� 'I LEGEND f� � ,�r y��. ��" ' ,�, {� f�i ,`� 1 y� ��.,r� . `.1� t�' � �i �1; �` i r � -`.. i 1 -�� ''` � I � �I QVa - Young Alluvial Flood Plain � i ; �+ �� ; r- 1 r 11. � ,� �f, �� . ;;i 1 � ,� � ` I Deposits y j �f`,, �"� ' �i r y �`^' � ' �J•. � Qyv Young Alluvial Valley � � r,.' fr1 '• +„ �F 'i' S'�� ' �' Z� ti,�r!`� !:'„�i ; ;;: Deposits �1 •''`;'y 1 1• ��1 y' -} �� ` r .. ti i _ �'� ` .._ ,� 4 •��i • '�� 1'� .� / / i 15- - ''*=� r - � REFERNCES:Morton,D.M.,Hauser,Rachel M.,and Ruppert,Kelly R.,2004,Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30'x 60'Quadrangle, i Southern California,Version 2.0:U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. "�O 2007 DeLorme(www.del�rme.eom)Topo USA°". �� . � ,. . . , ��4��l�is�\iL;i�� W;�i��rs,.�r � '�' �1�_��-�U��. � _ fNC so. �. , � �,:. ;� �� r� � � , ��` E ,t i ��r°�"� '!-�.� �� nsnr�chi�i:,�l i7vir�rii�i�riF;��, ��`! �� f 9'�� ' �� .. L� .-C aj %°,j , i`h'��,J t'�+� % .�nc�iV��rLr,i•i;.+ES��eeLiri ,�n:sii�L.�iils Faultin� The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system include the Newport-Inglewood,Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. No active faults are known to project through the site and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, established by the State of California to restrict the construction of new habitable structures across identifiable traces of known active faults.A Riverside County Fault Zone is located less than 100 feet southwest of the subject site.The Elsinore Fault Zone is located less than 1 mile northeast of the subject site. An active fault is defined by the State of California as having surface displacement within the past 11,000 years or during the Holocene geologic time-period. Based on our mapping of the subject site,review of current and historical aerial imagery,lack of lineaments indicative of active faulting,and the data compiled during the preparation of this report, it is our interpretation that the potential for surface rupture to adversely impact the proposed structures is very low to remote. Based on our review of regional geologic maps and applicable computer programs (USGS 2008 Interactive Deaggregation, Caltrans ARS online, and USGS Earthquake Hazard Programs), the Elsinore Fault with an approximate source to site distance of 0.88 kilometers is the closest known active fault anticipated to produce the highest ground accelerations,with an anticipated maximum modal magnitude of 7.7.A list of faults as well as a list of significant historical seismic events within a 100km radius of the subject site are included in Appendix D. Landslides Landslide debris was not observed during our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the site. No landslides are known to exist, or have been mapped, in the vicinity of the site. Geologic mapping of the site conducted during our investigation, and review of aerial imagery of the site, reveal no geomorphic expressions indicative of landsliding. CONCLUSIDNS A�ND RECOMMENU�,�X�IVS General From geotechnical and engineering geologic points of view,the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the plans and are implemented during construction. Earthwork Earthwark and Gradin� The provisions of the 2016 California Building Code (CBC), including the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications in the last Appendix of this report, should be applied to all earthwork and ]EI�]l�'7[']E� �'7[']Eb�'7['� �G1E�0�'7['��C]H[l�][cC1�I. ��1��][�� 6 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A grading operations, as well as in accordance with all applicable grading codes and requirements of the appropriate reviewing agency. Unless specifically revised or amended herein, grading operations should also be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of our General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. Clearin�and��hbing. Vegetation including trees, grasses, weeds, brush, shrubs, or any other debris should be stripped from the areas to be graded and properly disposed of offsite. In addition,laborers should be utilized to remove any roots,branches, or other deleterious materials during grading operations. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should be notified at the appropriate times to provide observation and testing services during Clearing and Grubbing operations. Any buried structures or unanticipated conditions should be brought to our immediate attention. Exca�vatinn Chara�t�ris�1C5 Based on the results of our exploration and experience with similar projects in similar settings,the near surface earth materials,will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment. Graundwater Groundwater was observed during subsurface exploration by EnGEN Corporation in Borings 1,2 and 3 at a depth of 34,31,and 30 feet below existing grade,respectively.Local well data dating back to 1993 indicates regional groundwater highs at approximately 17 feet below ground surface. It should be noted that localized groundwater could be encountered during grading due to the limited number of exploratory locations or other factors. Graund Preparation far Fx11__A.reas For each area to receive compacted fill, the removal of low density, compressible earth materials, such as upper alluvial materials, and undocumented artificial fill, should continue until firm competent alluvium is encountered. Removal excavations are subject to verification by the project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing compacted fills,the e�osed bottom in each removal area should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. The intent of remedial grading is to diminish the potential for hydro-consolidation,slope instability, and/or settlement. Remedial grading should extend beyond the perimeter of the proposed structures a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation or a minimum of 5 feet,whichever is greater. For cursory purposes the anticipated removal depths are shown on the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 10 to 12 feet below existing grade within the building structures and 3 to 5 feet within the parking lot and driveway. ��ll�'][']H[ �'7C'��'H'1� �G1Ec0�'7['��]H[I�l[��]L �]E][��][�C�� 7 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A Wet Re�mn�a�15 Wet alluvial materials will probably not be encountered within the low lying areas of the site. If removals of wet alluvial materials are required, special grading equipment and procedures can greatly reduce overall costs. Careful planning by an experienced grading contractor can reduce the need for special equipment, such as swamp cats, draglines, excavators, pumps, and top loading earthmovers. Possible solutions may include the placement of imported angular rock and/or geotextile ground reinforcement. More specific recommendations can be provided based on the actual conditions encountered. Drying or mixing of wet materials with dry materials will be needed to bring the wet materials to near optimum moisture prior to placing wet materials into compacted fills. ��ersi��Rr�ck Oversize rock is not expected to be encountered during grading. Oversize rock that is encountered (i.e.,rock exceeding a ma�cimum dimension of 12 inches) should be disposed of offsite or stockpiled onsite and crushed for future use. The disposal of oversize rock is discussed in greater detail in General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. Compacted �ill Placement Compacted fill materials should be placed in 6 to 8 inch maximum (uncompacted) lifts,watered or air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. Irn,part Earth Materials Should import earth materials be needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery onsite. Fill Slopes When properly constructed,fill slopes up to 10 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered to be grossly stable. Keyways are required at the toe of all fill slopes higher than 5 feet and steeper than 5:1 (h:v). Keyways should be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 2 feet into competent earth materials,as measured on the downhill side. In order to establish keyway removals,backcuts should be cut no steeper than 1:1 or as recommended by the geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. Compacted fill should be benched into competent earth materials. Cut 5topes When properly constructed,cut slopes into older alluvium up to 10 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered grossly stable. Cut slopes should be observed by the engineering geologist or his representative during grading,but are anticipated to be stable. ��][�'7[']H[ �'7C1[�I�'7['1� ��c0�']['�cC]H[�][��. ��ll��l[�C1E� 8 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A 5tahiliaation Tills Currently, stabilization fills will not be required for cut slopes in the alluvium. Our engineering geologist or his representative should be called to evaluate all slopes during grading. In the event that unfavorable geologic conditions are encountered, recommendations for stabilization fills or flatter slopes will be provided. Fi11 O�rer Cut Slopes The fill portion of fill over cut slopes should not be constructed until the cut portion of the slope has been cut to finish grade. The earth materials and geologic structure exposed along the cut slope should be evaluated with regard to suitability for compacted fills or foundations and for stability. If the cut materials are determined to be competent,then the construction of the keyway and subdrain system may commence or additional remedial recommendations will be provided. Temporary Baekcut�.. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to follow all Cal-OSHA requirements with regard to excavation safety. Where existing developments are upslope, adequate slope stability to protect those developments must be maintained. Temporary backcuts will be required to accomplish removals of unsuitable materials and possibly, to perform canyon removals, stabilization fills, and/or keyways. Backcuts should be excavated at a gradient of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter. Flatter backcuts may be required where geologic structure or earth materials are unfavorable. It is imperative that grading schedules minimize the exposure time of the unsupported excavations. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. CutjFill Transitions Cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed within the "fill" portion exceeds proposed footing depths, This is to diminish distress to structures resulting from excessive differential settlement. The entire foundation of each structure should be founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the "cut" portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Refer to the following table for recommended depths of overexcavation. U to 5 feet E ual De th 5 to 10 feet 5 feet Greater than 10 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the"fill"portion 10 feet maximum Overexcavation of the "cut" portion should extend beyond the building perimeter a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or a minimum of 5 feet,whichever is greater. ��r��r�� r��r� �c��c0»['�cC]H[l�]<<C�.L �]E][��][cC1E� 9 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A Cut Areas In cut areas, an area a minimum of 5 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures should overexcavated until; competent bottoms are achieved; to a minimum 3 feet below the proposed foundations; or per the Overexcavation Table above; (whichever is greater) and replaced with compacted fill. Final determination of areas that require overexcavation should be determined in the field by a representative of Earth Strata Geotechnical Services. Shrinka e Bulkin and 5u65idence Volumetric changes in earth material quantities will occur when poorly consolidated earth materials are replaced with properly compacted fill. Estimates of the percent shrinkage/bulking factors for the various geologic units observed on the subject property are based on in-place densities and on the estimated average percent of relative compaction achieved during grading. Artificial Fill 0 to 5 Alluvium 5 to 10 Bedrock 0 to 5 [Bulking] Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces is expected to be negligible to approximately 0.01 foot. The estimates of shrinkage/bulking and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. Since many variables can affect the accuracy of these estimates, they should be used with caution and contingency plans should be in place for balancing the project. Geatechnical UbsexvatiQns Clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. No compacted fill should be placed without observations by the geotechnical consultant or his representative to verify the adequacy of the removals. The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should be present to observe grading operations and to check that minimum compaction requirements and proper lift thicknesses are being met, as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. Pnst Grading Cnnsideratians Slo e Landsca in and Maintenan � Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with ]EA�II��[']H[ ��C']�A��['I� �G1E�0�'7['��C1H[l�l[cC1��, ��lf��l[�C]E� 10 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A deep rooted, drought tolerant maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. Site Draina�e Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Roof gutters are recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways,adjacent streets,storm-drain facilities,or other locations approved by the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to structures should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning,testing and maintenance to remain effective. At a minimum,pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the CBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should also be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. Utili r n hes All utility trench backfill should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined byASTM test method D 1557-00. For utility trench backfill within pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro-hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs,all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or e�erior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the footing. EISMIC DES1G N51DE TI NS Ground Mntiat�s Structures are required to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the 2016 California Building Code Section 1613. The design is dependent on the site class, occupancy category I, II, III, or IV, mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (SS), and mapped spectral acceleration for a 1-second period(S1). �I�1l��ClH[ ��C'][��']�l� �G�]Eca'�'�cC]H[1�1[cCl��. ��'�l[�CE� 11 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A In order for structural design to comply with the 2016 CBC,the USGS"US Seismic Design Maps"online tool was used to compile spectral accelerations for the subject property based on data and maps jointly compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS). The data found in the following table is based on the M�imum Considered Earthquake(MCE)with 5%damped ground motions having a 2%probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,475 year return period). The seismic design coefficients were determined by a combination of the site class, mapped spectral accelerations, and occupancy category. The following seismic design coefficients should be implemented during design of the proposed structures. Summaries of the Seismic Hazard Deaggregation graphs and test data are presented in Appendix D. Site Location Latitude: 33.4753�(North) Lon itude: -117.1293� est Site Class D Mapped Spectral Accelerations for short�eriods,SS 1.870 Mapped Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second I'eriod,Si 0.763 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 1.870 Acceleration for Short P�riods,Sms Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response 1.145 Acceleration for 1-Second Period,Smi Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short 1.246 Periods,SDs Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second 0.763 Period,Sni Seismic Design Categary E Importance Factor Based on Occupancy Category II We performed the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site in accordance with the 2016 CBC, Section 1805.5.11 and 1803.5.12. The probabilistic seismic hazard maps and data files were jointly prepared by the United States Geological Survey(USGS) and the California Geological Survey(CGS) and can be found at the CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. Actual ground shaking intensities at the site may be substantially higher or lower based on complex variables such as the near source directivity effects, depth and consistency of earth materials, topography, geologic structure, direction of fault rupture, and seismic wave reflection, refraction, and attenuation rates. The mean peak ground acceleration was calculated to be 0.77 g. 5e�c�nda�5eismic Ha��r�� Secondary effects of seismic shaking considered as potential hazards include several types of ground failure as well as induced flooding. Different types of ground failure,which could occur as a consequence of severe ground shaking at the site, include landslides, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction/lateral spreading. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, the state of subsurface earth materials, groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our experience, subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing, all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely. ��llb"1['1H[ �'7[']lbl�'7['A� �G]E�O�'7['lEcC1H[�][cC�� ll��vl[�C�� 12 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A Seismically induced flooding is normally a consequence of a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche (i.e., a wave-like oscillation of surface water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake) or failure of a major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site. Since the site is at an elevation of more than 1000 feet above mean sea level and is located more than 20 miles inland from the nearest coastline of the Pacific Ocean,the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunami is considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to or up gradient of the site,the likelihood for induced flooding due to a dam failure or a seiche overcoming the dam's freeboard is considered nonexistent. Li uefaet'Qn an Lat�ral readin Liquefaction occurs as a result of a substantial loss of shear strength or shearing resistance in loose, saturated, cohesionless earth materials subjected to earthquake induced ground shaking. Potential impacts from liquefaction include loss of bearing capacity, liquefaction related settlement, lateral movements, and surface manifestation such as sand boils. Seismically induced settlement occurs when loose sandy soils become denser when subjected to shaking during an earthquake. The three factors determining whether a site is likely to be subject to liquefaction include seismic shaking, type and consistency of earth materials, and groundwater level. The proposed structures will be supported by compacted fill and competent alluvium and bedrock,with groundwater at a depth of approximately 30 feet. As such, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction and lateral spreading beneath the proposed structures is considered very low to remote due to the recommended compacted fill, relatively low groundwater level, and the dense nature of the deeper onsite earth materials. Liquefaction analyses were performed for for the existing un-graded conditions using the data gathered by EnGen Corporation in 2000.A conservative groundwater level of 10 feet below existing ground surface to represent the historic high groundwater level. According to Fig. 10 of Ishihara (1995) liquefaction should not manifest itself at the surface, due to the recommended grading, the depth of the liquefiable earth materials, and the volume of overburden materials above the liquefiable zone. We estimate that dynamic settlement of sands due to liquefaction will be effectively zero. The liquefaction potential and dynamic settlement of sands analyses are included within the appendices of this report. T TATII�E FOiINUATION DESIGN R�� MENDATIDNS General Provided grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, shallow foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structures. Tentative foundation recommendations are provided herein and graphic presentations of relevant recommendations may also be included on the enclosed map. Allo�vahle gearing Val�es An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (ps� is recommended for design of 24-inch square pad footings and 12-inch-wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 ps£ Recommended allowable bearing values include ��r�H� ��r��a��r� �c�]E�>�'��CIE�l�][cC�]L �]E][8�1[cC�� 13 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. Settlement Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than approximately 3/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about 1/z inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading. The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. Lateral Resistance Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. For areas coved with hardscape, passive earth pressure may be taken from the surface. For areas without hardscape, the first 3 feet of the soil profile must be neglected when calculating passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay,sandy clay, sandy silty clay,silty clay, and clayey silt. The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly against either compacted fill or competent alluvium. S#ructura c and guildin Clear Structural setbacks are required per the 2016 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximiry to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can,over time,be affected by natural processes including gravity forces,weathering,and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the influence of these processes. For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Sectiori 1808.7 as illustrated in the following Foundation Clearances from Slopes diagram. ��r� �x��r� �c��O��C�cCIH[�][cCl��.. �]Ellk�/1[�C�� 14 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES �r�=-_L �-,�—__�___-f..��.�, 2016 6ALIFORNI� BUILDIN6 C�DE �'arth - Strata, ln�. 8UTl.DIN6 SETB�LCK DIMENSIOh15 �...�...�b,.....r��.,.*....a.,... ,.,...,�.�..,,.�...�,.�..m,�.�.n r�of r '°r°r / \ ; / \ �,>.�� .�� : °�°' H YV�wT�NOT E� 16/CETA{A% � � . '., ��..��.��...�..�.��.r��....�� r. 10!Of When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe,the height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. Faundatinn et�vations In accordance with the 2016 CBC and prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing materials. The excavations should be per the approved plans, moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level, and square. Any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to steel or concrete placement. Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. ]E�][�'7C']H[ �'7[']l��'7C'� �G��O�'7C'�cC1H[l�][�C��, �]El[k�][cC�� 15 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A �cpansi�re SoiI Cansidera�ians Preliminary laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of VERY LOW TO LOW as classified in accordance with 2016 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D4829-03. Additional, testing for expansive soil conditions should be conducted upon completion of rough grading. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, footing sizes, and/or reinforcement. Ve Low and L w Ex ' n �ot ntial Ex 'an Index of 21 t 5 Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2016 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D4829-03. Accordingly, the CBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20,require special design considerations in accordance with 2016 CBC Sections 1808.6.1 and 1808.6.2. The design procedures are based on the thickness and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper 15 feet of the proposed structure. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an effective plasticity index of 12. Fnntin�s � ■ Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12-inch minimum depth for one-story, 18-inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24-inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one- ,two-,and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15,and 18 inches,for one-,two-,and three-story structures,respectively,and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, and should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. Building FIQar 51abs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor slab thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 2016 CBC Section 1808.6.2 based on an assumed effective plasticity index of 12. Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center,each way. All floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. ■ Interior floor slabs,within living or moisture sensitive areas,should be underlain by a minimum ��r�x ��r��r� �c��c0i�['�cC]H[I�]f�C�]L ��][��][�C1E� 16 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material,and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch(psi) may be used. Ultimately,the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer,taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. • Garage floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 inch minimum felt e�ansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12-inch-wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No.4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. ■ The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content,prior to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during construction. ��['� ��[']l�'7['� �G��cO�'�'E�1H[l�][cC1��. ��]E��][�CE� 17 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A P st Tensioned S tia De ' n e ommendat' In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2016 CBC Section 1808.6.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to expansive soil. However,the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation,owner irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. Additionally,we recommend that prior to excavating footings,slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below the slab be presaturated to at least 1%above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete. The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during construction. The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted and irrigated,will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the foundation,should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners,to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures. ��][�'7[']H[ �'7['�1�.'7[',� �G�E��['�cCIH[�d](��A��]E][k�l[�� 18 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A " reli i�ta Pnst T ' ned F und inn Sia s' Ex ansion Index Ve Low and Lowl Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fracrion Passing the No. <20 percent(assumed) 200 Sieve T e of Cla Mineral Montmorillonite assumed Thornthwaite Moisture Index +20 E}e th to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet Constant Soil Suction P.F.3.6 Moisture Veloci 0.7 inehes mnnth Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 5.5 feet Center lift, m 2.0 inches Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance,em 3.0 feet Ed e lift, m 0.8 inches Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Negligible Contactwith Earth Materials Modulus of Subgrade Reaction,k(assuming presaturation as 200 pci indicated I�elow Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment 18 Perimeter Foundation Reinforcement -- Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1745 Class A material 1. Obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upan the geateehnical criteria presented in this repart,and structural engineering considerations. Corrosivitv Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by concrete) and the "environment" is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference standard "Bridge Design Specifications", under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides". Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less than 500 ppm. As such,specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required. Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2016 CBC Section 1904.1 and ACI 318, Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore,structural concrete in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize Type I or II. ��r�H� ��r��r� �c�lEcO��['�cC]H[l�][�CA��. �]E]Eb.�][cC]E� 19 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity,the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel should be considered corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic materials that are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to provide corrosion protection. If building slabs are to be post tensioned,the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if e�osed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, moisture-insensitive epo�grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by Hayes Industries, LTD or 0'Strand, Inc. The preliminary test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples, and the initiation of grading may blend various earth materials together. This blending or imported material could alter and increase the detrimental properties of the onsite earth materials. Accordingly, additional testing for chlorides and sulfates along with testing for pH and resistivity should be performed upon completion of grading. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. RETAINING WALLS Active a��At-Rest Earth Pr�S�e�.res Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Tentative Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 8 feet high.The active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls,which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. � 1�fIi1�7!M[1M 5`TA'i'�(:�QI]IV'A�Ei�t`I'I�I.t1ill P1tESS[]ItI:S(��:i - - -- II �ACi:��aP�Lc]N�tTID�r � PRFs5SEil2�1`Y�'� L�VEL 2:�li:i�1 � Active Earth Pressure 40 63 At-Rest Earth Pressure 60 95 The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining walls. Therefore, the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls, structures, or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1.5:1 (h:v) plane projected ��113'7C1H[ �'7['ltkl�'�'� �G��O�'7['�cC1H[�](cC1�1L ��ll��][cC�� 20 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement potential of nearby buildings, the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1.5:1 (h:v)plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address equivalent fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations, specific backfill materials, higher retaining walls requiring earthquake design motions, etc. 5u6drain Sys�etn We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated pipe should consist of 4-inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/4- or 11/z inch open graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system,weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The retaining walls should be adequately coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Tempor�r,�r Excavatior�� All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal-OSHA requirements. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is not responsible for job site safety. Retaiz�in�Wail Ba�kfiil Retaining wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to 8 inches, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. ��][��['1H[ ��['][�l��C'� �G]E�>'�'E�C]H[1�][�C1�h. �Ell��l[cC�� 21 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A CQNCRETE FLATW�RK Tk�'ckness and�oint_S�a�ing Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 31/z inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less,to reduce the potential for excessive cracking. Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. 5ubgrade Preparatian In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00 and then moistened to at least optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. Cracking within concrete flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete. Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Judd Kessler and their authorized representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth Strata Geotechnical Services not be accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that Earth Strata Geotechnical Services be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work. In order to allow for design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to construction. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report. This report and the drawings contained within are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately, as revisions may be required. ]El��b'7['1H( ��['A��'7['1� �G�cO�'7['IE�C]H[l�l[cC�]L �lEl[��][�C]E� 22 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A REPU T LIMtTATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and slall ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation and exploration. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. As a result, we do not and cannot have complete knowledge of the subsurface conditions beneath the subject property. No practical study can completely eliminate uncertainty with regard to the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject property. The conclusions and recommendations within this report are based upon the findings at the points of observation and are subject to confirmation by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services based on the conditions revealed during grading and construction. This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The owners'contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during grading and construction, and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. EI��'�'�]( �'�'][�I�'�'� �G�E��'�'E�1H[�1[cC�I. ��][�C�� 23 February 3, 2017 Project Number 171610-10A APPENDI� A REFERENCES APPENDIX A References California Building Standards Commission, 2016,2016 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24,Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on 2012 International Building Code. DeLorme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USA�. EnGEN Corporation, 2000, Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study, Proposed Structures, Southwest Corner of Future Pala Road and Route 79 South, City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California, Project Number: T1956-GS,dated February 3. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special Publication 42,revised 2003. Ishihara, K., 1995,Effects ofAt-Depth Liquefaction on Embedded Foundations during Earthquakes,Proc. 10� Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,August 29-September 2, Beijing, China. Jenkins, Olaf P., 1978, Geologic Map of California,Santa Ana Sheet; CDMG, Scale 1:250,000. Kennedy, M.P.,Tan, S.S., Bovard, K.R.,Alvarez, R.M.,Watson, M.J., and Gutierrez, C.I., 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30x 60 Minute Quadrangle, California:California Geological Survey,Regional Geologic Map No. 2,Scale 1:100,000. NationalAssociation of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion BasicsAn Introduction,page 191. Southern California Earthquake Center(SCEC), 1999,Recommended Proceduresforimplementation ofDMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, March. Tokimatsu, K., and Seed, H.B., 1987,Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking,Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,ASCE,Vol. 113, No. 8,pp.861-878. APPENDIX B EXPLOR.ATORY L�GS Geotechnical Test Pit TP-1 Date:January 18,2017 Project Name:Temecula Parkway Page:1 of 1 Project Number: 171610-10A Lngged By:JMR Drilling Company:Drilling It �ype of Rig: Backhoe Drive Weight(Ibs): - Drop(in):- Hole Diameter(in): - op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map L U d � � Q � O �..1 � � N \ � Q C �F O 0 0 Vl �J � � � v �° °' a� � ,,, � Q ?� Q- 0 u'�'i � cn 4J � � � 0 U � 0° N � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p ' � I Artifi�ial Fill.Undncumented Rfu 1-6' � SM Silty SAND;brown,dry,medium dense,fine to coarse sand � � � �Dense,clay below 4 feet � � uaternar Yaun Aflu�ial Vaile Qe osits a 5 - � SM Silty SAND; light hrown,slig�tly moist,dense,fine to medium sand,trace _ � - - 6-iz� clay � 10 ------ --- ------ --- - - - - - - - - - SP�Poarly-Graded SAND; light yellowish brown,dry, medium dense fine to coarse � ` �sand � Total Depth: 12 feet No Groundwater 15 � 20 - ---- - - - - .. - -- 25 30 � I:'r►rfh Stralr� Gi•ratrthni�ulS�r►•iccs. Tnc. 42184 Remington Avenue,Temecula, CA 92590 �;�„�,-�,n,�•,,�.�+„•,,,,,,,,.�.�«,r,rn,r.�r.rrr�+al,r�r.n,�c�na►r�,�nr. .«.v.,f..�l�r.�:++ r��1i 3�;..rf7; Geotechnical Test Pit TP-2 Date:January 25,2017 Projert Name:Temecula Parkway Page:1 of i Project Number: 171610-10A Logged By:JCF Drilling Company:Drilling It Type of Rig: Backhoe Drive Weight(Ibs): - Drop(in):- Hole Diameter(in): - op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map � U a � �- p +, �' o � v � � o 0 $ o o p •,� v � � t v �o °� a�i 3 •� � Q � Q- 0 � � in N � � � � U � m � � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p ! � Artificial Fill, Undocumented_�A� r SM Sil#y SAND;dark brawn,slight�y moist,dense,fine to coarse sand,trace gra�el I l � � � uaterna Youn Allu�ial Valle i7e osits a 5 SM Silty SAND; light brown,slightly moist,dense,fine to medium sand�trace clay - � - - - ------ ---- ------- ------�__-___ .....------__..._..__--____------_--____..__-----_��._._----.......------_...._..__......._-------------.__... � SP Poorly-Graded SANCI; light yellowish brown, dry,medium dense,fine to ' I coarse sand 10 I I Total ❑epth:9 feet No Groundwater 15 20 - - - - -- - - 25 30 � I i I �- �� - f~��frth Srri�ru �:rorc�chriircr!Ser�•r`s�s, lnc. 42184 Remington Avenue,Temecula, CA 92590 (;snin•l�n�.�rl,f»��rw�nk�r��rf r��d ifu<<�ri,rfs rFti�,u��c��n�,�r:�,�r� ..��.rs�.sr.�r..nn.ry51)34�i.dJ15 Geotechnical Test Pit TP-3 Date:January 25,2017 Froject Name:Temecula Parkway Page:1 of 1 Project Number: 171610-30A Logged By:JCF DriEl9ng Company:Drilling It Type of Rig: Backhoe Drive Weight(Ibs): - Drop tinJ:- Hole Diameter(in}: - op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical MaQ L U d � a Q � � Q' �` O Y � � Y co O �' 0 p � �n L1 � � t V LL � � � � � Q 3 G. � v�i � cn OJ � � i � U � 00 N � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 � � I :Artificial �itl Undocumenied Afu � i SM Silty SAND;dark brown,slightfy moist,dense,fine to coarse sand,trace clay j �and gra�el { uaternar Ynun Ailuvial Valle !7e osits a � ., , � SM 5il#y SAN�; light brown_dry,dense,fine to coarse sand,trace gra�e[ ___�_....______ 5 � � ---- _.__... __...._ �---- ---------- ----------- -- ------ --------------....__.._ ------- ....___.._.. ; ML Sanc3y SILT; light brown,dry,dense �. � � -------i_----- -__------_ __..____ -------------------------------...�._..-----------i---------_��..._-___-------�-______._...._�----- , I � SP Poariy-Graded SAND; light yellowish 4rawn dry, loose,fine to coarse sand 10 - � Total Depth:9 feet _ No Groundwater 15 20 --- - - -- - - - - 25 30 � �- -z,�--�-� E�►rrlF .Srr��r�r [:riite�rhr��t•cil S<�r+irc•r, Inr. 42184 Remington Avenue,Temecula, CA 92590 c.��.�,�,,:,,i,F,+,,,,�n,.,i,rr�d.�r,��.«r�T1urrN(:e�++•ufwnr� ....F_Si.[l.�i a:��ASI}�!•d�15 Geotechnical Test Pit TP-4 Date:January 25,2017 Proje�t Name:Temecula Parkway Page:1 of i Project Number: 171630-10A Logged By:JCF Drilling Company:Drilling It Type of Rig: Backhoe Drive Weight(Ibs): - Drop(in):- Hole Diameter(in): - op of Hole Elevation(ft):See Map Hole Location:See Geotechnical Map � U d L Q- p a-� � � N .+.�+ � t�o O � � p 0 �n v � � � L U � � N � y >. Q 3 Q � � � N N � � � � U � C° '^ � � MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p � I iRrtificial Fill Undocumented Afu SM Silty SAND;dark brown,slightly moist,laose,fine to coarse sand with gravel, trace clay � I � I i � uaterna Youn Alluvial Valle De osits a 5 ML Sandy SILT;dark brawr�,moist,dense,trace clay ..__.� ----- _._._ I -------....__,._...,....._..----------------'---y,_.�_'--------__..__-------------------_�..____-_-_ � � �� SP'_�Poorly-Graded SAND; light brown dr loose fine to coarse sand 10 � I Total Depth:9 feet No Groundwater 15 20 - -- - -- - — 25 30 � �:--�.�i�el I'cErth .��r�rru G�ntrrftnicr�l Sc•rvirCs. lnr. 42184 Remington Avenue,Temecula, CA 92590 c:�,�,�►„�,;.,r,F.nr+n�rr+nrntul�ui�[.U�rerml� Tc�i�n,y CUrrsuiiwar� .w..Fte..,l�< <rn, �957)3Pl-131s E�GEN Co�ration GEOTECHtdICAL BOi�IIVG L� •- FfQjeCi NiJRobP�T1�GS P60jEC1C Pala Raif�aw.LLC �O�illg�Ylliii� B-1 $UfEaP.e��V._1�11 Date: 01e2zro� Lagged By: C.M. .I ! G� � ��' � j �5 � �t � � � Mds�Lure � � � }v� � Car�t�f �yr � ' :':�:l:�: FILL �� SM � :�:�� :�.�.I _ _ _ z : :�: : : . �:E:r: : ::�., 5ifty Sand,lxawn�1flYR 4/3), 3M � 12.12,1� '�0.5 :i: : : :: : moist,rr►edium denss � � .�.f.�. . .�. - I=�� ; ALLW[UM ; :I: : '.:�;� i � I i San[fy si�,Yellowist�brown, $ I ML 15,'E5,15 121 � 1 � (�Dv�t 5f4)rn�ist.dense � Sar►dy sitt.yelfuwish � � � ML 8,9.5 10.7 � hrown,47�'�'R Sf6},rr�ist, I � medsum der�se � . . •: 5and.l'x�htyeflowish f7�vwn, �� SP 9,11.f5 4.7 ` - -• {4dYR 514}sf�ghitty maist. dense,medium grained,�ace • : gra�el,roCk En Sampler , :;� � . . .� Sand,light yellowish brown �� SP 11,2�,25 2.8 � •••:- {1QYR�IGy siightiy maist, �ery dense,trace gra�el, . . rocic in sarnpler :� I .. i ;�a:r�r,�� _B�DRQCiC Pauha Formatian� z� SP�SM 13,28,50+6 5,3 'r:�:[•�:c�� 'anc�s ar�e, ,g F`-'elrowisTi— ,�:i.;F;: brov►m[1�YR 514�to sitty :.�::1.i; sand,yellowish brnwn, (1(�Y� ,;:,:�;;. 514;,moist,very dense :i;�;ri t: '1:1:�I:1 !i•I•} � +• ; _�� Silty sandsttme.yellawish 25 �M 7,20,25 17.1 t�rown{9qYF�5!B), moist, � ��15E - �.� I 'I :� I f :i: , : : : : r . ; Sandstone, i'sght ali�e hrown �d SP 8,31,40 6,7 .. ... •{�.SYR 514)very maist,�ery :;1 dense,medium grained i . :....;� , ., �� -_ : Groundwater � SF' 6,19,30 18.5 .• _•. Sands:one,light oli�e[5YR ";�:• �.� 612},wet,medium dense, � 1 Notes; EnGEN Corporation EnGEN Corporati�nn GEOTEC�-tNIGAL BQf�ING LOG Projec6 Numb�T�s5e-GS Projecl� �ata�borr.�.LC Boring Number. �� Surface Eiev_: io�t � o�rz�� a93ed BY: c_,�. � t oes«� �� uscs � � � p�y � n��' � � � � � f � � r � � � �r medium gravied � � '� 3 I .. �...� � �EE . .�l ' � � � '' � I •��::;J Sa�dstane,iigrrt oEi�e{5YR `� I 5P-5AA 15,'E9,25 ��.7 -i::;�::-} 612},wet tv sifty sandsiane, � � � � I+.-F i F i� brown�sh yeAory(10YR 616y, � � 'l :E,:::-c! moist,der�se � I , .::;:[� r j � .�:rri i� �f.�L E.[� I�•I'F � � . - .:� 5artdstarre, ligt�f y�ilowisli `�� SP 16,20,28 I 15.7 . ••.•.� brorm,wet,dense,mediurrs . .:.� grairted � "� . ;.:..:� • . San�stane, light yeEbwish � SP 16,30,36 19.9 , _ brqwn,rr�et,very dense, I - medium grained � Fotaf aepth 51.5 Gr4undwater 34_Q + I � � f I I � f so I , 65 i I �I � � 7� i � i i � i f Notes: �nGEN Corporation ErsGEN Corporation GEOTECHNfiCA��ORlWG LOC, ._ P►OjeC�EVUrtlbe�: T'l956-GS PfOjECt Pala RainbaYr,tLC Berirlg NearlDer H-2 S�uFace EIeV_: 101Q Date: a��r�sr� �99�BY= c.�. Graplrc � � �a� � f u� � I �Y •f � I 0'�' � . � I � � f � C°'ae� ; ! _ ,=i:} '� A WilfM � 8 � SM � � :1=•:�:! ��. . I f :�-�: I �`:?`-� ; � � :� .�:f: :!:"s j�;=1:i:f f ' .�r+T 5ilty sancf,�r�wrs(��1'R 413t, � SM � t4,17,2Q � 110.7 12.2 `'': i mo st,dense.srigm porasity � ' � .�:�_i;�:f� ' I �'f=':;: .;_ �� ;-;�E:`�'� �ittY sarid,yeqowssh b�rawn , � 5 ' SM , 5,9,13 f •E: :f. :i.i- [ QYR 516j,maisL medium � k 93.8 �5.1 �'{'�;r' ;�:'_� dense.sllgh�parosrty � J : ':�: ' . E•- ,� Si�ty s.and.!ight yellowish SM 18,21,25 Z40.5 16_4 :f' '� .: :E �rowa{iDYR 6!4].moist, dense :�� ' :: : ' Sand,iigM yei3awish brvwn. �� SP 7,'I,8 10�f.6 23 " "';� ('l4YF{614},rr�oist, medium dens�,co8rse grained,trace , -.. ;� �i'dVL'I F ...:: ,:i I � ' . � � E � � 1� � . ... SF' 13,13,t5 � 10Q.3 3.3 . .. f� � � • 1 � . ...� i . B�a„ ��RQCK{Pauba Farmati8n} 2d � �P 15;33�5(�4 4.d ' '•' an sione, very paTeT�rvi�vn, � . ' :� mais�very dense. cosrse f . ,,. grained j I .. j , � � • I '. '.� 25 � .5P 30,5(7+3 11BA 8.8 ' :i . . ., .. :..;� ..�.:. :I . � • 5andstone,olive, very moist, � � SP 25,35,50+3 106,5 7.4 . �ery dense,rnedium gralr�ed � Tntai aepth 31,5 -F Gr�undwater at�1 Feet � � r i � 35 � � �� 1 � Not�s: � � • ,�.�� n��N Gorporgtion EnG�N Corporation GEOTECWVICAL B�RING LOG • Prqect l�f�mber. ��956-GS P�ec� Pala€�amDorr.►tc E�ing Nurnber: &3 SurEace E�ev__ tot� Date� airtuao �ogged Hy_c_� � D�M�! �N E � i UrJGS � � � � � �0�111fE � �� QNOiS�iR! 1 j � C�eter�E - '-� : � : FILL � j SM � :F:f:�' ".. = 4 .� f: . : : : . : :I:l: : . � : :�: : :f: . 5il[�sarrd.hr'awn(�OYR 4/3). � SM f 50�40.50+4 �'49.0 �O.S "�.t'1 �:�: ' mas��ense � i _{:i��: � � ALLWZ IN � : : :�:.. I ��:: : :� S'dly san�.ye�low�sh Crrown � SM I 10.i1,16' � 107.2 . 'f3.� � � (10YR 514.rr►aist,rnedum � I �I '� �: dense,s6gM Poros�tY -�� :��:[ - : Sitty sand,fiqhl Y�1lowish 5M 21,3�,34 97.2 �.9 I= 4raWm TOYf�61a ,rnois� : : : : �ery clense : :i: _ : . ::i: : Sand,liqhi yeflawist�brawn, 10 SP 7,7',10 � 96.3 5.1 . .. (iOYR�14),moisF,mediurn �erise,coarse grained,trace . :. grave! �,��s Sandy gra�el.brown[10YFi 4!3} 15 GP 29,50+6 f 127.2 4.0 •� moist,�ery dense,rack a� � • sarrspler .;�■ •'rj r�r t � _ ; .. NO RECOVERY �fl 5p � .� B�f}RbCK(Pau�a Furmatsorsl .. ....3 . ; ;:� Gravelf sandstone,yelfowish �5 SF� 33,35,50+3 � 109.1 2.9 6rawn�10YR 514,moist,�ery dense, rnedium grained,rodcs . ,, in sampfer • ' I , . Gr�undwater � 5P 35,50+4 97.8 23.6 Sandstone,qli�e gray (5YR '.='I=:..' 412}wEt,very dense, medium grained � Total�epth 31,5 , Graunclwater 30,4 � � I I �� : � C � � i � Ndtes: � �nG�N Corporation EnGEN C�ration GEOTE�HNBCA�B�R[NG LOG ' P�roject Number,T3956-GS Proj� Pata Rai�aw.�LC 80[��11R1�f; B-4 S11fFdCE E�2V.: f010 � otni�ao Logged t�y: c_r�. G�,ic � �°^ � �� E�Cs t CBI°'"t E p� � � I � (i CM� i�� i J � I I � ' � f . . ��k� � o S� f :f. : } .. � � �' �;�:F ,I� � � � ! �i:.�:•: .:. � i ° 1 , Silty sand,�r�ra+n{iOYR 513}, � � SM 2�,SQ+6 j 101.1 , 8_5 � � � sl;g!-Mty moist,�ery dense ! � � :�: . :�''�� ALLUVfUM :i:f:� ':i;l�� i 1 ' i . . S�iry sand.3s'gMyelfa�wish 5 + SM 23,19,15 � 103.0 14.5 :�:': :� �: � brnwn�10YR 6!4),moist. I :�: :�:�' :�: deRse � � :� i � 5i€ly sand,fighi yeilowish SM � 9,15,15 1Q�_8 '12.2 : :�' : ; : bs�am[1{3YFi 614},rnvist, � :i:�= : : : � dense,stight porosdY i :_��:� ,� SNI 8,15,20 I 100.8 5.5 .:�. ;�.�: ,� � } :�� #:� �� I : :I �_':�:� � � :�:�:i : :i � I � � � ; ' : �� 15 . : :�: N�RECOVERY 11,40.50+1 �i' :�: :: :�: �f:�: � : ._ :I �; : :, �:� ,: :�:� �a R�FUSAL C?U�TO RUCK . 7otal aepth 2D.� �fa Groundwater + � r i � � 25 I ! . I 3a � � � i I 35 � � I i i I I Notes: Fnf;CN f;nrnnrafinr� APPENDI� C LABOR.ATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C La6orataxy Procedures and Test Results Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)procedures and/or California Test Methods(CTM). Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils(Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Grain ize Distributi�: Select samples were tested by EnGen using the guidelines of ASTM D 1140. The test results are presented in the table below. *B-1 @ 5 feet Sandy SILT 63 *B-1 @ 7.5 feet Sandy SILT 51 *B-1 @ 10 feet Silty SAND 23 *B-1 @ 15 feet Gravely SAND 7.6 *Samples tested by EnGen Corporation Moisture and Density TeSts: For select samples moisture content was determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 2216 and dry density determinations were made using the guidelines of ASTM D 2937. These tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples and the test results are presented on the e�loratory logs. Maxi 17IY1 DEf1511�7 T�5T.�5: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined by EnGen and Earth Strata Geotechnical Services,using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. 5AMP2.�. MEi'L'��t1AE, MA�:IMUM I]RY []P't'YMLiN[MC1157'[�I'.�: I�U[:111'is��i U�SCIt�i'TI[]I�I ��1V5lT1'[p�`�J CE�[V`�'�N'1'(°/o] *B-1 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 122.0 12.5 *B-4 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 120.5 13.0 TP-1 @ 1-6 feet Sandy SILT 112.0 11.5 TP-1 @ 6-12 feet Silty SAND 109.0 7.0 TP-3 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 116.0 13.0 *Samples tested by EnGen Corporation Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are >>-e5ented in the table below. 5�11�71�L�: ti9?1'I'�:IffAf., G?��AlVST(}i�I:1��D�7� �?�I'ANSI[�t�PDT�N'i'1'AL [.[3 C�'!'1'I ON 1}1?SCI;I�'T i C?N *B-1 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 7 Very Low TP-1 @ 1-6 feet Sandy SILT 5 Very Low TP-3 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 21 Low *Samples tested by EnGen Corporation Consolid Cion: Consolidation tests were performed, by EnGen, on select, relatively undisturbed samples with the guidelines of ASTM D 2435 (California Modified). The test results are graphically presented on Sheet(s) C-1. Direct Shear: Direct shear tests were performed, by EnGen and Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, on representative remolded and/or undisturbed samples using the guidelines of ASTM D 3080. The test results are presented in the table below. n�.�•r�i��.. *FRlCTION AN�LE *a.��a��r�•r�aH�s�aN �a��:.�:ar.��i�rti�: ��:sc:��t�1��c��v ��e�r��) tp�t7 *B-1 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 31.4 453 TP-1 @ 6-12 feet Silty SAND 28 140 *Samples tested by EnGen Corporation;Remolded to 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Minimum Resisti�ity anr�pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH Tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. SfiMJ'L1: M�Tl:idfAL H �II�iEM�3�+fi��4T��I'!'l! LUC��'l[)�V D�SCRil''i�t(1�V � �uht;t-ut�j TP-1 @ 1-6 feet Sandy SILT 8.7 4,100 TP-1 @ 6-12 feet Silty SAND 8.1 22,000 TP-3 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 8.4 680 Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMf'!.� Mr�"['E11111L S[)'LrA`['�C��d1'I�N'C' ��L�A'f�:��L�'USi�� LC1CA't'IfIN !)�5[:hll''f'!:[JN (u/�L�V w�ight] TP-1 @ 1-6 feet Sandy SILT 0.001 Negligible TP-1 @ 6-12 feet Silty SAND 0.001 Negligible TP-3 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 0.006 Negligible Chl ride n ent: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. The test results are presented in the table below. TP-1 @ 1-6 feet Sandy SILT 50 TP-1 @ 6-12 feet Silty SAND 30 TP-3 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 230 UBC Labvratory Expansion Test Results jp31�� Job Number: T�956-GS � .lob Narne: Pf1LA RAIN80W, LLC. Location: PAL.A RD_-FIWY 79 S. Sample Source: B1 Q 0-5 _ Sampled by: C.I�L(�21/00) lab Technician: C_S_ Sampie Descx. SANDY SILT, BROWN Wet Compact�ed WL: 594.8 Ru�g Wt: �51.9 Diai Gha�tge Time Net Wet�Nt-= 'a2•9 Reading 1: 0.90Q WA 3:45 Wet Densiiy: 72t-7 Reading 2 0.104 0.004 4:00 WetSoiL- 201-8 " Readirsg3: 0.'t06 O.QOS 4:15 �Y� ��-9 Readirtg 4: 0_107 0.007 26-Jan Initia!Mois�u�e(°i6j_ 11.6°� lni�a!Ory Der�sit�r; �09.1 • %Saturation: 57_3°!a Final lhlt. b Rirag Wt.: 819.6 Net Final Wi.: 4Z7.7 Dry V1lt.: 361.2 Los�: 66.5 Expansivn Index: 7 N�t Dry YVt: 356.4 Final Density: 107.8 Adjusted Index: 10.2 Sahlrated Moisture: 18.7% (ASThA D 4829 10.1.2) EnGEN Corporation � 41607' Enterpris� Circle N�rth Temecula, CA 92590 (809) 676-3095 � Fa�c: (909) 676-3�94 3��0 RESII�..s c - .._-- -- -. ---•- - --- - - - -_...---- - � C. p s f 45� �.�.�.. - -.._. _^..�. _ _ _ . ._. _ _ _ �, �ey .�1 .4. - . -- - _ - --�- - - . . -- - - � TAiV c� Q.6� ... _....�,__ - - - - - - - _ ' m 2�f)O . - -. . . . . , - � -.•- - . ...__. _ - -- - - _ - - - - - vs .._ _ .__._- _ •- --• - - - � •- - ---- -. . - - - ' - - - - • - v~i �_�� _-_f�-- - "___ - ...---: . -- �- _ - _ ._ � �004 �.--- -_ _.� -_ • ---� = - - - - � : - - - _- - . --- -__- - � •-- • _� -•- - ---... ...—•-- _"._._� _..._...-- - _ � - . -- - _ _ -- -- � __. _._ . ,...�. _ - - - -- •_• . ' -- _- o - _ ---__. -- -- -- -- _- . - . - - : - _ . 0 10OC3 2400 300Q 400Q 50�0 60a� Norm�f �tress , psf 300�1 . - � SAMPLE NO. : 1 2 3 -- - - -r ' - �� WATER CONTENT, 7 t 3_5 13_5 t 3.5 �� . ' �' Q Df2Y DENSZTY, pc f 109.6 109.6 109.6 [ � - -- - rH„ SATIfRATION, � 70.5 70.5 7Q.5 a 20d0 ` ' _ _ _ ' . � : � VOID RAFT� 0.509 O.SoB 0.509 y� - -� �:.-.-: D7.41AE�f'ER. i n 2.42 2.42 2.42 � - ---- --l-- r.�*c M r. �n i .oa � .aa � .ofl L 1500 ' _ �4.� �Y° WA�'ER CONTEN7, % " ^f:- - -� --- 0.0 O.0 0.0 � � � � - — ' . ` F- ❑RY ��NSZT`Y, pcf 109.6 109.� 109.6 ' � m 1d00 - •_ - . w SAYURATION, l 0.0 0.0 a.0 � �. _.._ _ .��.. F- u► R` .- �--�-=- :.� ' - r VGId RATIO , 0.50� 0.509 0_509 - - - .�.�� a OrAM�'TER, i n - �--�-` 'T �.42 2.42 2.42 500 -- -` - , H�rGN7. in 1 .40 i .�0 � .�� r� � - -_- �-- i� �;_!_',�� I�iORMAL STRE55, ps f 1�00 2000 '5090 O .�..__ .��.� -:-��.�..._:_:.�.�. FASLUf2E STRESS, p�f 1047 "1712 2.269 0 �. 1 0.2 0.3 0. 4 DISPLACEMENT, in 0.23 0.23 �. 17 • Ho r i z. D i sp I . , i n ULT�MAl"E S�f7E��, ps f OrSPLACEMEN7, in 5 t ra i n ra t e, i n/m i n z.0000 2.�000 z.oaoo SAMPL� TYPE: � CL��NT: PAL�4 RA'�NBOiN, LLC. DESCR�P7SnN: SANOY SYLY, �ROwN PROJECT: SPECIFYC GRAVITY= 2.55 SAA�PLE LOCAl'�ON: PALA RO. - HW`f 79 S. REMARKS: SAMPLE B1� 0-5 C(7LL�CT�D E�Y C.M. (1/�1/00) p�pJ . NO. : 71956-GS DATE: 1/28/0� bIR�CT SWE4R TEST REPORI' Fig . No. : E�1G�N Corparat i on APPENDI� D SEISMICITY TRANSP�RTATI�N Caltrans AR.S Unline (�'2.3.08} This web-based tool calculates both deterministic and probabilistic acceleration response spectra far any location in Califomia based on ariteria protidecf in Appendix B of Caltrans 5eismic Desi,g��Cr�'teria MQre... SELECT SIl'E L�CATIC�N .,_;.__._ l,ak�•s"xlsinore -- �� La�jnd � � �"� vruag�� `.;., T:�ni�� h10 l�in t� •_ $eQe ' � I�lufr� Anza � � { Gienoe{c Hille C�huilla Tem 1a �, �ti ° ''�,.?'� dec De�uz De Luz �L uaRga Hel�ta RainbUw Fallhrnak pa4� Pafvrr��r� �Vf�:rrit:trn �� Agra Camp I�ala Mcsa � rt'�"�'- palamar F'�:ndletQn — �nuntain Nor.h �� iT! La a BDnsall ytiar AEnag $nnnps i Q �_ �Q �I� G1ap data�::REpor3�airaq erroi Latitude: 33.4753 Longi�de: -117.1293 Vsso: 27Q m/s Galculate_ CALCULATED SPECTRA Display Curves:�3 • L�tion: !AT�3.475�OQ L()NG=—!17_1293 lis3�2�4a�s x R�i�i�.ar Eletere�ir�Estic Spe�£� � t.�' Elsb�x�e f�ewecula3 CMath Ufear Fault Factar AQ�lied) � Elsir�r� C.�ulian� tifith Near Fault Fa�tc�^ �lie+d3 � �a.e Elginare GGlern I�7 re+r dYi#.h Near Fault Fa�� Appli�4) � *� lP�a SX in 34 years Pra¢�d E24L�} tMit�tt Pfear Fau1G F�tar Ap�rlied) � � � i.� . � ,.�j 1.2 � � f � � Z . Q Ci � 9.S 4 � y 4.6 � L� � � 0.4 - �� 9.2 . . -- __ _ .. . .. .... :.....:. ... 4 A O.S 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.S � � PC['lOds T{SEC� � Tabular Data � Envelope Only I Hide Near Fault � Axis Scale i Show Basin � Apply Near Fault Adjustment To: NOTE:CaRrans SDC requires application of a Near FauR Adjustment fador for sites less than 25 km(Rrup) from the causative fauk. l'1i Deterministic Spectrum Using 0.88 Km Elsinore(Temecula) 19.04 Km Elsinore(Julian) 21.14 Km Elsinore(Glen ivy)rev `�a Probabilistic Spectrum Using 0.88 Km(Recommend PerForming Deaggregation To Verify) 'J Show Spectrum with Adjustrnent Only Show Spectrum with and without nearfaultAdjustrnent QK � � - -.,. Copyright O 2009 State of California PSH Deaggregation on NEHRP D soil Unnamed 117.129° W, 33.475 N. N Peak Horiz. Ground Accel.>=0.7541 g Ann. Exceedance Rate .404E-03. Mean Return Time 2475 years Mean (R,M,Eo) 4.3 km, 7.12, 0.75 Modal (R,M,Eo) = 0.9 km, 7.16, 0.46 (from peak R,M bin) a A Modal (R,M,E*) = 1.0 km, 7.16, 1 to 2 sigma (from peak R,M,� bin) N Binning: DeltaR 10. km, deltaM=0.2, Delta£=1.0 � 0 0 w0 � � :o � 0 (� o o�° o� h �`A,a � ��y� �� r o � oE, �-�.� �'�' ��`'�- p�s �P � J,� � 59�� O � � � �� y� � � dg �O �Prob. SA, PGA � � �` `�� o 8 <median(R,M) >median�'-a,� �t- £0<-2 O<EQ C O.S��'�y �� o ro-r�� sO � -2<ep<-1 0.5 C£a C ] � �� s � �� ,:. � o �-,�,a -1 <�0<-0.5 �� i 1 <�0<2 �Q �� -0.5 <Eo<0 � 2 <�o<3 200910 UPDATE �� ' �� Q 2017 Jan 20 23:46:04 I Distance(R),magnitude(M),epsilon(EO,E)deaggregation for a site on soil with averege vs=270.mis top 30 m.USGS CGHT PSHA2008 UPDATE Bins with It 0.05%contrib.omitted 1/20/2017 M�s:Ngeohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/out/Urmamed 2017.0120 23.45.56.bct *** Deaggregation of Seismic Hazard at One Period of Spectral Accel. *** *** Data from U.S.G.S. National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project, 2008 version *** PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: Unnamed long: 117.129 W., lat: 33.475 N. Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30). NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7541 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.404E-03 #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00343 #This deaggregation corresponds to Mean Hazard w/all GMPEs DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 7.0 5.05 0.697 0.544 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 5.20 1.472 1.091 0.380 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.9 5.21 0.085 0.085 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.2 5.40 1.532 0.990 0.542 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.3 5.40 0.129 0.129 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 5.60 1.495 0.778 0.717 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.6 5.60 0.179 0.179 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 5.80 1.366 0.613 0.745 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.9 5.80 0.224 0.224 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.0 6.01 1.669 0.671 0.951 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.2 6.01 0.330 0.328 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.7 6.20 2.000 0.688 1.237 0.076 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.5 6.20 0.580 0.522 0.057 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 6.40 1.991 0.588 1.298 0.105 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.6 6.39 0.595 0.507 0.088 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 22.8 6.41 0.107 0.107 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.7 6.60 0.852 0.174 0.505 0.172 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.0 6.60 0.147 0.127 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.8 6.62 0.311 0.311 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.4 6.79 4.990 0.602 2.685 1.703 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.7 6.80 0.185 0.145 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.7 6.78 0.543 0.543 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 i.0 6.97 10.438 1.111 5.221 4.006 0.100 0.000 0.000 13.6 6.96 0.097 0.070 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.6 6.97 0.645 0.578 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 37.3 6.98 0.117 0.117 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.16 16.955 1.651 7.613 7.156 0.534 0.000 0.000 36.8 7.22 0.341 0.341 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 54.7 7.21 0.060 0.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0 7.36 13.790 1.308 6.061 5.939 0.481 0.000 0.000 18.3 7.42 0.334 0.200 0.134 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.7 7.39 0.726 0.722 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 61.2 7.44 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.57 15.531 1.435 6.671 6.831 0.595 0.000 0.000 18.7 7.61 0.132 0.071 0.061 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.3 7.58 1.717 1.546 0.171 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 61.0 7.63 0.103 0.103 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.75 15.602 1.418 6.601 6.930 0.653 0.000 0.000 35.2 7.79 0.906 0.737 0.169 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.8 7.80 0.067 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.99 0.187 0.017 0.078 0.084 0.009 0.000 0.000 35.2 7.99 0.081 0.063 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.8 7.96 0.126 0.126 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.8 8.16 0.058 0.058 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Contribution from this GMPE(%): 100.0 Mean src-site R= 4.3 km; M= 7.12; eps0= 0.75. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 0.9 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.46 from peak (R,M) bin MODE R*= 1.0km; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma Y CONTRIB.= 7.613 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution) Source Category: °6 contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values). California A-faults 83.75 3.5 7.35 0.60 CA Compr. crustal gridded 16.15 8.3 5.93 1.54 ht�s://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/oWUnnam� 2017.0120 23.45.56.bct ��5 1/20/2017 https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/out/Urmamed 2017.01.20 23.45.56.bct Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2�: Fault ID � contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d) Elsinore;T aPriori 12.71 0.9 6.99 0.56 45.3 Elsinore;Gl+T aPripri 19.88 0.9 7.24 0.46 45.3 Elsinore;3+�+CM aPriori 5.91 0.9 7.64 0.41 45.3 Elsinore;GI+3+�tCM aPri.ori 5.96 0.9 7.72 0.40 45.3 Elsinore;T MaBal 4.51 0.9 6.94 0.59 45.3 Elsinore;GI+7 �1pBai 2.60 0.9 7.24 0.46 45.3 Elsinore;'f+] NioBal 2.71 0.9 7.53 0.42 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+] Ma8a1 2.74 0.9 7.63 0.41 45.3 Elsinore;T+3+CM MoBal 5.87 0.9 7.64 0.41 45.3 Elsinore;Gl+Tt]+CM iN4Ba1 3.42 0.9 7.72 0.40 45.3 Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 8.63 1.2 7.39 0.47 45.9 #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Mean Hazard w/all GMPEs *********# PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: Unnamed long: 117.129 W., lat: 33.475 N. Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30). NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7541 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.177E-03 #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00247 #This deaggregation corresponds to Boore-Atkinson 2008 DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 6.5 5.05 0.067 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.6 5.20 0.164 0.164 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.7 5.40 0.200 0.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.9 5.60 0.231 0.223 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 5.80 0.249 0.218 0.031 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.0 5.81 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.6 6.02 0.392 0.310 0.082 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.5 6.01 0.065 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.4 6.20 0.514 0.374 0.140 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.0 6.20 0.137 0.137 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.9 6.21 0.023 0.023 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.8 6.40 0.505 0.356 0.149 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.1 6.39 0.160 0.160 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.1 6.41 0.064 0.064 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.1 6.60 0.270 0.107 0.128 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.7 6.60 0.063 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.8 6.62 0.289 @.289 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.2 6.79 2.198 0.289 1.231 0.678 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.3 6.80 0.081 0.080 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.7 6.78 0.504 0.504 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.5 6.81 0.040 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0 6.97 4.728 0.487 2.540 1.701 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.0 6.96 0.043 0.040 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.6 6.97 0.575 0.508 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 37.3 6.98 0.117 0.117 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.16 7.591 0.705 3.694 3.193 0.000 0.000 0.000 15.8 7.20 0.028 0.016 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.8 7.22 0.033 0.023 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.8 7.22 0.341 0.341 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 54.7 7.21 0.060 0.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 61.1 7.25 0.040 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0 7.36 6.132 0.560 2.942 2.630 0.000 0.000 0.000 18.4 7.42 0.229 0.135 0.094 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.7 7.39 0.691 0.687 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 54.5 7.42 0.029 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 61.2 7.44 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.57 6.846 0.608 3.225 3.012 0.002 0.000 0.000 18.7 7.61 0.086 0.045 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.3 7.58 1.578 1.407 0.171 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 44.0 7.54 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 61.0 7.63 0.103 0.103 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.75 6.831 0.596 3.175 3.037 0.023 0.000 0.000 35.2 7.79 0.789 0.620 0.169 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/art/Unnamed 2017.01.20 23.45.56.bct y' 1/20/2017 https:/lgeohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/out/Unnamed 2017.0120 23.45.56.bct 60.8 7.80 0.067 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.99 0.081 0.007 0.037 0.037 0.001 0.000 0.000 35.2 7.99 0.06b 0.048 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.8 7.96 0.123 0.123 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 75.5 7.95 0.024 0.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 60.8 8.16 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Contribution from this GMPE(%): 43.8 Mean src-site R= 6.1 km; M= 7.Z6; eps0= 0.85. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 0.9 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.53 from peak (R,M) bin MODE R*= 1.0km; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma � CONTRIB.= 3.694 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution) Source Category: % contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values). California A-faults 40.31 5.7 7.35 0.77 CA Compr. crustal gridded 3.35 8.9 6.11 1.73 Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%: Fault ID � contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d) Elsinore;T aPriori 5,77 0.9 6.98 0.61 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 8.87 0.9 7.24 0.52 45.3 Elsinore;T+7+CM aPriori 2.59 0.9 7.64 0.49 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+]+CM aPriori 2.61 0.9 7.72 0.48 45.3 Elsinore;T MoBal 2.05 0.9 6.94 0.64 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 1.16 0.9 7.24 0.52 45.3 Elsinore;T+J MoBal 1.19 0.9 7.53 0.50 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+7 MoBal 1.20 0.9 7.63 0.49 45.3 Elsinore;T+J+CM MoBal 2.57 0.9 7.64 0.49 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+J+CM MoBal 1.50 0.9 7.72 0.48 45.3 Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 3.93 1.3 7.39 0.57 45.9 #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Boore-Atkinson 2008 *********# PSHA Deaggregation. qcontributions. site: Unnamed long: 117.129 W., lat: 33.475 N. Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30). NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7541 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.198E-04 #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00000 #This deaggregation corresponds to Campbell-Bozorgnia 2008 DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 6.8 5.05 0.074 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.9 5.20 0.201 0.201 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 5.40 0.283 0.274 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.2 5.42 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.2 5.60 0.305 0.268 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.9 5.60 0.015 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 5.80 0.268 0.225 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.2 5.80 0.021 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.0 6.01 0.286 0.254 0.033 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.6 6.01 0.035 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.8 6.20 0.350 0.311 0.039 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.0 6.20 0.074 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 6.40 0.388 0.320 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.3 6.39 0.084 0.084 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.7 6.41 0.005 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.1 6.60 0.143 0.092 0.051 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.4 6.60 0.029 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.5 6.79 0.189 0.140 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.3 6.80 0.032 0.032 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.6 6.98 0.266 0.182 0.083 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.3 6.95 0.015 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.16 0.501 0.242 0.259 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.35 0.383 0.189 0.194 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.57 0.451 0.219 0.232 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.75 0.479 0.225 0.254 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.99 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Mtps://geohazards.usgs.gov/d�ggirrt/2008/aNUnnamed 2017.01.20 23.45.56.bct 3/5 1/20/2017 ht�s://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggirrt/2�6/ouUUnnamed 2017.0120 23.45.56.bct Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Contribution from this GMPE(%): 4.9 Mean src-site R= 4.7 km; M= 6.59; eps0= 1.73. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 0.9 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 1.69 from peak (R,M) bin MODE R*= 7.0km; M*= 6.40; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRI6.= 0.320 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution) Source Category: � contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values). Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%: Fault ID % contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d) Elsinore;T aPriori 0.31 0.9 7.01 1.85 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 0.60 0.9 7.24 1.69 45.3 Elsinore;T+J+CM aPriori 0.20 0.9 7.63 1.63 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+J+CM aPriori 0.20 0.9 7.72 1.63 45.3 Elsinore;T MoBal 0.10 0.9 6.97 1.92 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 0.08 0.9 7.24 1.69 45.3 Elsinore;T+7 MoBal 0.09 0.9 7.53 1.64 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+J MoBal 0.09 0.9 7.63 1.64 45.3 Elsinore;T+J+CM MoBal 0.19 0.9 7.63 1.63 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+J+CM MoBal 0.11 0.9 7.72 1.63 45.3 Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 0.08 1.0 7.39 2.36 45.9 #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Campbell-Bozorgnia 2008 *********# PSHA Deaggregation. �contributions. site: Unnamed long: 117.129 W., lat: 33.475 N. Vs30(m/s)= 270.0 (some WUS atten. models use Site Class not Vs30). NSHMP 2007-08 See USGS OFR 2008-1128. dM=0.2 below Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.7541 g. Weight * Computed_Rate_Ex 0.207E-03 #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00783 #This deaggregation corresponds to Chiou-Youngs 2008 DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 7.1 5.05 0.556 0.491 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.6 5.05 0.028 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.2 5.20 1.107 0.940 0.167 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 12.9 5.21 0.084 0.084 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 5.40 1.049 0.856 0.192 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.4 5.40 0.121 0.121 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 5.60 0.958 0.724 0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.7 5.60 0.153 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.4 5.80 0.849 0.556 0.293 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.0 5.80 0.175 0.175 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.1 6.01 0.991 0.605 0.386 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.2 6.01 0.230 0.230 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.9 6.20 1.137 0.631 0.505 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.4 6.20 0.368 0.365 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.3 6.40 1.098 0.552 0.546 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.5 6.39 0.352 0.336 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 22.3 6.41 0.038 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.6 6.60 0.438 0.136 0.237 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.4 6.60 0.055 0.054 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.4 6.79 2.602 0.308 1.331 0.962 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.3 6.80 0.071 0.068 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.6 6.78 0.037 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0 6.97 5.445 0.492 2.575 2.278 0.100 0.000 0.000 13.2 6.96 0.039 0.035 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21.6 7.00 0.069 0.069 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.16 8.862 0.704 3.660 3.963 0.534 0.000 0.000 1.0 7.36 7.275 0.560 2.925 3.309 0.481 0.000 0.000 15.2 7.43 0.104 0.065 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.6 7.39 0.035 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.57 8.233 0.608 3.213 3.819 0.593 0.000 0.000 18.7 7.61 0.046 0.026 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.3 7.59 0.139 0.139 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.9 7.75 8.291 0.596 3.172 3.893 0.630 0.000 0.000 35.2 7.81 0.117 0.117 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ht�s://geohazards.�gs.gov/deaggirrU2008/out/Unnamed 2017.01.20 23.45.56.bct 4/5 1/20/2017 ht�:l/geoF�ar�.�gs.gov/deaggirrt/2008/ouf/Urxiamed 2017.0120 23.45.56.bct 0.9 7.99 0.100 0.007 0.037 0.047 0.008 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Contribution from this GMPE(%): 51.3 Mean src-site R= 2.7 km; M= 7.06; eps0= 0.58. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 0.9 km; M= 7.16; eps0= 0.34 from peak (R,M) bin MODE R*= 0.9km; M*= 7.16; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRI6.= 3.963 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having > 3% contribution) Source Category: 9� contr. R(km) M epsilon0 (mean values). California A-faults 41.30 1.3 7.35 0.37 CA Compr. crustal gridded 10.04 8.3 5.86 1.43 Individual fault hazard details if its contribution to mean hazard > 2%: Fault ID % contr. Rcd(km) M epsilon0 Site-to-src azimuth(d) Elsinore;T aPriori 6.63 0.9 6.99 0.46 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T aPriori 10.41 0.9 7.24 0.33 45.3 Elsinore;T+J+CM aPriori 3.12 0.9 7.64 0.27 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+]+CM aPriori 3.16 0.9 7.72 0.26 45.3 Elsinore;T MoBal 2.35 0.9 6.94 0.49 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T MoBal 1.36 0.9 7.24 0.33 45.3 Elsinore;T+J MoBal 1.43 0.9 7.53 0.28 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+] MoBal 1.45 0.9 7.63 0.27 45.3 Elsinore;T+7+CM MoBal 3.10 0.9 7.64 0.27 45.3 Elsinore;GI+T+J+CM MoBal 1.81 0.9 7.72 0.26 45.3 Elsinore aflt, unsegmented 4.63 1.2 7.39 0.36 45.9 #*********End of deaggregation corresponding to Chiou-Youngs 2008 *********# ******************** Southern California **************************************** M�s://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggird//2008/ouWrmamed 2017.01.20 23.45.56.bct �5 U.S.Geological Survey-Earthquake Hazards Program 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters Fle�v Serrch Uis. i2upr�r� k�Ep!ur� !ip Dio L'ip Sli�, Len=th ii. SiatP Tpp �GC!��i; at� 'd2e"c:2;1 Dir Sense 'k:;�` M. . � �krr :k;�l� stri ke p,gg • in � I+ + + CA n/a 86 NE 0 16 195 slip stri ke 0.88 sin r • CA 5 90 V 0 14 52 slip stri ke 0.88 Cicinore_C1+7+� CA n/a 86 NE sli 0 17 153 p stri ke 0.88 C�inore:�,I+T CA 5 90 V D 14 78 slip stri ke 0.8B Elsii�ore:WiGi+'�•F�+•$'f.f CA n/a 84 NE 0 16 241 slip stri ke 0.88 in�rP:W+ 'I+'I'+J CA n/a 84 NE S�i 0 16 199 P 0.88 L'Isinnre:�Y±iiLT CA n/a 84 NE slirike 0 14 124 P stri ke 0.88 �i�inc�re:T*JtCP-1 CA n/a 85 NE S�I 0 16 169 P strike 0.88 E[siraare:l'}.1 CA n/a 86 NE S�i 0 17 127 P stri ke 18.64 ii r • CA 3 84 NE S�. 0 19 75 p stri ke 18.64 �isinore:J*CAi CA 3 84 NE sli � 17 118 P 21.57 FI�{nare:Gi CA 5 gp � S`Irike � 13 37 P stri ke 21.57 Elsinnr�_W+GI CA n/a 81 NE Sl. 0 14 83 P stri ke 35_ll San.Iari�tta:A+C[' CA n/a 90 V 0 16 118 slip stri ke 35.11 Sar�JacIE�IU:A CA 9 90 V 0 17 71 slip stri ke 35.11 S��t_V�tcinta:A�C CA n/a 90 V 0 17 118 slip stri ke 35.11 S.u7laei{�to:A+CC+8+5A_4 CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 178 slip strike 35.11 Sar�J�ein a A+{'t r CA n/a 90 V slip 0.1 15 152 stri ke 35.14 5„win Jarii�lo:5i�V<<Jy+A'�C CA n/a 90 V 0 16 181 slip stri ke 35.14 Sai�Jt3�:in[o;SBV+SJV+A CA n/a 9D V S�. 0 16 134 p stri ke 35.14 5anJa[Inta:5JV+A+CC*13j5ivf CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 196 slip stri ke 35.14 S111 J 7CIp[�;S�V'FA'}CCi•$ CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 170 - S�IP 35.14 V�• + CA n/a 90 � Silrike 0 16 136 P stri ke 35.14 5an 1a[i�'�a:SJV�A�C CA n/a 90 V 0 17 136 slip stri ke 35.14 San Jaci��to:S 1V+r1 CA n/a 90 V 0 17 89 slip stri ke 35.14 $�n.I�Cihl0:S�3Ur$�y{-��•F��i•Q CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 215 slip stri ke 35.14 S.�n 1dCiistQ:S��±�1V�A+S CA n/a 90 V 0 17 181 slip stri ke 35.14 San Ja�il��s:58Vi 5JV+A=CGt�+Sh7 CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 241 slip strike 37.48 San Jacinta:�.iV CA 18 9� V 0 16 43 slip stri ke 37.48 San Jaelt�ta:SB +<�V CA n/a 90 V S�i 0 16 88 P stri ke 44.03 Ik � rsn a CA 1.3 89 0 11 208 slip strike 44.03 N r I � nn • d i CA 1.3 9fl V S�i 0 11 208 P stri ke 44.03 - �' fi}o r i CA 1.5 9U V S�� 0 10 66 P strike 47.7g Rose Canvon CA 1.5 90 V 0 8 70 slip 52.45 San.loaauii�Hiiis CA 0.5 23 SW thrust 2 13 27 stri ke 54.42 Sa�i Jao�zkQ:CC CA 4 9p V 0 16 43 slip stri ke 54.42 San Jaclnta:CC+B CA n/a 9tl V 0.2 14 77 slip 54.42 i " + + CA n/a gp � strike �2 14 103 slip stri ke 56.06 t�f7ino.aEL 2 CA 1 65 SW S�i 0 14 29 P 57.19 S.Z�,�.I_,�intr�f CA 14 90 V strike 0 17 47 slip stri ke 58.07 E.Is111o�N;V[ CA 2.5 75 NE S�iP 0 14 46 stri ke 6017 �a �ske Vi1Eey CA Z gfl � sli � 19 20 p stri ke 60.28 Chiito_alt! CA 1 50 SW sli 0 9 24 p stri ke 60.67 S,Sai�Andre�,s.CL��`�,,z�,i+�1513+S5R±�� CA n/a 85 0 14 380 slip S•5an strike 60.67 CA n/a 86 0.1 13 512 Andreas:i:H.[:C+al3+NFA FShi�5E3+5s��r,� sli p stri ke 60.67 S�,SanA�ldreast55$+�� CA n/a 7I 0 13 101 slip stri ke 60.67 S 5 n An�kreas:iVSB+SS6+8ti�C� CA n/a 79 0.2 12 206 slip strike 60.67 5.San Andre�s:L{G CA n/a 58 0 13 56 slip stri ke 60.67 �,,5s]1�Andreas:66+{V�+5h1+N5E3+SSB+l3G±�:S? CA n/a 85 0.1 13 390 slip stri ke 60.67 F + i p� + a• - CA n/a 84 0 14 321 slip stri ke 60.67 n r + '+ ' CA n/a 77 0.2 12 170 slip stri ke 60.67 5 n +N + + * CA n/a &3 0.1 13 303 slip stri ke 60.67 A Ma [3� 'B+ ' CA n/a 81 D 13 234 slip stri ke 60.67 �1 CA n/a 86 0.1 13 546 �litdr eas:PH+CH+CC+BB+NA4�5M+N5�SB�13G tCa slip • an strike 60.67 CA n/a 86 0.1 13 479 Andreas:pl[rCH+CC�8B+N�+5�+1±N513+558+6G sli p stri ke 60.67 Sart An r • B+ + CA n/a 75 0 14 136 slip 60.67 Ati �9� + �5 + ,+ CA n/a gq strike 0.1 13 340 slip stri ke 60.67 ��»Aiidre s:Nhf+5M+N5�+55p-8G CA n/a 83 0 14 271 slip stri ke 60.67 $ SanAndreas:GH=C[:+gg+�y�y+5��y��+558•BC CA n/a 86 0 14 442 slip stri ke 60.67 5 5an An�lreas:CC+qR•r��}+Sfi7�NSB#S56a BGtCq CA n/a 8fi 0.1 13 449 slip stri ke 60.67 S.S.m Andre�s:l3G��0 CA n/a 72 0.3 12 125 slip stri ke 60.82 �� i 's ".+ ' +- CA n/a 90 V S�iP 0 13 176 stri ke 60.82 �yan A�idr�;�,y;�1',±[36+HM+5t,{�� CA n/a 9Q V 0 14 322 — slip stri ke 60.82 5.5�4l7 P�i1CIf8J5:S$� CA 16 90 V s`i o 13 43 P stri ke 60.82 5.S vn n r� ' +C � � h{FSM+ S •�• SSF� CA n/a 90 V 0 14 384 slip stri ke 60.82 u�Andre�3 �• d= rN + g CA n/a 96 � sli � 14 263 P strike 60.82 An *"W+'-� ' +�F.i+ I+i� Br55a CA n/a 9[1 V 0.1 13 421 slip stri ke 60.82 S 5 n Andr2as:Nh4+5h4+N59tS5Q CA n/a 90 V 0 13 213 slip stri ke 60.82 5,,,;_,Salt Arid[_�55� CA n/a �0 V D 13 79 slip stri ke 60.93 �1�][ CA 6 99 V S�i 0 16 45 P stri ke 71.96 I?;3ius Verde�S�QnneS�¢ CA 3 9U V 0 10 285 slip stri ke 71.96 t�uroclac��F�a�?� CA 3 90 V S�i 0 9 186 p stri ke 7q,5g p i �7 n CA 2.5 9� V 0 16 74 slip stri ke 7535 5 Sa�tA{tdre3y:Nhl+SAa+N CA n/a 90 V 0 13 170 slip stri ke 7535 5 Sar�Ri�di�as:Shi+N5E3 CA n/a 90 V 0 13 133 slip strike 75.35 ' iz +v r '* B+ Mr Al+h€5 CA n/a 90 V � 14 279 slip stri ke 75.35 • I�+ + + �'rt�N' CA n/a 90 V 0 14 341 slip stri ke 75.35 S.San A��dreas:N53 CA 22 90 V 0 13 35 slip stri ke 7535 A + + "+ * • F f- CA n/a 96 V 0.1 13 377 slip strike 75.35 5.S<<n A�irlrz�s;13B•FIV�+S FShI+N513 CA n/a 9� V 0 14 220 -- - slip stri ke 76.35 Ne+.vraorT-4r1�leHro4� tlt. CA 1 8S 0 15 65 slip strike 76.51 f'��I�Verdes CA 3 90 V 0 14 99 slip 83.00 P n e Hil s f.n nte Elil S CA 0.7 26 N thrust 2,8 15 17 83,10 Cu�amoi�ea CA 5 45 N thrust 0 8 28 stri ke 85.31 i r� M r� CA 0.6 67 W 0 16 21 slip stri ke 67.63 i i �� CA 0.5 74 NW Sli a 15 20 P stri ke 88.91 S.5an A11�1�'��5;��7 CA 20 4D V 0.6 11 69 slip stri ke 89.45 s* r CA 3 90 V 5�. 0 16 �5 P stri ke 90.63 Eureka Peak CA 0.6 90 V 0 15 19 slip stri ke 90.98 �Jaeknto:NfShl CA n/a 90 V 0.4 1Z 61 slip stri ke 90.98 �ui Ja�inra:R CA 4 90 V 0.7 13 34 slip 91.49 SierCaMad�Q CA 2 53 N reverse 0 14 57 91.49 Sierra hladre Cann�reted CA 2 51 reverse 0 14 76 strike 9234 Elsinure:C�1 CA 3 82 NE sli 0 13 39 P 94.27 P7 � i i CA 1 49 5 reverse � i6 50 96.72 PtienteMills�5at�[a Fe5[�LitlPsl CA 0.7 29 N thrust 2.8 15 11 strike 98.60 E�elendale-So La�kli��rt CA 0.6 9Q V 0 13 114 slip •_ � � Search Results � 2 of2 earthquakes in map area. 6.4 12km W of Salton City,CA 1954-03-19 09:5427(UTC) 6.0 km 6.0 16km WSW of Oasis,CA 1937-03-25 16:49:02 jUTC) 6.0 km Didn't find what you were looking for? • Checkyour Setti�s. e hich e i h akes are include on he ma n l' ? • Fe�t somethin�not sl�own-reg.,g i h�r . �� Design Maps Summary Report User—Specified Input �ui9slirag Code Refererace Document ASCE 7-10 Standard f�ehich utilizz�USGS hazard data avallablG in 2008j Site C�ordinates 33.4753°N, 117.1293°W Site Soil Classifscation Site Class D — "Stiff Soil" Risk Category I/II/III 1�ufT�ti �r e�� i Ho#3pri�gs v.�u., �i:,wr! �9ART1�f.� `'� . a � �; , t• 4 :• ..y l ♦ �' ... � � . , r�'��+y . �' . • � . , 'I �4 �.ti,' • { �r. ." Y� . �li , l R ' I } �.r ; Temecala�' µ a '-�' ' � '�y�` �� 4 - ' ' --. . . � . L y . � . . � ��•• ,:� • . ��i_ � - �ti�wAM6� ' ..i !1� tiM'� ' �a . 'i � J `,� 4Ul:YT� � '1 �{L .� � -� I �� . �i,�" �� ' 1� �k _ Y,_ . '; � � �.W,1�i1��l�:�q � , � ! ' SGTArlW WCh �iK. �. LETACMMF4fl,k��t� , + _µ FslEbrook. USGS—Provided Output SS = 1.870 g SMS = 1.870 g �ps = 1.Z46 g S1 = 0.763 g SM1 = 1.145 g SDz = 0.763 g For information on how the SS and 51 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the"2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. MCEa R�spr�ns� 5ppctrum Q��ign Ft�spr�rr�sr� S�p�ectrum 1.43 1,9p • Y,�L1 1,71 l �� 1,5� 1.04 1,33 �'91 � � 1.14 Oi Q,?� y q,55 � �ti.65 ��?� 0.53 0,S7 n.3� o.�a u.�s 0.19 6,1� o.ran o.00 0.L�0 7.29 d.4i� �.6q 0,90 1,n0 1,20 1.40 1,60 1.SI0 :.9L� 4,00 Q.v4 0.4b �J,S�� 0.80 L��O 1.�0 1.10 1,GQ 1,80 :.�0 p�eri�d�T Isec� Peri�d.T(��ci For PGAr.,, T�, CRS, and CR1 values, please �I w h V r r . AlChough Ch,s�r.rorinaiion is� produrt oF�h�US.Geological �urveY, ,�de provide no r�arrar,ty,�xpr�sced or�iTplizd,as Co t'r,e accuracv oF the �a�a con�ain�d r.herein,This too! is not a subst!tute for-rechnlcal s�:b�ect-mat_er knovdledge �� Design Maps Detailed Report ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.4753°N, 117.1293°W) Site Class D - "Stiff Soil", Risk Category I/II/III Section 11.4.1 — Mapped Acceleration Parameters Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric mean ground motions computed by the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain SS) and 1.3 (to obtain Sl). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 5tandard are provided for Site Class B. Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3. From Fiqure 2Z-�.[l� SS = 1.870 g From �i ure Z2-2[z� S1 = 0.763 g Section 11.4.2 — Site Class The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or the default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance with Chapter 20. Table 20.3-1 Site Classification Site Class vs N or N�,, su A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A B. Rock 2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A C. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf D. Stiff Soil � 600 to 1,Z00 ft/s 15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf E. Soft clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the characteristics: . Plasticity index PI > 20, . Moisture content w > 40%, and . Undrained shear strength s„ < 500 psf F. Soils requiring site response See 5ection 20.3.1 analysis in accordance with Section 21.1 For SI: lft/s = 0.3048 m/s llb/ft� = 0.0479 kN/m� Section 11.4.3 - Site Coefficients and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Table 11.4-1: Site Coefficient Fa Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period SS <_ 0.25 55 = 0.50 55 = 0.75 55 = 1.00 SS >_ 1.25 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E Z.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of SS For Site Class = D and �S = 1.870 g, F, = 1.000 Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient F„ Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period Sl <_ 0.10 S1 = 0.20 51 = 0.30 51 = 0.40 Sl >_ 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S1 For Site Class = D and Sl = 0.763 g, F„ = 1.500 Equation (11.4-1): SMs = FaSs = 1.000 X 1.870 = 1.870 g Equation (11.4-2): SM1 = F„S1 = 1.500 x 0.763 = 1.145 g Section 11.4.4 — Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters Equation (11.4-3): Sos = 2� SMs = 2� x 1.870 = 1.246 g Equation (iie4-4): Spl = 2/ SM1 = 2/ x 1.145 = 0.763 g Section 11.4.5 — Design Response Spectrum From Fiaure 2�-1��3� T� = 8 seconds Figure 11.4-1: Design Response Spectrum TcTQ:S�=S�(O.�+O.�TlT�� S;�=1.246 - - Te3TSTa:��=Sm �' ' T�<TfT�.S�=S�,FT a N ' T>T�:S,=3�,T�1T' � : : � : , = 5:�� 0,763 • ... -- . -• -• • •• ; - • - • • Y � � , ' � Y . ' � . � � � , � �a � , N � � , T �0.122 T,�0,fi12 1.�00 ��riodr T tfec� Section 11.4.6 — Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum The MCER Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by 1.5. S,��1,6T0 - `a � y � � � � I � � � � R � � � � � 5r��1�145 • - •-• •-• •-; • - ! ; ; ' a , , e� ' ' ; a � � � � ` • d � a' , � � ' ' � • + � � , ; � � Ta�0.122 T �0.512 ],.0fl�7 Periv�.?��! Section 11.8.3 - Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design Categories D through F From �ig�at�_��4� PGA = 0.770 Equation (11.8-1): PGAM = FP�APGA = 1.000 x 0.770 = 0.77 g - - Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient FP�A Site Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA Class PGA <_ 0.10 PGA = 0.20 PGA = 0.30 PGA = 0.40 PGA >_ 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.Z 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.770 g, FP�„ = 1.000 Section 21.2.1.1 - Method 1 (from Chapter 21 - Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design) From Fiaure 22-i7�5� CRS = 0.902 From Figure Z2-f8�6� CR1 = 0•888 Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design CategQry Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter RISK CATEGORY VALUE OF Sos I or II III IV Sps < 0.167g A A A 0.1679 � Sos < 0.33g B B C 0.33g <_ Sps < 0.50g C C D 0.50g 5 Sps D D D For Risk Category = I and S� = 1.246 g, Seismic Design Category = D Table 11.6-2 Seismic Desfgn Category Based on 1-S Period Response Acceleration Parameter RI�K CATEGORY VALUE OF Sol I or II III YV Spi < 0.067g A A A 0.067g 5 Spi < 0.133g B B C 0.133g <_ Spl < 0.20g C C D 0.20g 5 �pl D D D For Risk Category = I and Spl = 0.763 g, Seismic Design Category = D Note: When Sl is greater than or equal to 0.75g, the Seismic Design Category is E for buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of the above. Seismic Design Category = ��the more severe design category in accordance with Table 11.6-1 or 11.6-2" = E Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category. References 1. Figure 2z-1: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/Z010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-i.pdf 2. Figure 22-2: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf 3. Figure 22-1Z: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-1Z.pdf 4. Figure 22-7: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf 5. Frgure 22-17: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/Z010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-17.pdf 6. Figure z2-18: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-18.pdf APPENDI� E L�Q,UEFACTI�N ANALYSIS LIQUEFACTION & SETTLEMENT OF SANDS ANALYSIS Project Name: Temecula Parkway Project Number: 171610-10A Boring Number: B-1(Graded Condilions) Horizontal Ground Acceleration (%g) 0.7541 Energy Ratio CE(Auto-hammer) 1.50 Analyzed Groundwater Depth(feet) 10.0 Borehole Diameter CB(6-8 inches) 1.00 Average Wet Unit Weight(pcf) 123.5 Groundwater Depth in Boring(feet) 34.0 Design Magnitude Earthquake 7.7 Magnitude Scaling Factor(MSF) 0.9 Blow Total EHecli�e Fines Sampler NCEER NCEER Liquefaction Layer Layer Percent Selllemenl Per Deplh Counl SPT Slress Stress Content Overburden Type 1996 1996 Safety Thlcknass Thickness Volumetric Sand Layer (Feep SPT Cal.Mod Nm (lons/ft2 tanslNP] FC(%) CR C�, rd Cs (Ni)en (N+)eo�s GSR CRR'MSF Factor � IL} t(inches Strain (inches) 1� 3a 35.000 0.741 0 679 30 0 85 1.13 0 97 1 20 61 75 0 52 --- Correcled SPT>30" 12.00 144.00 0.00 O.OD F8 AS 45.000 1.112 0.662 5 0.95 0.95 0.98 120 73 73 0.81 --- CorrecledSPT>30* 8.00 72.00 0.00 0.00 �3 7sS 7B 000 1 420 1 O15 }0 0.95 0.84 0 95 1 20 112 115 0 65 ••• Correcled SPT>30" 5.00 60.00 0.00 0 00 39 �15 46.000 1.729 1.167 �'a 0.95 0.75 0.93 120 68 68 0.88 --- Corrected SPT>30" 5.00 80.00 0.00 0.00 3:3 77 71 000 2.036 1.320 5 1.00 0 6B 0 91 1.20 87 B7 0 69 ••- Corrected SPT>30` 5 00 60.00 0 00 0 00 �10 Afl 49.000 2.470 1.534 G 1.00 O.B3 O.B5 1.20 58 58 0.67 •- Correcled SPT>30" 7.00 84.00 0.00 0.00 �l9 34 34.000 2.717 1.656 16 1.00 0.61 0.62 1 20 37 39 0 66 -- Corrected SPT>30" 4.00 48.00 0.00 0.00 �S$ �B 48.000 2.984 1.778 5 1.00 0.59 0.78 120 51 51 0.84 -- Corrected SPT>30' 4.00 48.00 0.00 0.00 .�i t {i6 66.000 3 149 1 B70 � 1 00 0 58 0.76 1.20 68 68 0.63 --- Corrected SPT>30' 3.00 36.00 0.00 0.00 Total Selllement[knchesy 0.0 Procedure established by T.L.Youd and I.M. Idriss,et.al., 1996 NCEER-96-0022 Workshop&S.C.E.C. SP117 �•,--=--�- -�--,-��==��_-• T_, Evaluation of settlements in sand due to earthquake shaking,Tokimatsu and Seed,1987 3 Extension of rod above boring(feel) ��h r ��J',�,�ar� A 1�G. " CRR 7.5 is nol defined For(N�)60cs greater lhan 30. Soils with(N1)60cs>30 are considered loo dense lo liquefy(NCEER Workshop) _ _ _ c.ea.�n..ac.r.t��ru�,- J-•.�w.rtwr..d.y;� �N1�60-NMC'NCECBCRCS �Ni)socs=Ks�Ni)so � �/1�I�E.�T7iK fE�MC'.R.�77Q1 RWf1CTd APPENDIX F �ENERAL EARTHW�RK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS EARTH-STRATA Gen rthwar adin S e ifcations n ral Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are intended to be the minimum requirements for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications should be considered a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s) and if they are in conflict with the geotechnical report(s), the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general specifications. Observations made during earthwork operations by the project Geotechnical Consultant may result in new or revised recommendations that may supersede these specifications and/or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). The Geoterhnical Cansultant af Recnr : The Owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant), prior to commencement of grading or construction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading or construction. Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the Owner shall coordinate with the Geotechnical Consultant, and Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) to schedule sufficient personnel for the appropriate level of observation,mapping, and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface conditions to confirm assumptions made during the geotechnical design phase of the project Should the observed conditions differ significantly from the interpretive assumptions made during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall recommend appropriate changes to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the reviewing agency where required. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture conditioning and processing of the excavations and fill materials. The Geotechnical Consultant should perform periodic relative density testing of fill materials to verify that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. T e Eart ntract r: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of earth materials to receive compacted fill, moisture- conditioning and processing of fill,and compacting fill. The Contractor shall be provided with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s) for his review and acceptance of responsibilities, prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s). Prior to commencement of grading, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "equipment" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. The Contractor shall inform the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of work schedule changes and revisions to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation and testing. No assumptions shall be made by the Contractor with regard to whether the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. It is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork operations in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). At the sole discretion of the Geotechnical Consultant, any unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable earth materials, improper moisture conditioning, inadequate compaction, insuff'icient buttress keyway size, adverse weather conditions, etc., resulting in a quality of work less than required in the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s), the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the Owner that grading be stopped until conditions are corrected. Fr aration of for Com ac d Ff 1 learin a rubbin : Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed in a method acceptable to the Owner, Geotechnical Consultant, and governing agencies. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals on a site by site basis. Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall not contain more than 1 percent organic materials (by volume). No compacted fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent organic matter. Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous materials specialist shall immediately be consulted to evaluate the potentially hazardous materials, prior to continuing to work in that area. It is our understanding that the State of California defines most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) as hazardous waste. As such, indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids may constitute a misdemeanor,punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall be prohibited. The contractor is responsible for all hazardous waste related to his operations. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Owner should contract the services of a qualified environmental assessor. Prncessing: Exposed earth materials that have been observed to be satisfactory for support of compacted fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. E�osed earth materials that are not observed to be satisfactory shall be removed or alternative recommendations may be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant. Scarification shall continue until the exposed earth materials are broken down and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. The earth materials should be moistened or air dried to near optimum moisture content,prior to compaction. ��rerexcavation: The Cut Lot Typical Detail and Cut/Fill Transition Lot Typical Detail, included herein provides a graphic illustration that depicts typical overexcavation recommendations made in the approved geotechnical report(s) and/or grading plan(s). KerrwaX,s and 6enchia��: Where fills are to be placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be thoroughly benched as compacted fill is placed. Please see the three Keyway and Benching Typical Details with subtitles Cut Over Fill Slope, FillOver Cut Slope, and Fill Slope for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or smallest keyway shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide (or lh the proposed slope height) and at least 2 feet into competent earth materials as advised by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent earth materials or as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 should be thoroughly benched or otherwise excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the compacted fill. E�alua�tinnJA��eptance nf Bottam Excaxa�aQ,r��: All areas to receive compacted fill (bottom excavations),including removal excavations,processed areas, keyways, and benching, shall be observed, mapped, general elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive compacted fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing compacted fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of bottom excavations, processed areas, keyways, and benching. The Geotechnical Consultant is not responsible for erroneously located,fills,subdrain systems,or excavations. illMt ' 1 General: Earth material to be used as compacted fill should to a large extent be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances as evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Q��: Oversize material is rock that does not break down into smaller pieces and has a maximum diameter greater than 8 inches. Oversize rock shall not be included within compacted fill unless specific methods and guidelines acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant are followed. For examples of methods and guidelines of oversize rock placement see the enclosed Oversize Rock Disposal Detail. The inclusion of oversize materials in the compacted fill shall only be acceptable if the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted fill or thoroughly jetted granular materials. No oversize material shall be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of proposed utilities or underground improvements. Im o : Should imported earth materials be required, the proposed import materials shall meet the requirements of the Geotechnical Consultant. Well graded, very low expansion potential earth materials free of organic matter and other deleterious substances are usually sought after as import materials. However,it is generally in the Owners best interest that potential import earth materials are provided to the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their suitability for the intended purpose. At least 48 hours should be allotted for the appropriate laboratory testing to be performed, prior to starting the import operations. FiII Placeme�t an_ m��,S�...on Pra�edure� Fill �r : Fill materials shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in nearly horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Thicker layers may be accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant, provided field density testing indicates that the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer of fill shall be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to obtain uniformity within the earth materials and consistent moisture throughout the fill. Moistu�'e Canditio�sing af Fill: Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall be watered, dried, blended, and/or mixed, as needed to obtain relatively uniform moisture contents that are at or slightly above optimum. The maximum density and optimum moisture content tests should be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM test method D1557-00). Cotnp c 'on nf Fiil: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test method D1557-00. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for compaction of earth materials or be proven to consistently achieve the required level of compaction. Cnm activn nf Fil� Slv es: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, additional effort to obtain compaction on slopes is needed. This may be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers as the fill is being placed, by overbuilding the fill slopes, or by other methods producing results that are satisfactory to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading,relative compaction of the fill and the slope face shall be a minimum of 90 percent of m�imum density per ASTM test method D1557- 00. act"on T� 'n a FiII: Field tests for moisture content and relative density of the compacted fill earth materials shall be periodically performed by the Geotechnical Consultant The location and frequency of tests shall be at the Geotechnical Consultant's discretion based on field observations. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be random. The test locations may or may not be selected to verify minimum compaction requirements in areas that are typically prone to inadequate compaction,such as close to slope faces and near benching. Freuuenc� nf Cor�na�tion Te� ing: Compaction tests shall be taken at minimum intervals of every 2 vertical feet and/or per 1,000 cubic yards of compacted materials placed. Additionally, as a guideline, at least one (1) test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or for each 10 vertical feet of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill placement is such that the testing schedule described herein can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork operations to a safe level so that these minimum standards can be obtained. ComRaction T�st Lac�t[gn5: The approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location shall be documented by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established. This will provide the Geotechnical Consultant with sufficient accuracy to determine the approximate test locations and elevations. The Geotechnical Consultant can not be responsible for staking erroneously located by the Surveyor or Contractor. A minimum of two grade stakes should be provided at a m�imum horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertical difference of less than 5 feet. u rain ste In tallation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the approved grading plan, and the typical details provided herein. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrain systems and/or changes to the subdrain systems described herein,with regard to the e�ent,location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading or other factors. All subdrain systems shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor (except for retaining wall subdrain systems) to verify line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Adequate time should be allowed by the Contractor to complete these surveys. Excavation All excavations and over-excavations for remedial purposes shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading operations. Remedial removal depths indicated on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual removal depths and extent shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading operations. Where fill over cut slopes are planned, the cut portion of the slope shall be excavated, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of the fill portion of the proposed slope, unless specifically addressed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical details for cut over fill slopes and fill over cut slopes are provided herein. Trench Backfil� 1) The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for trench excavation safety. 2) Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding materials shall have a Sand Equivalency more than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the conduit and thoroughly jetting to provide densification. Backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of m�imum dry density, from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 3) Jetting of the bedding materials around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 4) The Geotechnical Consultant shall test trench backfill for the minimum compaction requirements recommended herein. At least one test should be conducted for every 300 linear feet of trench and for each 2 vertical feet of backfill. 5) For trench backfill the lift thicknesses shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction, unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment or method. �� _ -1��--�'=--- •-•� �.- �.�� ,�� S�A BILIZATI�N FILL TYPICAL b ETAIL � OeolCchnical,Envrrorrrrmms7 and MeMrfals Testing ConsWFants _ BETTER PEOPLE.BET7ER SERVICE.BE7TER RESULTS MIN.OF 5 FEEF DEEP LOMPACTED FFEL,BUT VARIES AS RELOMME[JDED BY 7HE GEOTECHNYCAE�CONSULTRNT 15 FEETMrF: J� � — 4 INCH PERFORATEd - PROPOSED6f2RpE PVC$hLKtrRAT 4 INCH SOLID PVC � Za FE T h1i�7 Ot1T1.£'� - .,�..,._, �f��c — � �7 - TYPICAL BEhSCFlIN6INT0 EARTH MAl-ERTA�.S S 4INCH PERFORATED PIC+SL BENLkIN6It3T0 {{ PVC B�CKORAI COruVP�tCFE�FIfJ_ r �r EaRl'Ft MATERIaES 4 INLH SOLED PVC ';��P 30 F�ET MAX pU�� .�... J �, � - �P - 1 �. . ...�.. .................. 2 FeEi+1AIiv - . . � � .........................• • .............. � .. ........f ..... ... .. .,`� -- •••••••••••................................ 5 FEET�SN { GEOFRBRIC[MIRA�f40F�E OR � 1 ��avEo�quiv��n� PERFORh7EDPVCPIPE WiTH PERFORR7IOIJ5 KEYWAY BOTTOM SF{OULD FALING�O� �15.0 FF�1' DESCEND I{VTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER 6EOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLOGISF(TYPICAlLY k/Z OR 15 FEET MIN.) 22 INCH MIN.OVERl.:4P, 5EGVRE�EV�Rv 6 F�El' sc��ouc�ao so4xn Pvc aur��=�rv�, suaRourirs��ey cor�nrncrEo Fzu.. aunEr's rn 5E Pf.AC�D EVERY I474 F'�ET aR LE55.� � 5 CUBIC FEET/FOOT OF%q INCH-1�INCH OPEN GRADED RpCK �� ..-.�=-�:•r ; _ ;�=��:-Y�� .�'�,��-1x � �'�-��-�� ]l�r�r BUTT'RESS TYFICAL ❑ETAIL GaoDedrnlr�i,Env[�annmrira7nndMofdlafs Taatlrtg Cansuflenf� BE7TERPEOPLE.BE7TER SERVICE.BE77ER RESULTS IfkT:,aF 7�EET 0£FA CO,NPAGT�D FiE_L,BEJT VAREES h5 RECOkIMENDE�Bv THE 6EOTECHNICAL CONSULTpNiT PROPQSED 6RADF F5 FEETMIIS-� 4INCHPERFORATED � PVLBACK�RAi 4 I�H SOISD PVC OUTtET l0 FE T ASThf �� - �� TYPICA�BEPICHIN6INT0 COMPETENT EARTF!MATERIA -.' .J 4 INCH PERFORATED - PVC BIiLK6Rf�i J �IChL BE6rlCFS[iJ5 - n115PRC?'Fp�kL r INTO COMPEFENF 4INCFf SOLID PVC - t P�5' 3p� µ�{x EARYH MRTERIRLS � QUTlFr - J�.`�� - T F-P ` � ' a r!� • • -...................... z��e{nnrN - l • �� • s�.. . .. ........ .. .. . .... 1 .....�...........• ••- ..................................................................................... t I �5 FEET MIN GEOFABRIC(MIRRFi i40N OR f �PPROVED�i�UI�+�LEhi h�` PERFORRTED PVL PIPE WI'fFl PERFORAlZONS � ��p��T ICE`/WAY BOTTaM SHOULD FACIASG Da DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER 6EOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOL06IST(TYPICAIlY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) f2INCH MIN.OVERLAV. � SECURED EVERY 6 FE�T SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVC OUT�ET PIPE, SSIRR4UhlAED By C4hhPAGTE6 Fif..!_. �UTLE'.'S Tp 9E P'tACEp EVERY?00 FFEr�R L��S.� � 5 CUBIC FEET/FOOT OF%INCH-1'/z INCH OVEN GRADEDRpCK I �. �� • -ti_" ' 'Y__—"_ `��-�_.j �,��,� m �S�r��,��a. ,�,�,�� CANYON SUBDRAIN SYSTEM TYPICAL DETAIL C.evfechitfcef,Enrlrvrtmnnldand+Hrtarlds T'va�lrrp Caasullanls BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVlCE.BETTER RESULTS CONTACT BETVIEEIV SUTThBLE AND UNSUITABLE MRTERIAL TO BE RF+S!RV� PROPOSED GRApE� � � — — . ��A�� .'•� � 6EOFkBRIG(MIRAFL I40N OR APPRQVED�J?L'6.iEt� r. ' •r . .. - ..-�'� 6 ENCH COE.LECT6R 7FPE � (SCNEDfI[.E 40 PERFORATE�PVC PFPE � _ I WETH PERFORti3SON5 FACIN6 DOW{�� EXISTIN6 NATURAL6RApE - . , . , • _ ... .�� • . •; /y ,. � • . .. .-" � I2 Ih6CkE5 4VIN.OVERIIP,SELURE6 EVEkY 6 FEE i �'.�� T--:�=H NfFN' =, -�._ - . � �,r � t UI35UITkBLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED y . . �I S•^.•�4;. '• � , � . ':.:,� .'.:., ,'� �~ i�.._�:� `� y y� Q 9 CUBEC FEET/FOOF OF%�INCH-S Yz � INCH CRUSHED ROLK TYPECAL BENCHEN6IIVF GOi41AETE3JT EARTH MRTERFALS, ,� ��'�� CONkPETEI+ST EARTH MATERIALS NOTES: �x�Y� Y� y�x��f� 1-CONTINUOUS RUtJS EN EXCE55 OF 500 FEEF LON6 WILL REQUIRE RN B INCH DIAMETE[Y PIPE. 2-FINAL 2d FEET OF PIPE AT OUTLEf WYLL BE 50l.LD AND BACKFILLED WT�i�1 LOAhPACTED FLNE-6RAINEQ EARTH MATERIALS. CANYON SUBDRAIN TYPICAL OUTLET �2p.p��µ�» � 6EOFRBRIC(NSRAFf I4�hf OR APPRabEd cQiJiVRl.EM11T] F2CiFC]S�b GRnbE� ^ `� — FYPICALl,Y!0 0 FEET COfA�AC'�D FILL BUT Vr4R?E � I .O 6INLHSOLED PVC7FPE - �y • � � 2'/. �Y . . FNCk-�i. FNCFlCRUSHED .------. RQCK �A FEET H,FRf J� IMCH SOLiD PVG PIPE 5 INCH PERFORA�D SLFIEDUl.E 40 VVC€TIPE �. . �=��i �,��-,��, o ��,�,��,��, ,�,�,�` CUT LaT TYpICAL DETAIL Geotechnfcal,L�nvlrwrlmnu!and�IAMliafs TexfM�g Con5ultanfs BETiEft PEpPLE-BE77�R 5ERVICE.B�El�RESULT5 � � �� _ �� a REMOVE 11N5UITABLE MATFRIA � �� I � PROP05E�GRA[]E I � 1:1 PR�SECFfQhf TO COIV�.pE�7�IT EARTH MATERIALS I � OF2iC-Z3RL SRnDE ! � COMPACTE��ILL� A �' �' � ❑VEREXCRVAT�ht�1D 32�CQh1PACT ^ A� 5 FE�Mih�UT V/dRTcS t � � ,��. . � � LOMPE-S��iT fhR'�E A4,4F�RIRLS - 1:1 PRpSE�DN TO GahtPET�NT �' �j' EARTH MATERIALS � t�fOTE:R�MOVA�BQTTQNI5 Sf�fOi.1La$E 6RIlDE�WITN A MIh'TMUM 21 FRLL Y4LVaRpS 5TRFET pR dTH�R SUETA9LE AREA{RS flE�RhiTiVEO BY-S'�iE 6FATFCNh1ICAL CQPfSIJLTrl�1"f]TQ AYOiA PON63.h16 S�LO'+V TNE BVELDIhl6 t34TE�W3�ERE DES£GI�1 LU7 L�T5 ARE E7(GwVnTEtl EN'k�TRFi.Y T_�iTG COhiPE'fEPSF ERRTH MhT�RIAi..S.OVEkE?[CAVhTiO1�E A�AY STEEL EY tti'�E�EO FDR HARO-ROCK CQNALTIQltiS QR 7AA�tRTRLS YFiTF? VARIABLE EXPANSION POTEtJTIALS --Ni--_ I'f' -- - �_ ��f:� �r 1=�.`�"�``.'p C7_�.sti.._' . -- _ _-��= �',��,�,� 9 �5,�,�-,��-,�� ]�,�� CUT 1 FILL TRANSITI�N L4T TYPICAL DETAIL Gooeechqfcef,Envkonmanlef arrd6fw[afafx Teeling Cuneuflah[e BfITFR FEOF'LE.BETTER 5ERVICE.HETrFF[RESIIZT5 � � �� - � � _ • . . . . �� r pR�yx��1.&��a��`0'�' + . ' ;. ' � : �. E��,,�uE�s. ,� " ,�� ; �• ��,piR�4E��.' . �.'. � '��.. PROPOSED 6R/sOf d•w• • ' j,l}•��.►rj!j� - ' ' •� I . - .,• r• � �' L��s.' �� . _ •• • '•y .. . •. ,�� 1:]PR0.7EC3'i�l TO ..�._.. � � — — ._._._. _». � .....�. �� =~,• �. , •J.:' n �. ,`��— — CplMETEh}F�ARTI-1 � — — ' � MATE72IAL5 ,.-�.� ...�.-- ' '••� � � .�-� ._T� � . � COMPACf£p�Z11 .� � _ � +�— } ..� ;', � .'��:� ,�� 5 FEET AAEr!BL3T VAREES •,Qt1E'R��CCR'tf,�T,�•Anl{S�N�RCT }.,- i � � ' _- �- 5r.. .. ' "1.� r, ."� J ��R�py„5 .. - . -f , ! :� J N�E��^[N .. , . . � �ti.� . , �,t. � - ::�- � `° ,,J�•� NOTE;REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE 6RADED Wi i rl A MITIIMUM .� '.y/ 2%FALL TOWARDS STREET OR OTHER SUITABLE AREA(AS y' . f]ESERILSIi�p BY TF{E 6EpTECriFSICIS�COlJSJi..TANTJ T4 RYQT�7 TIPICAL BEWCHLN6INT0 A0�1pIhl6 BELOW THE BUII.DIN6 CpAtPETEhIT EARTH MATEkIAIS NOl�:WHERE pESfGN CUF L4T5 RRE E7{CAV.a'fF0 Et1TTRELY RdTr] GOMPETE3JT EARTH�hATERIALS,OVER£J[CAVRTIflN MAY ST�f.6Y NEFOE�FpR Fir1Rp-RpCK LOPlDITIOtdS OR IhA'S'ERULS YJFTH VARIABLE EXPAt�5IpM14 Vp'FElJlIALS �.�`�.T,,�' � , . , ��.��'-'��9 f�EYWAY & BEN�WING TYPICAL DETATLS ��'�'��' � ��'�'�'f ��'�� CUT OVER FILL SLOPE Geotechn7cal,Emdrvnmerrtal and Maroriefs Teatlng Consulfenls 6ETlER PEOPLE.9ETTER SERVICE.BETTEA RESULTS PROPOSEb GRIV AE CONTACT BEN/EEFJ SUITABLE/iND .� UfJSUETABE.E MRTERYALS TO BE REIYIDVE '.�� .� .� EXISTING PIATURhL GR�SQE ' � � '� - . � �� BL��+ ��/ - yJ- PROPOSED GRAOE �� OVERBUILD AND CUT BACK TO ll-IE PROPOSED GRA{� LONiPRCSED FIEL �a TO BE CUTBAGK g� �¢Ep H � �.�` / J�� .�,`� 1:1 PROSECTION TO - �t�' COMPETEiVT EARTH �y� ! ��'� 7+ShT�RiA - ��.� ! �,(f' i � -' � °Qy � �►�r` TEMPORARY 1:1 CUT - :� � � : ' ,....:. �/.....,.........:.: . . .. . . ............ •.................................................. +r I :::� .r - • .- . i . '. ... . .'. .. , _ � .F. .. • '�� . � .. .�. ..�� I `�O 1 2.0 FEET MI�l--' KEYWAY BOFTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE 15.Q F�ET KEYWAY DIMETI5ION5 PER GEOTECHNILAL CONSULFANT/ GEOL06IST(T/PICAL.!Y H/Z OR 15 FEET MIN.) NOTE� PIATURAL SLOPES STEEPER FFCA@�f 5:2(N=�MS�SY BE BENCHED INTO LOMPET��lT EARTF{MATEE2EAlS !_=�.` . __--=�� -- - � - KEYINAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS ��' � ��'��''��'�' '��'�•` FILL OVER CUT SLOPE Geqtpchnical�ElIYUOIIR18I1�Md Me�BlIdI4l�OStf,+�CCIIJLNBl/fS BETiER PEOPLE.BETTER SER VICE.BETTER RESULTS ................................................................•---.............-•------•--------------........-•----------�-��`'�CnC}"'� .`,'r,— �......'.•_•.'"� PRoaosEb r�a� 'y: ;"; � �°�� - ,��:._ `�::,.-: �.� � - ,l��:y � � EXISTIN6{VATURAL 6RAf]E - . ,,`'Y� � � p�L}�Q'� }.`'��y Lf]�YlPAL:IE�r'�i.1. � ��;;y� �� ' ��a��s �<�v�.ti h c: {a FEEF�c�L) - .• ��O�'hg�,E�� .�',�,��"�' t CQNTALT BE7VlEEt�15ULFRBLE AND UNSUfTABLE SL�n� }.{ EARFH MATERIAES TO BE REMavE -.- � '� / :.. �°�, � � .� GUT SLOPE - :. -� �,��• � :,�• I �L5 � ...�. — �,�,,��'�.�� •��. ''�� I ��rR �—VAREFS(B FEETTYPICAL . � .. ��.� �' ��- �� ' Uo� ` KEYWAY BOTTOM SNDULD DESCEN6INT6 SLOPE . f5.fl FEET� NOTES: KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER GEOTELNNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLO6IST(TYPICALLY N/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.} NATURAL SLOPE�STEEPER FFfAN 5:I(H:�MUST BE BENCHED INTti COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS THE CUT SLOPE MUSF BE CON57RUCTED FIRST F _;Y•N.��"L��.��'� :r�l � KEYWAY & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS '�"��'�' G �"�'�'�'�'�� 1�'�`'�" FILL SLOPE Ge�otetMelrwf,EnvHarrmonMl arnl MeferJola Tesd�Comulferlfs BETTER PEOPLE.BETTER SERVICE.BETTER RESULTS PROPOSED 6RAd� - �� -r�4p� . � . � ��°:,,:'—�_ . �,.. ..:. c°� ,��'�-�, f-- — EXISTING NATURAL GRA6E � , . � J ,�'� - : ,�� . COhAPACTE�FS1,i � �� - �fe�`� �y — CONTACT BETWEEN SULTABLE AND 'y�yr� VAf:FES s' lINSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REM6VE - ��' f4 FEET TYPTCkL) I:1 PROTECTION TO ��]�� f COMPETENT EARIN S � 0E�` PROP�ED TOE OF SLOl�E ��-�y��l TEMPORARYI:IGUT •�r 7 s ']�.�t]}�" � / �,,�v� A� :.;.. .� y J ��µ� ..._ �. � � . � .:.:.>.� . �r,T E ... ............................................. ...................,......,.,.......,.. • •'- � • ,..i l: ..�.. . �hRXES(6 FEET7YPIC+�L ' � . �. ; •��. .`: ` ,:.� �fl . . - �/- .�. =i'— . , ,.. /�� =.--�— 2 0 FEET AAI� KEYWRY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO 25.0 FEET SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSLONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT/ GEOLOGIST(TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.} NOTES: IJAll1RAL SLOPES Sl-EEPER THAN 5:1(H:V)MUST BE BEh�HED:i�]TO C07�APc f'ENT EAR7�N,Al'FRTALS - --�-�� ` i�_- ._=---:Y�--.� _ _ .�'��+,rrtl� � ,§'��-��-�,. ll.�n�.. OVERSIZE ROCK TYPICAL DETAIL Gcolochnfcal,EnHrwemmfa!and Maicr�nfs Trsd+�g Canse+llnnrs BETTER PEOPlE.BETTER SERVICE-BETlER RESULTS PROPOSED 6RR4E r�'�`�.#�r� 1 �'�,,: j• �_r�,. �-'""`"""��'.7�� hT-.� ?^f� `T _ 7 I- �.�7 ��y. �--J' �"f� 1�:- 'f-. �. �- ��' • f' , - i �''Y � �r - '_,,y_�- ' �u f Tr / ��+'1J-,.y�'�y� S} � � Y' _ ' "{�- � 'f y � 'r, -t .^.��` �� -�!�, � � •r��f^��.- ^`-��!Jf,%- �- �'i'„•�y''?-'� 'ry �T'� , �`��i_ �� '�V_' ' �� -r d��f�r?�� ✓�M1 • - /- T'��-LY� -��C r"T .. �+ `" ` rI-'- ` .r • , �I•r�'��''''.�'��-' ' �� F ��'`lY' ! i .J � Ii.'r.=- r:- �;7r;y_`� �• _�� V- . "�''}�� '-�-� ff'•L-' , �{ L, a �:. ! �, ..�.._.,�;�';,T i��''�- �, ��]i�-1 ��-_V'�-'"-Y /.�}� '�'J-F-� _ �-f-+,��r_i��.l'I;7_+'-•,_ � PROFOSED SLOPE FRCE /ti��r• - _+r �^j� �- �' r-�r+'-'"(i:-r`;'j•r�:_`::. _ j .�7y:f 7.''- y��-7�1�f �— ^�� i.;r` r..�..� �T-�.- ,r.l` '.J";.��.I.�� -� I�_r��,�i�_�J. � � I CAhSPAC'fEp FILL �0.0 FE �'R1It�� I � ! �� f5A FEETAIi�—� 20.0 FE Y kSN GOMP+ILTEQ FT�L ' 2:l��LA�R :t , .�� . �" .c:.. ,_��;,� � . � ,r . 4�FiT MTN r , . .. .^Y. :�, r - . .. ' �,..,L . 4i�?• � . • _ , .• • � . . . . , ' . . . frJ.O�E��41.Iv . 'ca+�P,acr�o Fx�.�: - � '� '`' • _ , .` . . � -. -�, , . LOAIPhCTFd�'..w� WINpRdW PARALLEL TO SLOPE FRCE CRO55 SECTlON A-A' OVERSz7_Ep BOULDER CQN�PtiCiEp FILL 3ETTING OF APPROVED �y; �,t �.-r, � NOTES: GRANULARMATEf2IRL Rr�� w ��.+; ?. ��.� . .t ry�w _ ,P• OVERSrZE ROCK IS LARGER THAN , ��,� '`�`` B IPIGHES IN MAX DIAMETER r 1+' ;;5�. ;�,uYy.��ky .i�y'h!-`�':':itl�^�..�1•' � EXCAVATED TRENCH OR DOZER V-CVT �� Q � LEGEND i� � :, Locations are Approxima[e k � � i� p� ^� 1 Geologic Units 1 �, �: � � W � 'ti � �—� `�r' 169"_y 'c ' � i ° = � Afu - Artificial Fill, Undocumented � � �" � 1 � �L � s � � — ' - � �-�— - Qya - Young Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits �.. i � (Circled Where Buried) �"� � � � � 9 j . � . � � � , � — �9 � • ` Symbols - � � = � � i �� . + � --�- � ' ~ � � � e ��' �� - Limits of Report � Q , ^a 9� � I i TP-4 1�1 �� E� '7 S�x�R � '. i T.D.=9' S� � � ti 1�' - NOG.w. � �.x��'"` •. � Test Pit Location ' -- - -- - 13-3 '• �.- j I _ i i , TP-4 IncludingTotal Depth and �_ � � - T:D._=31.5 � � Tg` �. 1 � T.D.=9' I C_�� 3�, � -� } \� N O G.W. Depth to Groundwater � '�. � �� B-4 ' �� .� � �. = � a � � � i � T.D. =20' l �� p1, - Boring Location s � ` NO G.W. �� 1 �� No'c,�, (Engen Corporation) � ` 1 � , 1 , �, � �Q February 3,2000 �._ , Y _0 3-5' ' _'`\ 1! - ��1 69_,; � ffl ` �' �` � ,.- � � i0_12� - Recommended Removal Depths � 1 l ��a' � ' � � •_� 1 3y��• `' � � =_ ❑-T2� �•� ` � � TP-3 '� `o ` �.�-�.�� Y � T.D.=9 d ` � 1 l..D. 1 Noc.��. � _ , l� �-e � 1 - f � ��" �9`° � � a , �� . �� ._�- , � � ' � 3� � \ � ' � _�_ _. _ _ ` n 1� � 3-5 — � �-�1��' .•1 ....... � � �� ^ _ � � 1 _ - �\ Q` 1 � _ � ` �� .� � GEOfECH�N1CAL NlAP � � l �'.o.=��.�� •_a��' � . . "�� ■ r i m • �f LOCA TED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TEMECULA PARWAY AND PECHANGA PARKWAY G.Y�.C�3� � 1 � � ' ti �� TP-1 a _ CITY OF TEMECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r � �� tip�_n �� _ APN 961-440-010 � � � � � , / PROJECT PECHANGA SQf1ARE � U �J -� _ � �_ � � CLIENT MR. JUDD KESSLER � TP-2 �� r $_� �" � � PROJECT NO. 171610-10A �p H � T.D,�3�.� _. DATE FEBRUARY 2017 7,;° � - �� " � ' h SCALE 1:40 _ ' , DWG XREFS '�` �l � � REVISION ' � � - DRAWN BY JDG PLATE 1 OF 1 � 1 Sc6'-9 Cf— r - ' � � � � � / �(� ." � =�. �rF'�-. �5a��t� � _ r-;1,�� - -- - - IN�. ' - �eo��ch��ica�, � , nvironmental, _ anc� }`I�a�eria�s �estin� �onsu�tants Earrh Struta �eat�rhnicat $er��ires, Inr. tsr�,:hnicul, Earir��nn��r.�J[�rn,r i1u.*�ri:�I: 7��titana{;��muir.�=sr; September 15, 2017 Project No: 171610-70A Geocon Project No.T2652-22-05 Mr.Judd Kessler Oil and Water Pechanga Parkway, LP PO Box L Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California Reference: Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California, dated February 3. Introduction Earth Strata has prepared this response to the Review Comments letter for the above referenced project prepared by Geocon West, Inc. dated September 8, 2017. The nineteen (19) comments will be listed below followed by our response to each comment. The following changes and clarifications should be considered part of and attached to the report referenced above. COMMENT N0. 1 1. "Infiltration Basin - The base map utilized as the Geotechnical Map depicts an infiltration basin along the western and southern portions of the site. However, the geotechnical report does not mention this or provide percolation or infiltration data for basin design. Infiltration test results are required for all projects great the 5,000 sf. Consultant should provide percolation/infiltration test data in accordance with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Low Impact Development Best Management Practices Handbook (Handbook), or discussion explaining why this testing is not included." Response - Infiltration was addressed in a separate report by Earth Strata, Interpretive Report for Infiltration System Design, Proposed Commercral Development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and -016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated February 2; it is our understanding that this report has been accepted by the City of Temecula. 4718� RE�II�,�GTON ��%EN�IF, TE\��IEC:tTL.A, C.-� 92590 951-397-8315, ESGSI\�CCOV�I C�MMENT Nd. 2 2. "Site Description - This section mentions the previously existing Pala Road at the site but does not provide additional details. Consultant should provide a description of past use and anticipated conditions at the site,including aerial photograph review information." Response - The past use of the parcel was as part of the previous alignment of what is now called Pechanga Parkway; since the realignment the site has been vacant.As described in the original report, anticipated conditions at the site generally consist of inedium dense artificial fill underlain by loose to medium dense alluvial deposits. The alluvial deposits are underlain by Pauba Formation materials at depths of approximately 19 to 22 feet below existing grades. CQMMENT NU.3 3. "Proposed Development and Grading - This section is general and does not address the unique development at the subject site. The Geotechnical Map depicts a gas station/convenience store, but the project description describes a generic commercial development Consultant should provide an accurate description of the proposed development including locations of improvements, types of structures, and a discussion of the infiltration/storm water basin (s). Describe planned site grading, including estimated depth of cuts and fills within the planned building pads." Response- Proposed development consists of remedial grading to create a compacted fill mat for the proposed gas station convenience store and as Plate 1 depicts,gas pumps with a canopy. COMMENT NO.4 4. "Vicinity Map - The Vicinity Map is vague and does not provide an exact location of the project. Consultant should provide the exact location of the site on the Vicinity Map with site boundaries." Response - The approximate location and boundaries of the site are shown on the revised Vicinity Map,attached.The"exact"location of the site as well as project boundaries are shown on Plate 1. COMMENT NO. 5 5. "Field Exploration - The field exploration consists of four borings excavated in 2000 by EnGen, one of which is along the north side of the proposed gas station/convenience store and four test pits, none of which are located within the gas station or gas island footprint 10 to 12 foot deep remedial removals are recommended in these areas. The exploratory excavations in the canopy area do not extend below the recommended removal. The consultant should provide the basis for their recommended remedial grading given the location and depths of the exploratory excavation." Response-The borings extend below recommended removal depths and are consistent across a 190- foot transect (North-South) across the site. Given the consistency of these borings and our confirmation of similar soil conditions in the upper 9 to 12-feet to the west of canopy; it is reasonable Project No. 171610-70A Page 2 September 15, 2017 to conclude that the soil conditions which remain similar across a 190-foot north-south transect also remain similar 40 to 120-feet west of the borings. Removal bottoms will be tested during grading to ensure minimum in-situ requirements of 85% relative compaction are met and excavations will be deepened if and when necessary. COMMENT NO.6 6. "Laboratory Testing - The report incorporates laboratory testing from a previous consultant. The report should include a statement accepting responsibility for the use of the laboratory results. The description of Appendix C indicates the consolidation tests were performed in 2000 by EnGen and are shown on Figure C-1. However, Figure C-1 was not included in the appendix. Provide the referenced laboratory test results or describe the basis for evaluating the potential settlement" Response -Yes,we accept responsibility for the previous testing. Settlement was evaluated based on the referenced laboratory testing as well as liquefaction and dry-sand settlement analyses based on the data presented in the referenced EnGen report.Additional laboratory testing will be conducted as necessary during construction. CQMMENT NU. 7 7. "Faulting - The faulting section should include a discussion of the ground cracking which occurred in Wolf Valley in the late 1980's early 1990's and the report should clearly conclude whether the site is affected by this hazard, or that is not affected." Response - The area is susceptible to ground cracking, subsidence, and liquefaction. It is for this reason that remedial grading of 10 to 12 feet below existing grades into competent alluvium (defined as an in-situ minimum relative compaction of 85%) for structural elements was recommended in our original report; the recommended remedial grading will address the low density soils susceptible to these negative settlement effects by compacting them to a minimum of 90%relative compaction. COMMENT NO.8 8. "Ground Preparation for Fill Areas - The consultant states that removals should be performed until "competent alluvium is encountered:' Consultant should provide a definition for"competent alluvium"." Response- For alluvial removal bottoms a minimum in-situ relative compaction of 85% is considered "competent". Project No. 171610-70A Page 3 September 15, 2017 COMMENT NO.9 9. "Cut Areas - This section provides recommendations for buildings in cut areas and appears to be in conflict with the remedial grading recommendations. Restate specifically for this project." Response - Sometimes clients redesign projects; when this occurs structures can change locations and sometimes new structures are proposed. These recommendations are presented to address any such changes should they occur in an attempt to reduce needless delays in project progression. If cut areas are required, the recommendations of this section will apply. Based upon our knowledge of the site, cut areas will not occur. COMMENT N0. 10 10. "Utility Trenches - In this section of the referenced report repeatedly cites the 2000 version ASTM D1557. Consultant should cite the most current test method or remove the year designation and indicated that most current test methods are being utilized." Response-We will use ASTM D 1557. COMMENT 1V0. 11 11. "Tentative Foundation Design Recommendation - This section provides design parameters for shallow foundations, but the report does no describe what type of foundations will be used for the gas station canopy (shallow spread or cast-in-drilled-hole pier foundations). Clarify applicability of recommendations to the canopy foundations." Response - We anticipate only shallow foundations. If the developer changes the proposed canopy foundation to deep foundations we will provide recommendations at that time. COMMENT N0. 12 12. "Settlement- The referenced report does not provide the building loads used to calculate the anticipated settlement. Clarify the assumed loading (magnitude of column or wall loads) used in determining the anticipated settlement. Also, clarify consolidation testing as described above." Response - Low loads are anticipate are anticipated and should be on the order of 1 to 2 linear kips and column lads less than 20 kips. See consolidation testing response above. C�MMENT N�. 13 13. "Lateral Resistance - The provided lateral resistance is stated to be valid for footings placed against either compacted fill or competent alluvium.The grading recommendations appear to result in a building founded entirely on compacted fill. Clarify if the structures can be founded in alluvium." Project No. 171610-70A Page 4 September 15, 2017 Response - As stated fill "or" competent alluvium (see above for definition). Based on the recommended 10 to 12-foot removals,we anticipate foundation on compacted fill. CUMMENT NO. 14 14. "Retaining Walls - The retaining walls section indicated that it is valid for walls up to a maximum of 8 feet high; however, the report does not provide a seismic lateral pressure for retaining walls in excess of 6 feet as required by the 2016 CBC for structures with seismic design category of E. Provide a recommended seismic lateral pressure for the retaining walls over 6 feet in height if planned for the site:' Response-No retaining walls are proposed in the current plans for the development.The section was included in case design changed, it may be disregarded since no retaining walls are proposed. If design changes and retaining walls over 6-feet become part of the proposed development, seismic loading will be addressed at that time. CaMMEKT N0. �.S 15. "Building Floor Slabs, Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations, and Subgrade Preparation -The referenced report recommends materials below slabs should be pre-watered; however, a description of pre-watering is not provided. Clarify what is meant by pre-watering and give recommendations describing the process for pre- watering of the soils." Response-The pre-watering is discussed on page 17,last paragraph. COMMENT NO. 16 16. "Corrosivity - The report indicated that "pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being corrosive to most common metallic components...". Please provide the source of this classification." Response- National Association of Corrosion Engineers, "Corrosion Basics and Introduction", 1984. COMMENT NO. 17 17. "References - The referenced report References should include all relevant geotechnical and geologic sources that would be reviewed for the type of investigation and as a matter of the standard practice. Please review and include historic aerial photographs, well data, hazard maps for the site, the seismic design programs that were utilized, etc... List online sources that were used for information and calculations." Response - The majority of these references are listed throughout the text were applicable. However we have added the references mentioned above to the revised "Reference" list attached at the rear of the text. Additional hazard maps, well datum, etc., are included in the attached "Additional Figures" section included at the rear of the text. Project No. 171610-70A Page 5 September 15, 2017 COMMENT 1V0. 18 18. "General - Consultant cites outdated ASTM test methods. Current applicable test methods should be cited throughout the report." Response-Acknowledged. Changes from"-00"to "-12"have been implemented. COMMENT NO. 19 19. "General - Geocon did not perform a review of asphalt concrete or Portland cement concrete pavement recommendations as they were not included in the referenced report" Response-Acknowledged. The opportuniry to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or require further clarification,please notify this office at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ]EAIE�']C'lH[ �'7['][�A�']['� �G�]E�O�'H'IE�C]H[�1[�f�1L �]Ell��][�C]E�, 1[1�cC. �O�C.SSIp�� ' ��.;•._`':�'/.`,: ��w� ��SGf;,{'�� {F� �J:��r'��-�L�-��1 ` !Li �J� � �/J ��.•.y �: �rJ / r!/ �� T � � No. 692 ,� z l �_��, �/% � � � �Hp• � � �� ':C�. :�;:i! '..� � � � � �f � � t�� `c� ''� ---�'.�'4�' � �� _;1 �;':�[)' + ._�� ' r 7ft1�C}��;� Aaron G.Wood, , �r � Stephen M. Poole,PE, GE �.,�s��,�;:�;�� ;� PG CEG � ,�s�f` Principal Engineer � ��s��%��f Principal Geologist ;.:'��, �,;�{�;� -�-�---- - - . ��._..-��-�/ SMP/AGW/mw ":;�;.t.- :,; ;, . �.>- . . Attachment: Review Comments (Rear of Text) Revised Viciniry Map- Figure 1 (Rear of Text) Revised References (Rear of Text) Additional Figures (Rear of Text) Geotechnical Map- Plate 1,Revised September 2017 (Rear of Text) Distribution: (2)Addressee Project No. 171610-70A Page 6 September 15, 2017 Review Comments GE��ON f � W E S T, 1 N C. G E 0 T E C H N I C A l ■ E N V I R Q N M E N T A lJ■ M A T E R I A l 5 � I'r��jcct Ntt, 1�2G5�-?�-�� Sept�ittbcr Ho "_•'U I 7 l�;a�1h �tratf+ (i�r�tc�hnic7i S�n ices. Inc. �?l 8�4 Remin�tcm Avenue I'e�necula, C'alitornia 9?�9U �0.ttention: R�tr. �lephen Potile, C;W; �uhjrct: GE:O1l:CIiNIC'AL, 1'HIR�-l'AE�I�Y tt_L;VIC�Vd N.�f7-t).31R ?�i Si:RVlC'!�: �'I A 1 IC)N I��;C'1�fANG:� PAkK41�'r�1Y S1WC TE!�1EC1.�LA ANU P�CE-1l�NC�A !'�iRK`'��.�5"S �I k�:Ml�:Cl1Lf#.CALIFORNlA heter�s�c�: I'r��li►�ii�lut�ti' Ueu�c�rinricuJ /��r��r��r��rii�f- XE��arar�, 1'r•rr��c�.c�� ('c�»u�r��•ciaJ !)��lcy�nrc�ltl, :1.��.��sa•ur:s Pc1rcE�1 :Viu»her 9b1-�-�C1-(11(1 rurcl 9<rl-�l�fl-ftfG, Lcacule�l on the:� Sc�iitlriv�,�•I C'��i•n�r• r�f' 7�F:'�GIf�;C'(.r'.-�I, 1'crrk►ti�cr�� crncf f c�rfu��t�a F'arlt7i�uv. C.'i;►• uJ� 7e�neculcr, kivETr.��i<!c� C'urntlt�, C'r�li%i�•�ricr, ��ra��arcd hy I:arth Strata Geotechnical Se�'vices, M�„ Projcet I 7 I G l(?-1 OA dated F'ebruary 3. ?Q 17. D�ar�Ir. P�jc�le: [n aicc�rdattce �+•iYh thc rc.quest c�f Mr. Sc��ri ('aoper w�ith [!�e c,ic� i�t' 'Tet�i�eula, Geuccm W'cst, Inc, (Gee�cc�n) has �oyu�aieted u thiret-party �•ca�ir�+� uf' thc refereni:�d `,ecateehiii��il rep��rt prcpare:d bv �arth Strat� Gec�technicxi Se,r�riccs, inc. ([;SCiS). 'I'h� purpose �fthe r�vi�� is tc� presei�t our i�pini�n re�arding the suilt�bility uf lhe s[udy, ain�lusi��ns, and recc�mmen��ti�ms �rc�vidcd �vithin tl�e t'�t�CZIIC�I� C�C)CUIi1G1ll. ��COCC211's rcvic�� is hascd ciiz C-`crcn�tv raJ'�ii�E�r�sic% �'ec;•hnrc:ul Citaicl�li»e,c fi�r thf� l�c�ti�re►� c�f�Cit�o�cc�lrtticru! cald Creoio�Iic R�pvrl.�� 30Q0 Editiun. Riti>c�r,efclr C'utr►tl►1 I�Yucicl ('u�?lrul cutcl �6irlc�r C�cu�sc�rrutit»� 1)istrii�t !)esi,�r�t hlir��clhvuk for I o�v Itrrnctct C)c��elc�t�t�rc��N lics! ,�lcr�rcl�E�rf�c�lrr Fruc�trci�s daled �e�[ember 3()ll, C'crl�ot°r�iu G�.�ul�s�,rieer! .5't�rti•ct' ��E��c��iu! f'i�hli�•crlio�i 11'�1, (ir�ic/c�lifrEys fc�r 1�:��r.rluci�i�r�,r cr��d ;1lirigi�tir��T Sei,srnic� T�c'rzcrrcic i�r l..'ult�nrrria and Nutc �y dnt�d 200A, �nd Ci�y of Temecul� Stanclard Plans. PURPOSE AND SCOPE l'he sco�e sei��ic�s ��rf•ormed b,y Geocc,n l��r this �eulechnieal third-party r�vi�t�� ccm�isted c�f lhc follo��ii��: + Revie�v puhfishccl geulo�ic maps. r�lerenced plans and g�.��t�clinical ducuinents, and otl�er literatua•e penninin�,tc�the sit�. • I�vali�ation o�' tl�e suitability c�f' the rcicrenced �,cof�cllnir�l doeu�tlents thr the plfinneci cortunercial clevclopi7�cnl. • f'rer�iratioi� c�f'this thirci-��rly rcvicw Icttcr, 41571 Corning Pluce,5uile IOi s Murriela,Califnrnia 925h2-7065 � Telaphone 951,304,2300 ■ Fax 951 304,2392 SITE AND PROJEC� DESCRIPTION `fhe rupu�l ci�scril�es u c�>it�ii�rrci;il d��'cl��p�ncnt hut duc� nul ilcscribc tl�c �uhjcrt prujc�t. 13a;c�1 un thc: �it� pl,in ulilized �is �i h�isr f'in� Ihc (F��ulc�ch�lrru! ,11��l�. f'lale 1 i�i l. thc rr��i�scd d�:��l�,pmcnt ��ill include �i gas static�il /coi7�enier�cr st��rc huilding. a pun�p isl,�n�i ��ith asa��citjtcd p,irl.in� lut �nii d��i�e ISIe'S, All II7�IItP�IhUI11I�indscapc plantcr iti propc�s�d ��li�iig fih< <�eslern anci southern �i�Mii�ns c,Fche site. I:an�scapc planters are prup��5rd alc�n`, the cast�rn and n��rthcrli pc�rciun5 uf Che site. Yrope�sed fini.,hed �;rade elevatir,ns were+ nut indi�ated i�n thr ,itc pl�tn. '1'lie i�eterrt�ced rrpi�il d�scrih�a �i vacanL undevelc,pec� s'it< <vith t� laycr c�l� undc�cumented artiticial acrnss the sife. 1 he re:purt clid not descrihe pre��iou� site us<��e «r dea�-Ic��irnent. f3ased on uur kitowled�e i�k� tl�c a►-ca, the �ite �ias ��nzrally natural in lyyfi �nd was gradcd a� a ��art of thc dev�lc�pment tc�ihe east hy ?f)O?. `I�hc rct�renced �ent�chnic��l inrestigatic>n i�talude�l the exc�ava�iu�� c�f ti�ur �,e:ateclinical test pits tu dcpth, of�9 fcet aiid fihe reli�7nce c�n tour sntall-tli�in�cier �COI4CIlt11Ci1I E'?C)!'lI7�S �erformed in '_OQU hy 1?nCien C"c�ry�nratic�n. F.SCiS reliec� an lab�,ratc�ry tcsl resultti reported t�� C;nGer� in 20U0 and perfi�nn�d ,oinc additiar�al laborat��i�� testi�►� ti�r tht tiuhjr.rt �tud�. (3�i,cd on this infarmatic�n, ESC;S prot�idi;�1 �ec�tcchnical conclu5i��ns.illC� C�CUl11111Cililaiii«rj: ++i�h respect tt�the prc�pc�sed cle�`��C1�11TiNfll. GEOLOGiC C�NDITlONS �fhe silc: is IllCiilt'iI ti�ha;rr. Wulf�and k'uul�a Valleys jaii� at tl�c. �iiuthen� �itd ��F tlze l'emectila �°alle�, 'I`I�e Wc�lf'VaEley f'ault is ��c�lc��ically m�pped s��uth cif the site. the Wildomar fuult is mapped exst of the sitc anei the V4�illarci fKult is ma�ped ��est ut�tlie sit�. "Chese faults ere assc�ciated �vith the Elsinc�re tauli Zone ilTl[j l}1C Lfi:E11C1' San Andreas fault sy�teni. T�11e sil'e lies appraaiirla[elV l Oq feet rzc�rth�ast af'.i Riv�rsicle C��unty H'ault I I.►iarc� lim� an� is ii��t IocaYed �vithirt a St.�lte nf t'alifornia [°ault I-lazard Guni, WC)If VIIILV 44'flti LhC S1Ll; l7r'�,round cr7ckin� in ttte late 1980's early 199p's. Cieomorp��ic��llS'. the site i� luc;�ited iZear thc int�rsccliun t?I�ihc 'I'enie�.til.j ��id M�irrieta C'r�eks. As sucf� �,cologic units w�ithin the sitE consist ol'youni�ttlluvi�l soils overlyin� Pauba tonnatiun�tl h�cirack. Fill Gvas placec� �ilhin tl�e sitr lict��eln 199(i and 2UO2 in ass��c;iatic�n ��th gradin�; ot tl�e C11I11171tTC1ilI sice to the �ast. The siti: is located �vithin ti Kivcrsidc Count} lone ti�r very high liquefacuon pc�tential and �uithin a Lic{uelacti��n �une: c�n the C;aliliirnia Cicologic;al Sur�+e.�; Seisiuic Hazard �cme Map fnr the"lemecula`uadrangle. �iCnCull I'Yi��Cct No. 1 ZbS2�':-pS � � —. ? _ - - — ticpacmhcr 8.2U17 RE�/IEIM1i COMfVIENTS Cicuc�,n's c�,n�menl� iv��►rdin� tl�e refcrcnce�l r��,nrt ar� prc,vicle�l btl��, f'lu�is�� prc.,vidc a resp�.�ns� ��r ci+��rertive ,artiun tc� the ril� ��I� I rmr�ul.� as a��7rc,�,rititc�. !. lnf`iitration 13asin — I'hc basc m�ip utili«d a, the Gec7t�chiiic��l Ma�7 drpicts �in infiltratic�n ht��in aJong the 44eslerr� anil 51111111t'fll portie��s t�i� thc site, tlo��e�er, the ;�eotechnical repnrt do�;ti nc�t meiiliun lhis t�r pruviclt percolation c�r inliltratiun dal�i f��r basin �le�i�n. Irifiltratit�n test results arc requircii fi�r ;ill E�rc>jc�ls gr4��tcr thart �,OQO sf'. C��nsultunt shoul�l prc�vide percolalic��v'infiltration test data in acci>rd�ncc with Rivei:yicie. C'��unty° Flond C'cmtrnl tind VVat�:r C�msenatiun ()istri�i I.u�� linpact l)evelopiTicnt [3est h1una��mcnt l'ra�tices �landLiac�k (Handbaok), c�r u discussic�n explainin� ��hy ihis te,iii�� is not in�luded. ?. 5ite Ueserip#ion — t'hi� sectiun cnentiians thr prc��ic�ush �aisting Pala �Zo�id at the site but cli�es nut proo�ide additicili��l details. C'�7nsult�int sli�iuld ��r��idr a d�scri}�tion nt �ast use and ��nticipattd conditic�ns�l lhe ,ile, incltidiii�a�rial E�tiot��grapl� 1•e��ie�� intcir�i�uticm. :i Yroposed Uer�elopment and Gradin� - �l�f�iti ;ectinn is �eneral ancj dt�es nc�t iiL�I�CCSti the uniyu� devel��.�nient ar the: subjec[ site. '{��ht GNotert�nical !�9ap depicts a sas statiu��'ccm��enien�� sture, but thc pruj�ci descriptiun describes a gera�ric c:omn�ercial d��lupir�ent. C��i»ult�inl sho�ild �3r«vi�le �ri atcuratr d�scription of tlte proposed developmc�it including ICl(;�j(1C117ti af 1i11�POV4'i171:I1fS, t��x;s nf' structures, anci a discussion ot� the intiltrationfst��rn� tiv�iter basin(;j, I�cscrihe plan�ied site �radin�, includi►�� estimatecl depth of cuts and til]s »�itl�ii� th��}la��ne�� lsuildin�p�ids. �1, '�'icinity l�'fap �- 1"lac Vicinity M�� is v��ur. aild dars n��t pru�ide an excict Ic�catinn nt� ttte proje�t, L'oitsultant sh�7uld provide fhe e�tict locatic�n af th� sitz on ihe ['r�°ii�r�1� .ifup with �ite �iaundurics. �. Fielc! E:�pinrati�� — `�ht �i�ld cxplur��ticm cc�nsists af faur borings e�cti��itc.d iri '_000 hv l:u(ien, 1711� (�Y�N�hich is al��n�, Clie nottli sicie oC thc prc�pc��ed gas st�ltionieonv�nience ste�r�. and tuur test pils, i�une ul' �vliich ar� located �j+itliiii fite �;a� statiuii i�r ea� isla�id f'eiotpri�it. lU to 1? fc�aT deep retttedial remc�vals are recomn�ended in these areas. T'he esplc�rale�ry excava[ions in lhe ian<,py aref� do ne�t extend belo�v ihe recumrnencicd r4m��val. l�h� �onsLiltant shuulc9 �nrL�vide the basi� fi�r llicir rccommended remedial gratlin�;�;i4en the location �►��d depths of rhe c;��lc�ratory excavations. f�. l.abur�tory 7"csting - 'l'he report inc:orJ�urate: Ixbc�rator} testins� from n E�revious eonsult�nt. Cl�e repart shc�uld include a statr;ment accepting respansibilit}� for the u�e of thc labc7ratory result�. 1'he descript:ion Eor Appencli� C I1iC�ICt1IE;ti lhat consolidatu�n te�ts w�ere pertc�ruled in 2OO(1 b�' l:nGen ancl are shown on F'ig�ire C'-l. Ho��ever, Pi�ure C-1 ��+as not incltided iu t.he a�pendir. Prnvide the ref�rei�ced laboratc�ry tcst results c�r deseribe dle busis f��r e��aluating Yhe pcnential settfemenc. 7. Faulting — �'he faultin� section shoufd incl��de c� discussian af ll�� round cr�ckin�, which ��ccurrecl in Woli�Vxllc�y in thc I�te 19$t!'S e�rly 199(}'s �nd the repc�rt should cic:ariy conclude �vhcthcr t.hr �it� is aficctrd by this har�rd, ��r that is n�?t at�fcctccl. R, C;round Preparatinn for Fi99 Areas. '1�he cunsultant states th�t removals should be performecl until "cotxi��etenl ��Iluviwn is ea�counterrd." Con�ultarit should �rc�vidc 8 definition for ..Cbl11E)tt�fil ��LIVILIIlI.'. �icncnn f'rujcel Nu. 12(i��-?7-SJ� ----- • 3~ •- - — -- Scplcmhcr S,2017 `1, ('ut ��rcas I"hi�, s�c�ti<,n prc,��id4� re�i>mm4nd��tiuns fi�r builciiit�,s i�i cut arc<is :�nrl up�tar•s t�� h� ii� ccmflic� ��ith thc rcmcdial �;radin� recc�n�n�rncl��tic�ns, Itc��.�ia s�ic�if icall�' liir thi� F�rc�jcct. f0. [1ti0it�� 'frenches �- In this ��liun tlie �•elercnrecl r��,e�r� rcpealeclly citcs thc ?000 �cr;ion �1�ti'I'h9 131��7. ('c,n,�uhant shc�ul�1 cit� tl�e niost currrnt tctit methc�d �7r reit�c�vc the year [jC.r'Irllill1t�11 ,incl indic�il< thal mu�t currcnt iest mcthucl� ;�rc hciiig utiliicd. I l. `I'entative �'oundutid►n 1)esign liecommenda�tions �!'I�i� section pruvides desi�n �lilfSIllCItfS fur sh<ill,»� fi�undE�ti��ns, hut thc rcpc�rt dac, nc�c dcscrihc ��•hat typ� i�f� t<iuridation5 ��ill be ��si:d t��r the �as st�iti��rl c�jn�ip� (sli�llu�� spread c�r cast-in-drillcd-hc,lr picr fi�und:►iic,i�s). C.'larii�y applii:abiliCy �71�recoinmendatioi►s to Che c.anopy foundaticros. I�. �ctt9ereient 'I'he retcrcncei! rc��ort dc�es nc�t prc��'ide nc� huilcling I��ad; iiscd t�� calculate t1�e �intici��<ited settlett�ent. C'larity thN assumed lu�idin� (ma�nituilc of c<�lumn c�r ��all l��ads) u,�d in �1�tern�it►ius� tl�� i�lticipatec! SClIIC1IleI1L. Alal), Cla�itj� ecros«lidatiun trati3ig a� deticrihrd �hovr, I 3. Lateral Resistance -� 'fN►r nr��'ide�l l�ite�al re�istaiicr is st��t�cl to br VF9I1(I Ii1i' �lllllllll�5 r1IF7CClj a�ainst eich�r c��mpac�ed titl or conipetent al1u�ium. l'he gradin� rrci�itunendatii�ns appcxr to result in a huilcliii� fc�wid�d ci�tircl� ��n ce�i�ipacted fi1L C:Ifu•ifj it�the �tructure, can be Eoun�fed in alluvium. 1�4. Ftetaining V4'alls � "!'hc rctainii�� «°alls secu�ar� indic��te; tli�t it is valid fi�r v��ails «� ta a niaximum �►t� 8 feet Iji�h; ho4�ever, thc re:pi>rl d��es nol �truvi�c a seismic latcral pressure tar retaining t�alls i�► excess c�t'6 feet as requireci b�� the �016 C'aC' f��r structures �viih a �eismic �icsi�n catc►;cir4 cif f:. Pr��id� �i rec��mm�.iaded seasmic I�tLral pr�ssurt for th� ret�inin� �r�alls c��er( 1e�t ii� hei�ht il"plannc;d tl�r lhe sitc, I�. �3uild'enK Fluor Slubs, P��st 'Tcnwia►ncd Slab/Foundation Dcsign Recommcndations, and Suh�rade Preparatiun - �i'he rrtcrcr�cecl report �r.cc,rnmciid� matcrials hel��> sl�hs shaulc� be pr�-w�E�tered: hc�tiever, a d�scripti��n ot�pre-�vaterinst is �yot prc,vided. l'lariFy wliat ss meant hy ��r4-�v�tt�rin�a►id �!ivc recummencln�inn, eleti�ribi�►� �he proe:e�s li+r pre-+aalrriii�.«t'lhe sc�ila. 16. Corrosivit3�--�The report inciicate.th;�t'`��N v��lues l�cic�w�.7 �ri recc�gniicd as bein�curr��sive tu mast i:��inm�n metalli� cumF�anents...''. 1'le�se ��ravide.tlie source of this classiticatican. 17, References "f'hc rcfercnc.ec� rc�o��t Rc�ft>r�e�rce,� sl7c�uld include all relevanc teotechnical un� geolo�ic sc.�urces that �vc�uld b�. rrvie��ed t��r this lypc e�f inve,ligation and as a matter nf'the staridard ps•aclice, 1'lease revie�4 and iitclude hist�iric aerial pll�to�ra��hs, well data, h��rard m�tp; I'c�r thc 5itc, lhc ti�isini� �l�sikn pr«�rams that wcre utilired, etc... List �nline sc�urces that ��ere used f'nr intc�rmltioit and �alculatic�ns. l8. General � C:orisultant cites ��utdateci AS I'M test �ueth�ids. Current applicable test meflzc�ds should be ciled ihrc�ugh�ut the report. 1�). C;eneral -- Cieacon did iiut pertortn �i review c.�t asphalt concrete or Portlancl �canent concrcic (]!i1'�111CI11 I'C40111f11011(�r�tii�ns a5 lhc,y �+�crc nnt inclucled in the referenced report, Cieucnr�I'rnjGct�n �?,(+S?��-f)5 -� • � ��plculhai �,'UI'7 CONCLUSIONS E3a,cd nn �ur rcvicw ot' thc rcferenced d��cumcnt�, it is :�ur c�pirii<�n thftt additic:rnal inf��nnutinn ai7d clarificatiun are rrc�uired tn c��ntc�rm tu Rivrr,src/cd ('uin�t►' �f:C`f!lJICIl/ C}tl1CIC'lr�i4�,s ,J'r�r R��iGti+� r,J' Cfru�Nc•hnrc�crlc�fad(:Nnl��gk� Repr�r�.ti�(?(lOb �,ditian). She�ulci you hxve any questinns re�arding thi5 IetYer, or iF+;e may bE of turther serviee, please cc�ntact ihe undersi�ned at yc�ur c�mvenience. Very truly yc�urs, C�:OCON WEST, I:NC, r�}Ft5�.-��;�� cy1�Al� a�� .-�'ur '�'� ` = 1� .�' -� �� :: �. � rn►To '::-.-f.��_�-� � a��o �� d r�r,.a1� � � � � �, } -, � * L,isa .1. f3attiato � � � Ch�t f:. Rohinsott r*�� CEG '_'316 7 � C;f: 2$9U �� . ' �_ �.. a �QFCAL� ��-� L.A�:C'FR:C;K;hd l7istributiUn;(1 j Addressee (I)C'ity c�f Temecula Plannin� [?epartment, Attn: Scati C�jt�per Cicncon I'rqj�ci Nn,l'2bSd-22-f)5 � • S - Septcmher 8,2p 17 - =��--- � - � - �.. - _�, ��....�_.��;: _ _.,a,.._ . _ .— --�.-•�� °'�=- .e..�- •f �~..� _��.� + �: ♦ + �'''J`•-�'' T �� 1 � ` } . .. t C - . r,�` c e'1+u•.-i. i f . � !' � .•^_ ': [ � �..; �� u.�7��K" � �.s. , � �` �r ��h �x'r ti ' _ � � 1 � ��r. ir �'� � � •�,1 � � ; N ��,...�s�,,_' ; � � �..� : r � i �'* ,- � S ,� ! r 1 :F�•� r � .4�,:�' I i i ' -- � L,r�. a ,� r cw�►� �... �.�. � ' � � ` '� ' ��.� � � y `'�` � ' i ' -. . .._« . 'd- _ .._.. 1.4...:f:�.-a�: '� + �--'"'�+`? �•�r �' S• -�-•i+�Y-'�"+--� �,.._.i�.. -{ � �� f' �_, _� �- _* � _ ; ,,� , � � �`� �:• `i '�� `� , � ' � � ��' „ � �r�^ ti � � .�^ � ti � °. � � ` • ti , r \. � �' ' � � � � y S �' �r�' i I � ' . I �4� ��'r �r � } : �.^ r� a 'k � . �,�� •M.�M.t, �. .=\ . � { I� I � M• � _ 'n�f�.[�yI a'.K�� • � 'r . ; „ • .i I 7 � I i ' r�Y �. . f`� C . G �! ,�, � T ' .. . - - i�'F:.•^—.:..T-...�..��.�. ._._1....L. «� .t. ' _.•,.,�.,�.• .r .�1.t t+�+.e, j' ,. � , �f� �� 1� -�� s.. • f'• ��. .p . l � � 0.F� � '�.s� x t�•T_ i _,;�� '' � `0..'yy. .+t� ��-'� i { �.,�..- � � . � �� r = , . a,�•s� � = •� j ,�: �•ru��y. } ► ' { �Q �� ~a. �-�' �' � . • �*. �( .`�a - ' � ' C � a ' n, '• d "� . Y - `�' � � �� _�T •'� L t ` � y�~y � - - - .� �` �+� i .r"'i� Q ,.�' i+� , . �' ti �.� �},,�a *qyw � � : .•_ •,,;.� � t 4 - --- �----- �' ' :."`�''�--��---�`—� -------�----�ac+- ;�-�----r' �� ;- _- � -� ` .=-� t. �,t ; l -` ��,,.; I! ::�-- f�� .�� z ��_ .-� i , .�.. 4' ' 1: � � ��_� *y � h41'� 1 y �� I��' • [ � �' � �...� � �'' C ' �'`- � r` � - J y �� j � �`�` ' ; , �.. ��_ 1 7 16 10-12A Pechanga Square f � ��_. , y t� f,s�``� � r�--' - _ s � Approximate Site Location �' �;,,,.,�;�;,,, t �C s�� { — _M_�� _�',��. - � - -r �,, � � -- l �.�-- a� 4� ,� l� 5', p� �� i j� �� .;�� i �l.J�d � Zi [•• _ R f� �i e. '•Sy1��.' �� 'l. � � � � 3Yg� �..s{ � k i � �� y[ ' � , ti ��.� �� r /� � J �� 1 �' }�' ',� WM �y • I°� f ."R�'L� �� ; � �.� . � ��I,,ij,r;/ I 4 2r c... -�4' • , � �,,� a � �, t �, ' ,� f � --�+�,�---- - - -----r • �-- -�.., ;� . .�..-�- �- � ��- -E+ ,' i 1 :.N��3n�.. �. �4` _ .a ti A` � ;�` 1\ _.� • �i �' � 4 °�1� ' �G �� -.� � , � �.��..,,:P •� j � � �a' .�__ �� `,� l� µ.� , � � ` � '�'i• a ,��' ; ��„�.�„ i �.s+� , � f � � . �� t � . I � �� tE � � 4 �<, ��"� � ,� '�4 � �i � . �. _. � � � �,� � �_. ..�.::�.�'�._ _ �. I ��,r '� t j. r,. �.. � _�a*�,r+�`s�y� �,��, .. / .JrIi ' � -� �� .4� J,•• ,�•r , •��-�3`, G � .I � �''e�� •�r y:'� r �5�� x C. � � '��'=� d' �� - � �S : � � 6 ;�t t +�" � �+ 1 �}� � '1 � � � *� � ti � ; � ,, _ `'�.�� • , � �1''� � • _-�_; • - � • '��`-_iJ •7 • • �� t� —_��. �,�. __ J � +�~ i , � ' '_�1� .� ? , I I ; �� S� � , � � � ~� �� '� . , ... k . . ... ; � ! � �,w � .. s i, ,.� � ' 7? ! \��:�.tw��"l��1. � j4 •�r:' ,� }, - . I � � t �� i I �,;, � �.,., �,' . � . _. . . �' �: � � . __. � _ i;' , i �� : �' � f' ,��: , 3� i _ � ' � �'r' '� � � � ' .. � '• . ' � _.. .0 ..�r1C?DN�:'ma (�.vWw[!ai�ifmP�Om;Tr�p<��15a^ PECHANGA SQUARE 17151Q-12A �'"� ' SCALE 1:40,625 { ��c+En�:}.,,�...�� t- �,v,�<<��,R�r�,r:��-� - - , VICINITY MAP --- -- -- - ;,�,�� IV��r<<•�;�I�T�rr��7�(.�_��N�,Ir�,�,r, FEB. 2017 FIGURE 1 Revised References References California Building Standards Commission,2016,2016 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24,Part2, Volume 2 of2,Based on 2013 International Building Code. California Department of Transportation,2017,ARS Online,http://dap3.dot.ca.gov/ARS Online/ California Department of Water Resources,2017,Water Data Library,http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/ California Geological Survey, 2017,Seismic Hazard Zone Report 116,Preliminary Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Pechanga 7.5-Minute Quadrangle,Pechanga(sic)County, California California Geological Survey,2017,Seismic Hazard Zone Report 116,Preliminary Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Temecula 7.5-Minute Quadrangle,Riverside County,California DeLorme, 2004, [www.delorme.com) Topo USAOO. Google Earth Pro,2017,Historical Imagery Viewer Hart,Earl W.and Bryant,William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special Publication 42, revised 2003. HistoricAerials.com,Images from 1938 through 2010 Ishihara, K., 1995, Effects of At-Depth Liquefaction on Embedded Foundations during Earthquakes, Proc. 10th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, August 29-September 2, Beijing, China. Morton,D.M.,et all, 2003,Geologic Map and Digital Database of Bachelor Mountain 7.5 Minute Quadrangle,Riverside County, California:U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report OF-2003-103. National Association of Corrosion Engineers,1984,Corrosion Basics,An Introduction,page 191. Riverside County GIS,2017,Map My County,http://mmc.rivcoit.org/MMC Public/Viewer.html?Viewer=MMC Public Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999,Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117,Guidelines forAnalyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California,March. Southern California Earthquake Data Center, (SCEDC), 2017, Significant Earthquakes and Faults, http://scedc.caltech.edu/signifrcant/elsinore.html Tokimatsu, K., and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking,Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,ASCE,Vo1.113,No.8,pp.861-878. USGS,2017,Interactive Fault Map,https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/map/#c�faults USGS,2017,Search Earthquakes Catalog,https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/ USGS,2017,U.S.Seismic Design Maps,https://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php Additional Figures � �:: �. f . Q4� y "r� •"�� ' _ -f • - � j�� ,�,�ya�' . ti�.��+ . . W �• , � � � ,• ��I ' . . �d.. � r�� '� '� .� . � ��,� .,t . �f � ••�! Qps .-- � •� ■ 5fi. 1 . � /��•`" -� �+ r ' / ,� r• �i � .;f� �'' � f f�r � , 7i- ' -7� �'r�'^�rt�+_ �� J�• �r '7 QYa .. � � � , r . . . �-. ■-.�-:"� "��- - ��T`-� --�'-' .�.��- �i..._..�-- - � r � �+ '"_ , ' �� l � --�x' :• � � ► ?��5r � :� r . ��p1� .��'=' �•� 5� �`�,;�- �•e ��- . :_ � � J� ^�� r . �+ ,,,. t � � �' - s,.�� ; ��,;•�\�,a •1 � ,� r � Y ;.�,� .q,n' �.r . � f{ �� , ' r � � � r�+ I'� r'[ . � ,�� +r= �.f �'� � � ,r �� y.� �,�� .� � , � � �� . � � �� . . � �'�� -�%� , - ' � r � y • i � l� �`' � � � � 1 A ��•� � 1 ' . . _� � � � � � �� _ ; ;, r � �� .a. ..s � � • -�• t.*� ��.- . � +�' � '�` f r a�. � �f �{ �� , � �J� j,� _. _r+ f I , . • r�Yl � .s'J. � � • �,� r Sr'�i '?a � '_ � �! �� '. y;y � ^ �•rr��J. �. "� � � � � i ;,+� !� . �� .�` n 1 � Qya .'� � � � , .. � ` � r �� r � �r � � :, . „�� . �;� �7 r ��• r • } f .� sl' •= . e �" .. _ � -��-_ �� . , . ,- � ; -�� --��_r 1 . . . ' r ��...i..�fer..� :_ � --...+ �...�..-�� .. .��-� • ��-��-'�r•�- -' . •- �I�' . �•�!- ' .. -A.��e� - �Ow , r-s ��' ,� .f • �I�/T �f f`--� 4` . y . .��`' J� _ .. +. j[ � r�• F�,.� . �r _ _ ,� . � � . . .-� _ �.. . � , � �`,.� _. �.�.� ��- � -�-�,� � , �� , ,� ��, '� �-}}.��•• ^ k�,: �L�C'i �T � . �� ,�y�. � .. � . ,_ : :�`�, . � r� ��4'�'� .^�Fr�?-�I�f C'J�'CrVr'-��1�=;��L-�i'�. ` � � � � FOR�.fC]UE =�CrfO;"1 '� . ,� Gr`�Ulr'1��a+IDE ' ��l� ..� �.�A� i� .�. y �• ,. - , • . ` _ --� II � ��a • . Ra Qa . � -�� .lf.- i � Qa � . � �� • r.�•� 4� �� „ �. , �� Topographic base map from USGS.Conlour interval 20 feet.Srale 1:75,000. TEMECULA QUADR.4NGLE � i o.s o , z � , nnaes �1� s,aoo 2,sno o s.000 �o,000 �� Feei � o.s o i 2 K7amelers See"Geology"in Section 1 of report for descriptions of units. • Groundwa[er measurement location Pre-Quaternary bedrock units shown without color. —ro-- Depth to groundwater(in feet) Plate 12 Depth to IIistorically IIigh Groundwater levels in Quaternary Alluvial Deposits and Groundwater Measurement Locations, Temecula 7.5-Minute Quacirangle,Califurnia. a p�.. , s � � � DAS �� J� t . � . ��'y}�' •-�� .��' . � � . . . '�y :'�'y� ' l.� • • � • � .� r ,�' .woa . i � ef •�12��f C. )1 �� . � . . .v ---- [r�ti -��f � � p r�� •`. - -- � _. ,__ .�.� • - � .J� . : � M f '2� � �'.��I j7� � •�� • • � • �r�t� r � � ,�... �� Llvoa i - � ��J•� . � . e� �-4� '�*F. �} .? y L 1 � - . .'�• _� � , �� +r j��, 'f��`rr�r�+' . „ i_. ��, ��•��, � f �r r• " ' � .� ► � � ��J�,f� � AYa ' '1 I '1 y�� fl �4 r Y ",' .py,a. � � h� �"^� r �,-- � g 'r� QAs � �; '1 �] r , .i �� .f �- .. � -% . '' �,d� /. 1 � �� r � _�� •''+"� Qvna ��r�% �� .. ,':� , r � . ��S � � r��.� �l �_=.� • t �/F,^� } • :, � �-'�.{ �_ � � �/r ' "� `};: • if r.•F �' �' ,{'-� / � . Ov r ` � '� j . r� � i �r '� .'„/ �,�' .�� ,� ' .�•• �� - Qyd • _ "�� f �• +� f r :r 'y � ' ' . . �j r�VD��*].j••!. Ovua ��ir� . '� '�� r',� (� . Ovoa t. � _ .��y _ t �� s �, , � �a ..r�;'.'i ' �-�;� ' � { ��:�- .�, . �' � �� r � � . ,_ � -��. --:�. Y r . ,,,j_L �� • :aas . � � ac ' •_ + � �I . :r .�t�, � ' j ;�+�,�� ._ '�� a�� .aoa -- �.�/� . '�, ��+��' .r .,�.1 .._., . . - -- _ .:...di_.,.. ... . ;� � � f —�-#�-- �� . . � � .�' , � � $--� � � ; �t . a�,� �• � �,� i f Q�: •af�- . ��!-' ' ' '�' �� , F� �I .�;.� � i � ; � � �- ��ior��.a�.�.�r�n � � -��:`� � ��_ . �,f ��''� • � t�Of�E lQC1crACTi�Ji�! � _ � �'-. ORLANt7Si1Q� �:,1••�-- .' � - .�J �� ri � . ... dvoc � r.�.. �;� ��' � ; �• � :•R � �, ... . � ,� .. , „r•-�• r ' rr �+��.�� _ �. •!�' .��- d� f ��} �7��„ .' Q4 � , v � � f .�, �Qof2 , I f �,� ' � . Q�, r "� - �''� c�orz � y"�.�� r o +; � . Qvof � -�- Topographic base map from USGS.Conlour interval 20 fee[.Scale 1:75,000. PECHA�iGA QUADR�►NGLE ;�� , o.s o , z �� Miles ��I 5,000 2,506 0 5,D0o 7p,000 �l Fee� i o.5 0 + a Kilomelers See"Geology"in Section 1 of report for descriptions of units. • Groundwater measurement location Pre-Quaternary bedrock units shown without wlor. —��— Depth to groundwater(in feet) Plate 12 Depth to IIistorically IIigh Groundwater levels in Quaternary Alluvial Deposits and Groundwater Measurement Locations, Pechanga 7.5-Minute Quadrangle,Califurnia. Water Data Library- Groundwater Level Reports Page 1 of 2 Groundv�ater Le�els for Station 334.�53N117i�95Wooi ...... . ... .. . ....... . . . ... _ Data for your selected well is shown in the tabbed interface below. To view data managed in the updated WDL tables, including data collected under the CASGEM program, click the"Recent Groundwater Level Data"tab.To view data stored in the former WDL tables, click the "Historical Groundwater Level Data" tab. To download the data in CSV format, click the"Download CSV File"button on the respective tab. Please note that the vertical datum for"recenY'measurements is NAVD88, while the vertical datum for "historical"measurements is NGVD29.To change your well selection criteria, click the"Perform a New Well Search" button. � � Station Data Recent Groundwater Level Data Historical Groundwater Level Data _. --- - - - __-- - ' - -- -- - ---- - — — Groundrvater Levels for Well 334753N1171195W001 ,sn�a.�: , - - - ,� ; I �waI r! <ur l dc c� lt?4�li ; ��jurtli�mably d�il�: •IZ.! .�IClllli�Sllf�i"l(t' � . I 11�i11.0 � ��'� : �qrcnnd siula« 10i5,1: I` � �` , � � � � _ � .� ., � .`. . 3 � �t1111.1% rI f�� - � I �. •� 1tIL�.I,� ''i � Z � > � !0'_U,4 � tt S W 1��15.t: ■ 17 J �tl��i i' . � �• 72 :4 � lon'�r. r ; �! i � � � ,��oo.i; . . _ � _ � . i :,z,� 1985 1'�)��7 19&'2 1991 �i1�i 1995 Da te I Download CSV File Date RPE GSE RPWS WSE GS to... Msmt Code CASGEM Msmt Agency ' 10l12/1983 00:00 1032.310 1032.310 29.5 1002.81 29.5 N 5167 05/09/1990 00:00 1032_310 1032.310 29.65 1002.66 29.G5 Rt 5167 12/14/1990 00:00 1032.310 1032.310 25.48 1006.83 25.48 N 5167 01/22/199100:00 1032.310 1032.310 25.22 10D7_09 25.22 N 5167 07/02/1991 00:00 1032.31 D 1032.310 23.3 1009.01 23.3 N 5167 05/04/1992 00:00 1032.310 1032.310 22.37 1009.94 22.37 N 5167 05/D6/1993 00:00 1032.310 1032.310 17.31 1015 17.31 N 5167 All elevation and depth measurements are in feet. The vertical datum for recent measurements is NAVD88. http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatal ibrary/groundwater/hydrographs/brr_hydro.cfm?CFGR... 9/14/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 1 of 6 Riverside County Parcel Report Report Date: Friday, SepSeZ�b� Selected parcels� 961-�14D-010, 961- 440-016 I]iSCl�im�r MAPS/IMAGES .. -; `I L j�� i-��`� '. '�.� -�� ;� ' l+ 1 . j;�'! , � = � l I � I I `'' � � � �.=r,, � -- . I _ ` ,.I •• . f _ - � J � � �� . ��~ ��i '_ `1 1-�_��•i t��j r,' 1 � � � ,� - N� '�� . - i,�- � ��L � � � �`?� . . � . i '� r �� '� n�, . . ;y� . ' �I'�[ • �/�►` q, 3�,�, � ��;y.� .. . _ „"� �� ,��y � _ �" ��,ra-��v � 6. F. i' a ^ ' ..i I ,I. I�r �I �I - . • •.��/ ��, �f��y �� ,� -� , I y _ ... . ,` � .y !r ;'� .#� w.�^'_ � , � r.� �--� �� !+J �� —`.''� � PARCEL APN(s) -4f 1�-3 Supervisorial District CHUCK WASHINGTON, 95l.-A4i�-��-9 2011 DISTRICT 3 Supervisorial District JEFF STONE, DISTRICT 2001 3 Previous APN(s) 961-440-010: Township/Range T85R2W SEC 18 NO DATA AVAILABLE 961-440-016: NO DATA AVAILABLE Address No address available Elevation Range 1,008 - 1,012 Mailing Address 961-440-010: Thomas Bros.Map PAGE: 979 GRID: B3 P O BOX L Page/Grid RANCHO SANTA FE CA, CA 92067 961-440-016: POBOXL RANCHO SANTA FE CA, CA 9Z067 Legal Description 961-440-010: Indian Tribal Land Not in Tribal Land Recorded Book/Page: NM ] 56 Subdivision Name: PM 30180 Lot/Parcel: 13 Block: Not Available Tract Number: Not Available http://tzvmagOl.rivcoit.org/Riverside Report/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=96 1 4400 1 6,96144... 9/15/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 2 of 6 PARCEL 961-440-016: Recorded Book/Page: Pi�i 2�8 5b Subdivision Name: PM 30180 Lot/Parcel: 14 Block: Not Available Tract Number: Not Available Lot Size 961-440-010: City City Boundary: Recorded lot size is Boundary/Sphere TEMECULA 0.81 acres Not within a City Sphere 961-440-016: Annexation Date: Not Recorded lot size is Applicable 0.99 acres No LAFCO Case # Available Proposals: Not Applicable Property No Property Description March]oint Powers NOT WITHIN THE Characteristcs Available Authority ]URISDICTION OF THE MARCH JOINT POWERS AUTH O RITY County Service Area Not in a County Service Area PLANNING Specific Plans Not within a Specific Historic Preservation Not in an Historic Plan Districts Preservation District Land Use CIIY Agricultural Not in an agricultural Designations Preserve preserve General Plan Policy Not in a General Plan Redevelopment Not in a Overlays Policy Overlay Area Areas Redevelopment Area Area Plan (RCIP) Southwest Area Airport Influence Not in an Airport Areas Influence Area General Plan Policy None Airport Compatibility Not in an Airport Areas Zones Compatibility Zone Zoninn See the city for more Zoning Districts and Not in a Zoning Classliications [OftD� information Zoning Areas District/Area 348] n' Not in a Zoning Overlay Community Advisory Not in a Community Councils Advisory Council Area ENVIRONMENTAL NOT WITHIN THE WRMSHCP (Western Not in a Cell Group Vailev M�Iti-5nccie� COACHELLA VALLEY Riverside County ��t CanseryeYion MSHCP FEE AREA Multi-Species pl n n Ar MSHCP Plan Area Habitat Conservation Plan) Cell Group http://tzvmag0l.rivcoit.org/Riverside Report/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=961440016,96144... 9/15/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 3 of 6 ENVIRONMENTAL CVMSHCP (Coachella Not in a Conservation WRMSHCP Cell 7357 Valley Multi-Species Area Number Habitat Conservation Plan) Conservation Area CVMSHCP Fluvial Not in a Fluvial Sand HANS/ERP (Habitat None Sand Transport Transport Special Acquisition and Special Provision Provision Area Negotiation Areas Strategy/Expedited Review Process) WRMSHCP [1Af�sS�n None Vegetation (2005) Developed or Disturbed i2i�erside_Cnunt� Land Multi-5nesi�s Ha6it�t Grassland Censer�ation Plan) pl�r+Ar�� FIRE Fire Hazard Not in a High Fire Area Fire Responsibility Not in a Fire Classification (Drd. Area Responsibility Area Z'$Z) DEVELOPMENT FEES CVMSHCP f Coachella NOT WITHIN THE RBBD (Road & Not in a District V l M COACHELLA VALLEY Bridge Benefit Habitat Gonspr�ati9r� MSHCP FEE AREA District) Planl Fee Area (C�r MSHCP Fee Area �l WRMSHCP (Western IN OR PARTIALLY aY�{�e�elonmcrt SOUTHWEST AREA Riverside County WITHIN THE WESTERN Imnack Fe�Ars� Multi-Species Habitat RIVERSIDE MSHCP FEE Ord. 65S] Conservation Plan) AREA. SEE MAP FOR Fee Area (¢��Q) MORE INFORMATION Western TUMF IN OR PARTIALLY SKR Fee Area In or partially within an ( r i n WITHIN A TUMF FEE (��S�Dhen's Kacsar�v SKR Fee Area 13nifortxt Mitf_aa#isttt AREA. SEE MAP FOR Rat_�d. 663.14) �re Ord. 824) MORE INFORMATION. SOUTHWEST Eastern TUMF NOT WITHIN THE DA(Development Not in a Development (Tra�s or� -tatla_n EASTERN TUMF FEE Agreements) Agreement Area AREA ��e Ord._�7_�] TRANSPORTATION Circulation Element IN OR PARTIALLY Road Book Page 132 Ultimate WITHIN A Right-of-Way CIRCULATION Transportation Not in a Transportation ELEMENT RIGHT-OF- Agreements Agreement WAY. SEE MAP FOR MORE INFORMATION. CONTACT THE CETAP (Community 1 TRANSPORTATION and Environmental DEPT. PERMITS Transportation SECTION AT (951) Acceptability 955-6790 FOR Process) Corridors http://tzvmagOl.rivcoit.org/Riverside_Report/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=961440016,96144... 9/15/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 4 of 6 TRANSPORTATION IN FO RMATIO N REGARDING THIS PARCEL IF IT IS IN AN UNINCORPORATED AREA. HYDROLOGY Flood Plan Review OUTSIDE FLOODPLAIN, Watershed SANTA MARGARITA REVIEW NOT REQUIRED Water District EMWD California Water None Board Flood Control District RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT GEOLOGIC Fault Zone Not in a Fault Zone Paleontological Low Potential: Sensitivity FOLLOWING A LITERATURE SEARCH, RECORDS CHECK AND Faults WITHIN A 1/2 MILE OF A FIELD SURVEY, Willard Fault AREAS MAY BE DETERMINED BY A QUALIFIED VERTEBRATE Liquefaction Very High PALEONTOLOGIST AS Potential HAVING LOW POTENTIAL FOR CONTAINING SIGNIFICANT PALEONTOLOGICAL Subsidence Susceptible RESOURCES SUBJECT TO ADVERSEIMPACTS. MISCELLANEOUS School District TEMECULA VALLEY Tax Rate Areas UNIFIED 961-440-010: CITY OF TEMECULA Communities Temecula CITY OF TEMECULA INC DISPUTE CO FREE LIBRARY Lighting (Qrd• 6gg) Zone B, 17.31 Miles CO STRUCTURE FIRE From Mt. Palomar PROTECTION Observatory ELS MURRIETA ANZA RESOURCECONS ELSINORE AREA ELEM 2010 Census Tract 043254 SCHOOL FUND EMWD Farmland URBAN-BUILT UP LAND EMWD IMP DIST B EMWD IMP DIST U-8 FLOOD CONTROL Special Notes No Special Notes ADMIN FLOOD CONTROL ZN 7 GENERAL GENERALPURPOSE MT SAN ]ACINTO JR COLLEGE MWD EAST 1301999 RCWD JT WATER http://tzvmagOl.rivcoit.org/Riverside Report/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=961440016,96144... 9/15/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 5 of 6 MISCELLANEOUS RCWD R DIV DS RIVERSIDE CO OFC OF EDUCATION SO. CALIF,JT (19,30,33,36,37,56) TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES TEMECULA PUBLIC CEMEfERY TEMECULA UNIFIED TEMECULA UNIFIED B&I 961-440-016: CITY OF TEMECULA CITY OF TEMECULA INC DISPUTE CO FREE LIBRARY CO STRUCTURE FIRE PROTECTION ELS MURRIETA ANZA RESOURCE CONS ELSINORE AREA ELEM SCHOOLFUND EMWD EMWD IMP DIST B EMWD IMP DIST U-8 FLOOD CONTROL ADMIN FLOOD CONTROL ZN 7 GENERAL GENERALPURPOSE MT SAN JACINTO JR COLLEGE MWD EAST 1301999 RCWD JT WATER RCWD R DIV DS RIVERSIDE CO OFC OF EDUCATION SO. CALIF,]T (19,30,33,36,37,56) TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES TEMECULA PUBLIC CEMEfERY TEMECU�A UNIFIED TEMECULA UNIFIED B&I PERMITS/CASES/ADDITIONAL Building Permits Case # Description Status No Building Permits Not Applicable IVot Applicable Environmental Health Permits Case # Description Status EH5041836 CONSULTATION - HOURLY APPLIED EH5043420 CONSULTATION - HOURLY APPLIED Planning Cases http://tzvmagOl.rivcoit.org/Riverside Report/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=961440016,96144... 9/15/2017 Riverside County Parcel Report Page 6 of 6 PERMITS/CASES/ADDITIONAL Case# Description Status No Planning Cases Not Applicable `Not Applicable Code Cases Case # Description Status No Code Cases _Not Applicable Not Applicable http:f/tzvmagOl.rivcoit.orgfRiverside Repart/PublicMultiAPN Report.aspx?APN=961440016,96144... 9/15/2017 Fault Zone Map . 171610-10A - �{�`� ��. - - -- - - _ -- � -w��ti� ��°�;; . - -T - . 4:�_� _ _ _ - , Legend _ �—` Display Parcels Q City Boundaries Faults <all other values> AL�UIST-PRIOLO _ RIVERSIDE COUNTY Fault Zones � <all olher values> �. COUNTY FAULT ZONE � ELSINORE FAULT ZONE C ity of C It�l Of SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE Temecufa Temecula � SANJACINTOFAULTZONE *IMPORTANT*Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only.Map features are approximete,and are not Notes necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering slandards.The County of R:verside makes no warranly ar guarantee 'RC�T as to the content(the source is often third party),accuracy,timeliness,or campEeteness o!any o{the dala prov�ded,and ___ . assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.Any use af this produc�with respecE so accuracy and precision shell be the sole responsibility of the user. 0 120 240 Feet � REPORT PRINTED ON...9I15I2017 4:37:43 PM OO Riverside County RCIT GIS Liquefaction Zone Map Y 171610-10A =- ��, :- - — - -- --...— --... -�T�` 'j:��s�. . ��, .•u Legend Display Parcels ��j City Boundaries Liquefaction - <allolhervalues> p,� High � Low Moderale Very High � Very low City oF City ��f Tcti�ccuf�� Tci�tccula *IMPORTANT'Maps and dala are to be used For reference purposes only.Map features are approximate,and are not nJOt@S necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards.The County of Riverside makes no warranty or guarantee RCj as to the content(the source is oRen third party),accuracy,timeliness,or completeness of any of ihe data provided,and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.Any use of this produd with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user. 0 120 240 Feet �A-,�� •i,� REPORT PRINTED ON...9/15/2017 4:41:03 PM OO Riverside County RCIT GIS Subsidence Zone Map Y 171610-10A �i�''�, �_� r'��• �1;"iii=- • ';�- --- - r - - Legend — Display Parcels �'� City Boundaries Subsidence � —. <all other values> I �—_ I ■ Aclive . Susceplible ; I ��•. • I� � *IMPORTANT*Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only.Map features are approximate,and are not Notes 'RCIT necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards.The County of Riverside makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content(the source is often third party),accuracy,timeliness,or completeness of any of the data provided,and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and predsion shall be the sole responsibility of the user. 0 120 240 Feet � � REPORT PRINTED ON...9I15I2017 4:44:42 PM OO Riverside County RCIT GIS - � � LEGEND � ° o � Locations are Approximate � �� Y o� :n+ f ��, _ Geologic Units � � '�� ' ._., ^t6s'-3• w y - p ,;�,3 .. � , _ _ , � - __ Afu Artificial Fill, Undocumented �� , � — — � Qya - Young Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits . ; _ �� , � ' (Circled Where Buried) � f_. � � � � � p r� � ' � t � Symbols � �4�� J�' -- �`' ' . � j �v �'"�� ,.� j 1 � 5 � �� Limits of Report i � _ __ � � ;�, _ � �� i � � � �' 6��A �RA�� _� TP� {� � a l �` T.D.=9� . �,s�'� ` � _ � - Test Pit Location NOGW. � �_� _�(J r� � � �,��_�c� ' '� `� 'j'j�.-¢ Including Total Depth and I � � _. i` .r I�:D...=��.� — "c�?r• ' T D.=9� Depth to Groundwater c:w. «3�� '� �� No�.W. � �, � r �� `i� �� \� m - �a � � '� ' `I'.D,�2U' `+ � ' �-k - Borin Location I � � NC7G.W. '�, ` � _ r.n.=zo� g ' � �� tvoc.w (Engen Corporation) - � F— ` \ '� � �� ':,L February 3,2000 a ., y �, . � � �- � �—�' � __\ �� ',,� ' ' � � f— �` � 10-12 - Recommended Removal Depths ti 59"'• . xs � \ 1 _ � � _n•` �� _- —��' ' `' '' �9 � �� ,� .�-� � , :1 � TP-3 � �, ` 1�-f 2' � � �� 1� "I'.D.=9� � .� ` � ' � . . \ NOG.W. � �-� .�''� t y1 ; � -� �p �-� ,'_° 1. :� \ 'o '� �� — �5-� n � . � - � �j � � � � � 1 . `\�'~�Y' 1 3-�i' � �� 1 - = 5 � . , — � � �� '1 1 . , _ �� o, � �'s�,' � ��, � , ,, � � � ` � �, � � �� , o. 1 �� GEO TFCHNICA L Nl�IP t T.D.—51.5 -�_ 1 �. `l�b ` �� O�4i � m } • , LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TEMECULA PARWAYAND PECHANGA PARKWAY ti ! ��, ` • � TP-1 p' ' � ,'' CITY OF TEMECULA,RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA � '� 0. � ro.=iz� �r�' � � !' APN961-440-010 NOC.W. .:�j:•. \ �� ;� �\ � � �+. � PROJECT PECHANGA SQUARE � � �- _ —� � /� I� � CLIENT MR. IUDD KESSLER � � a a = -- - � 7'ri-2 , y � B-�, ,! � — � PROJECT NO. 171610-10A �.. T.�.•9' � � . . � r.o w. � 7'.D.�?rl.'��' � DATE FEBRUARY 2017 �A � � — � �� ' �+ �' SCALE 1:40 � � � DWG XREFS � � `� _ � REVISION \s � DRAWN BY JDG PLATE 1 OF 1 � � ti64'_8 - _ i ' � '^�� — � / � � � _ I 35'° �'Y ��'� � I Y�• � `,J � � �a. � 9 � � � � � ' , ��o��,ni�a�, '��iro�-�m�n��, � � �nc� �ater��is �es�ir�� n�u�� _ — . ti��=�rC = �:� S' -..�.ti'��Y..-r-'7�4J..�.-,--�r. w ��-��.! �arrh Strata Geo�echnical Ser��ices, Inr. G��r�rnnieal, rJ1PiiBA�lu rin,T.�1ut£rittls Terriny Cnnsulranrr September 19, 2017 Project No. 171610-10B Mr.Judd Kessler Oil and Water Pechanga Parkway, LP PO Box L Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Preliminary Asphaltic Concrete and Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Design, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961- 440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California Earth Strata is pleased to present our pavement design recommendations for asphaltic and Portland cement concrete pavement sections for a commercial development, located on the southwest corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. R-Value: The R-value of representative samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 301. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPL�LUCATI�N h1:'1'T�I:i:1L llI�SLkII''�'1t1N R-VALUE B-1 @ 0-5 feet Sandy SILT 30 PRELIMINARY ASPHALTIC ONCRETE P '[�EMENT DESIGN Laboratory testing of representative earth materials indicate an R-value of 30 may be used for preliminary pavement design. The table includes our minimum recommended asphaltic concrete pavement sections calculated in accordance with the State of California design procedures using *assumed Traffic Indicies. Final pavement design should be based on sampling and testing of post grading conditions. Alternative pavement sections and calculation sheets have been provided within the attachment of this letter. A11T0 PARKIN.G: >t�,�[IT�b�� ENTRANCE Assumed Traffic Index 5.0 6.0 7.0 Desi n R-Value 30 30 30 AC Thickness inches 4* 4* 4 AB Thickness inches 6* 6 91/z Notes: AC-Asphaltic Concrete *Denotes minimum section AB-Aggregate Base 42184 RE�IINGTON AVENLIE, TEMECULA, CA 92590 951-397-8315, ESGSINC.COM PRELI INARY PURTL ND EME T C NCRETE PAVEMENT DESi N �------ - - -- I'[�I:L'IIvl1'14:1�1'iY PD�`1'I.,AN1J C� '�rl��`I'�DNCItCT�.P2tV�M��i'I'll�L�I'GN �ireet�TY�� Des��i 1�-V�31�rG `lY��slic� inrlex -_. I��ir�m��x��ectiwu Commercial 30 6.0 6 inches PCC over 6 inches AB Note:PCC=Portland Cement Concrete The minimum requirements for the Portland cement concrete shall be six-sack mix and 3,500 pounds per square inch at 28 days. The subgrade earth materials immediately below the aggregate base (base) should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative density based on ASTM D 1557 to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative density based on ASTM D 1557. Base materials should consist of Class 2 aggregate base conforming to Section 26-1.02B of the State of California Standard Specifications or crushed aggregate base conforming to Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Base materials should be compacted at or slightly below optimum moisture content. Asphaltic concrete materials and construction operations should conform to Section 203 of the Greenbook. Portland cement concrete materials and construction should conform to Section 201 of the Greenbook. Earth-Strata appreciates the opportunity to offer our consultation and advice on this project. In the event that you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ]E�ll�'7[']H[ �'lC']lbA�'7C'� �GlE�O�'l[']EcC]H[I�il[�CAA]L �]E][R�v][cC]E�f l[1�cCr ` —�-�S�IU;: fr�q2`"'�••-.......ti,, 't, �,��r�;.�;�f•., .k � �' `s�V�''�q.3p. Fi9� �1''�� - r.. r'�9 t � � ��• �� Stephen M. Poole, PE, GE ��'�.�� -- Q'��` �r ��;��'��"� Principal Engineer �_��p� �_-��=� SMP/mw Attachment: Appendix A-Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Calculations R-Value from EnGen Corporation Geotechnical Report (dated 2-3-2000) Distribution: (2)Addressee Project Number 171610-10B 2 September 19, 2017 APFENDI� A ASPHALTIC C�NCRETE PAVEMENT CALCULATI�NS PAVING DESIGN _��;-��- ----,_��_ - _. . .._�-- JN: 171610-10 CONSULT: SMP ,�'�a,r�fx - �'�x��t�� lx�x c. Q„�,,,,,�.e e,,,.,,o,,.�.,,,,,,,,,d,,�.,.,;.e,„,,,,o��.,.0 PROJECT: TemParkwav pFTIl1!I[d�f.d.wEri�R 7�11Y�C1•iBTflF RflilLTa CALCULATION SHEET# Auto Parking CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 30 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 30 Input Traffic Index (TI) 5 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1.12 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 13.44 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gfl for A/C paving 2.53 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gfl 1.1 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal;but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. INCHES FEET Gravel Equivalent A/C Section Minimum A/C Section Minimum GE GE Delta Thickness Base Thickness Base feet inches inches inches inches feet feet 0.63 7.60 5.84 I 3.0 5.4 0.25 0.45 0.74 8.87 4.57 � 3.5 4.2 0.29 0.35 0.76 9.13 4.31 3.6 4.2 0.30 0.35 0.84 10.14 3.30 4.0 3.0 0.33 0.25 0.89 10.65 2.79 4.2 2.4 � 0.35 0.20 0.95 11.41 2.03 4.5 1.8 0.38 0.15 1.06 12.67 0.77 � 5.0 0.6 0.42 0.05 . 1.16 13.94 -0.50 5.5 0.46 1.27 15.21 -1.77 6.0 0.50 1.69 20.28 -6.84 8.0 0.67 2.11 25.35 -11.91 10.0 ' 0.83 PAVING DESIGN - - - - -�_. - - - --- -�.��-_____- JN: 171610-10 CONSULT: SMP ,sE'��x - �'�',�~��C�� 'rx�c. (3MpdNqlJ�je[dMllpnafanfal�ndM�Nn�hY�Y7inpGWs4Wdh� PROJECT: TemParkway urmx arari.r.rmsa saarvrca.�rrr�-rs�ns�s+K rs CALCULATION SHEET# AutoDrives CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 30 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 30 Input Traffic Index (TI) 6 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1.344 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 16.128 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gfl for A/C paving 2.31 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gfl 1.1 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal;but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. INCHES FEET Gravel Equivalent A/C Section Minimum A/C Section Minimum GE GE Delta Thickness Base Thickness Base feet inches inches inches inches feet feet 0.58 6.94 9.19 3.0 8.4 ! 0.25 0.70 0.67 8.10 8.03 3.5 7.2 ; 0.29 0.60 0.69 8.33 7.80 3.6 7.2 j 0.30 0.60 0.77 9.26 6.87 4.0 6.0 0.33 0.50 0.81 9.72 6.41 4.2 6.0 0.35 0.50 0.87 10.41 5.72 4.5 5.4 0.38 0.45 0.96 11.57 4.56 � 5.0 4.2 0.42 0.35 1.06 12.73 3.40 5.5 3.0 k 0.46 0.25 1.16 13.88 2.24 6.0 1.8 0.50 0.15 1.25 15.04 1.09 6.5 1.2 i 0.54 0.10 1.35 16.20 -0.07 7.0 0.58 PAVING DESIGN -- _:�-_=-•�-.--�------�-�-� JN: 171610-10 CONSULT: SMP �'ax��t.� - �'�x��t�a� �'a�� Wqt�Shefcaf.[nrirwi.r�nbd.��Werrirf+TrstlnpConaW�se�ti PROJECT: TemParkwav BLTTSR P10�'4d.I�fTtR idR11lCf.idT7�1►RFai17�.t8 CALCULATION SHEET# Entrance CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 30 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 30 Input Traffic Index (TI) 7 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1.568 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 18.816 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gfl for A/C paving 2.14 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gfl 1.1 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal;but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. INCHES FEET Gravel Equivalent A/C Section Minimum A/C Section Minimum GE GE Delta Thickness Base Thickness Base feet inches inches inches inches feet feet 0.62 7.50 11.32 3.5 10.2 0.29 0.85 0.71 8.57 10.25 4.0 9.6 0.33 0.80 0.80 9.64 9.18 4.5 8.4 + 0.38 0.70 0.89 10.71 8.10 5.0 7.2 0.42 � 0.60 0.98 11.78 7.03 5.5 6.6 0.46 0.55 1.07 12.85 5.96 6.0 5.4 0.50 0.45 1.25 15.00 3.82 7.0 3.6 0.58 0.30 1.34 16.07 2.75 7.5 2.4 0.63 0.20 1.43 17.14 1.68 8.0 1.8 � 0.67 0.15 1.5� 1$.21 � �.61 � 8.5 �.6 - D.71 0.05 1.61 19.28 -0.46 9.0 0.75 R—�fALUE TEST REPORT �a� sa .: . . .. .... . .. .... .. .._,. ..... . ..... : -. . ... �o .. .... . _- . . ... ... . � _. : ...... .. . . ... . m . 3 • � .�. . # .. . . .. .. . .. • -. . .. � 1 � 4� ... .. .. • -- . ... . ... .... ... . ..... 20 .. .... :....... �. .... ..... ... . ..... • .... .... ..... . .... ... •- n i � � , , �o0 2ao �oo �oa soo soa �oa �oo Exudat �an Pressure - psi Res i stanc� R-�Va I ue ar�d Exp�n�i cn Pressu re - ASTAA D 2�44 Cs�rr�pa�t . �xFsun�i crn Ho r i aon to I 5arnp !e Exud. R �ensity Mcist . R Na. �`r�ssure �'ressur� Press, psi Height Pressure Vcl c f �: p�i p psi � 169 psi in. psi v�l�� Cor 7 50 116 .7 14.4 (J.06 133 2.40 i�4 9 9 2 2�� 120.9 13.� 1 . 03 70C3 2.58 271 24 2� � 300 121 .5 12.2 2.7(3 65 2.56 41� 48 50 T�ST R��UL1'S MATERIAL DESCf7IP'CYON _ R-Valu� � 3�0 �si exudation pr�ssure = 30 5ANL7Y SILT, 6RdWN pr�j�ct No. : T79��--G� Tested by . J .T.O. P ro j�c C : PAIA RAIN�OW. LL.0. Ch�cked by : Location: F�ALA R(�. - HWY 79 S. R�rnarks: SAMpLE 81� 0-� COLLEC�`�� Y C .M. Date: 1 -31-190� �OLLECT�D dN (1/21/00) R-VAL.UE T�ST REPdRT Envirorimental �nd Geotechnicdl Enqine�ering I�etrork Corporntian F�g. No. _ r�-� Fcir�h StrQta Geoterhnical Serti•i�es, lnr. G�s+te:h:�r:al. F.r�s•dr��nmenrul UnJ.f�ar�riuU T�srin�['�nculr�nrs October 4, 2017 Project No. 171610-70B Geocon Project No. T2652-22-05 Mr.Judd Kessler Oil and Water Pechanga Parkway, LP PO Box L Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Second Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Reference: Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated February 3. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Geotechnical Third-Parry Review, Proposed Commercial Development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440- 010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated September 15. Introduction Earth Strata has prepared this response to the second Review Comments letter for the above referenced project prepared by Geocon West, Inc. dated October 3, 2017. The six (6) comments will be listed below followed by our response to each comment. The following changes and clarifications should be considered part of and attached to the report referenced above. COMMENT N0.2 2. "Site Description - The consultant acknowledged the past alignment of the old Pala Road (currently Pechanga Parkway) but did not describe the impact on the site. The consultant should elaborate on anticipated depths of fill from past site use and if documentation of fill placement is available." Response - Documentation of the fill is not available. As seen on the exploratory logs presented in our previous reports fill appears to range from 3 to 4 feet across the subject site. As previously discussed; remedial grading consists of 10- to 12-foot removals in building areas and 3- to 5-foot removals in parking and drive areas; as such any fill previously placed onsite will be removed and recompacted during grading operations. Given this; previously placed fill will have no impact on the proposed development. 42184 REMINGTON AVENLIE, TEivIECLILA, CA 92590 951-397-8315, ESGSINC.COM COMMENT NU.3_ 3. "Proposed Development and Grading-The consultant's response provides a description of the proposed construction, but they do not comment on the proposed site grading, including estimated depth of cuts and fills within the planned building pads. Or building and column loads." Response - As shown on previous geotechnical maps; recommended grading consists of 10- to 12- foot removals in the building pad areas and 3 to 5-foot removals in parking and drive areas. Existing grades will remain essentially unchanged, cuts and fills across the site are expected to be less than 3- feet from existing grades. As discussed in Comment 12 of the previous response regarding building loads; "Low loads are anticipated and should be on the order of 1 to 2 linear kips, and column loads less than 20 kips." CUMME N0.6 6. "Laboratory Testing- The consultant acknowledged that the settlement analysis based on accepted data presented in the EnGen report but did not provide the consolidation figure C-1 that was missing in their February 3, 2017 report. Consultant further states that they will perform additional laboratory testing as needed during construction. Consultant should provide the missing consolidation figure or elaborate on the laboratory testing that could be performed during construction to mitigate settlement potential." Response - Consolidation test data is attached. Additional laboratory testing during grading will consist of maximum density testing to ensure competent bottoms (defined as a minimum in-situ density of 85%relative compaction) are achieved before placement of compacted fill. COMMENT TtU.7' 7. "Faulting - The faulting section should include a discussion of the ground cracking which occurred in Wolf Valley in the late 1980's early 1990's. Although the consultant indicates the fill mat recommended for the site will mitigate ground cracking, a discussion of the historic ground cracking should be provided with an explanation of how the fill placed on the subject site will mitigate the ground cracking given the ground cracking propagated through engineered fill placed in the 1980's in several locations within Temecula." Response - Ground cracking is primarily a product of settlement of soft/loose soils within a vertical soil column. The purpose of the recommended remedial grading is to remove soft/loose soils which are susceptible to liquefaction/settlement and which could result in ground cracking. By removing 10 to 12 feet of the material which is susceptible to liquefaction/settlement and replacing that material as compacted fill we will create a compacted fill mat founded on competent alluvium (minimum 85% in-situ relative compaction); the total calculated settlement of which is within limits of design structural settlement (see liquefaction and dry sand settlement calculations in original preliminary report). It is unlikely that settlement at depth would manifest as ground cracking through a 10-to 12- foot thick compacted fill mat. Project No. 171610-70B Page 2 October 4, 2017 C�L�MENT NO�� 12. "Settlement-See comment above for item 6." Response - If remedial grading is carried out as recommended settlement is not expected to be an issue. See comment response above. MEN N�.17 17. "References-A reference for Bachelor Mountain Quadrangle is included in the references. The site is not located within the Bachelor Mountain Quadrangle. Consultant should replace with correct mapping references." Response -We did not state that the site was in the Bachelor Mountain Quad. However,the Bachelor Mountain Quad is adjacent to the Oceanside Quad (in which the site is located) and was reviewed as part of our investigation.We often review geologic maps published in different years and at different scales to gain a more complete understanding of the area; especially when a site is located near the border of a larger-scale map (as is the case for the subject site) because larger-scale maps often provide greater detail about an area. As shown on the Figure 2 - Regional Geologic Map presented in our original report, the map used as the base for our Regional Geology Map is the Oceanside 30'x60' Quadrangle by Morton, et. al. (2004); this reference was not repeated in an effort to reduce redundancy; but has been included below for your convenience. A complete list of geologic maps reviewed during our investigation includes: Kennedy, M.P., Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Morton, Greg, 2003, Preliminary geologic map of the Murrieta 7.5'quadrangle,Riverside County, California, Open-File Report OF-2003-189 Kennedy, M.P., Tan, S.S., Bovard, K.R., Alvarez, R.M., Watson, M.J., and Gutierrez, C.I., 2007, Geologic map of the Oceanside 30x60-minute quadrangle, California, Regional Geologic Map No.2 Morton, D.M., Kennedy, M.P., Bovard, K.R., and Burns, Diane, 2003, Geologic map and digital database of the Bachelor Mountain 7.5'quadrangle,Riverside County, California, Open-File Report OF-2003-103 Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Geologic map of the Oceanside 30'x 60'quadrangle,Southern California, Version 2.0, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172 Project No. 171610-70B Page 3 October 4, 2017 The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or require further clarification, please notify this office at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ]E�][b']C'1H[ �'7['l��'7C.� �G�]EcO�'7['�cC1H[l�][�C�I.�]E][�\v][cC]E�, 1[1��C. r�`��;,:��i�`;-,,�, -.::� ' �� ;1,... � :, f": .r�� -�---'=:-• f �� r��a. . •�� :� � � �FES51�r`'' /�f;�I w-' �-r-�r�ti f� �� s+;� ''='. 7��w� �- +.�,,'•,ti. ,�I�'i;�J ��C#�r��. �� . r �.. ^�'c y ` '`� �Cfi" L : I �`�� 'S.� � � '•.i � .. ! :"i � [�• . U32 � . f`:.}_l. e��.._i. � .%"1 f -.i y}1 { � � �X�• ��m Iy . r� ,+�lJ� xy 1� � P� f� j� w...-r.`�.,"' //�i � � n� � �r i f !tr`r.,: :� � �£?�4.�� E' �s6�, �"rs�`- ,..�.�..f� � ;�f^`�"�i Stephen M. Poole, PE,��.��+-� ' __ - - •- � � Aaron G.Wood, PG, CEG';�;� ' ��. � � �� Principal Engineer ��f�� Principal Geologist � -- - � SMP/AGW/mw Attachment: Review Comments (Rear of Text) EnGen Consolidation Test Reports (Rear of Text) Distribution: (2)Addressee Project No. 171610-70B Page 4 October 4, 2017 Review Comments �I��J��lr W � d `C. 1 N f` � � � f � e= H N � � L ■ � N v I A �� N ti'� E N fi 4 � a M e fi � f� I 4 L � Project N�.�'?6a3-??-Ua O�tober 3. 3017 Carth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. =F21�=4 Remin��ton Avenue Temecula,California 92�90 Attentian: 1�1r. Stephen Poole,GE Subject: GCOTCCHNICAL THIRD-PARTY �EVIEW PA17-03l8 7fi 5ERVICE 5�['FlT'IU�1 PE':C'�-lt�1tiG:1 PARK�1''r�y 5WC TEMCCULA AND['ECI�IANGA PA�t��VAYS TENt�CULA, CALlFO€tNIA References: l) R��vizs� to Geoccan 1i es(, h�c.'s GentEchnrrul Thirci Purt�� Reyie�r, Propra.�ed C'onzmercinl I�e��elopment, .dss�s�sc»•'s f'arcel ?�irm�ers 96J-�-FO-U10 crnd 961-�-�0-Olh, Loc�utec� �Southi+�est Conrer vf� 'leme�:�la Parkti+�cir r�ncl I'echan�cr Pcrr/nrrn�, Cit�� uf 7i'm�ct�la, Ri►>erside Coimh�, Cal�ornia prepared by �arth Strata Geotechnical S�rvices, lne.,dated September l�,2U17. 2) Preliminu�� Cevtec;hnical Inte�preti�� Repvrt, Pro�sed C'vmm�rc�ia! D�velup►rrerrt, �lssc�ssor's �arre! Number 961--�-��-0I0 and 961-��1f)-016, LncnPed �n the Sourhwesr C'w•�ac�� u1 7'�',1fE(.'{.�.�L Atrr•k►t�u►� cr�tcl A«•Ir�rrr�c� Pcrrki��cr1�. C'rr�� c►f ftrzaec•aticr. Rri�er�ide C'vunt��, Cr�lrfr�rr�ia, prepared by �arth Str�ta Geotechnical Services. Inc.. Prnje�t 17161 b-I OA dated�ebru�ry 3.2017. De�r�41r. Poole: ln accc�rdance with th� request df Mr. 5cott Co�per with the eity� of"['�meCula, Geocon West, Inc. (Geocon) has completed a third-party review of thr respons� (Ref'erencz ll to o�u� initial review comments dated Septembei• �, Z017. "Che purpose of the review is to present uur opinion re�arding the sui��bili�y o�ctze stuay, conclusinns, and recommendatioils provid�d within the referenced dncument. Geo�on's revi�w is based on Cnunry nf Ra>>ersi�l� 7'Nchnieral Gur�lelirres for thN Revieiv qf'Gevtechnicul uncl Gevlo,�=ic� Repa•ta� 2000 Edition, Riverside Counh� Flood Cr�ntrol u�Tc� Wcrcer C'on.��ervatfon Di.rri�r Dc►�i�r�r Nu�zelhr�uk �{ll' Lf714' �111J7elL�r U��v��lc�prn��nr f3��sr �lfarrc��rrn�rtr 1'��ue•rirr� ci�lui September�U 1 1,C'ctlif'urr7iu Crealogic'C7I S14Y'VC�l�Speeictl Pt�blieatiorr 11?=1, GuidE>line,s,fc�p Evali�ating cincl llirigu[ing,5ci.��mi�f�(cr�ard��in CciCifr�rrifc�nnd Note�g dat�d 2U08,and City afi�C'emecula Stane�ar•d Plct�ts•. Your response to cnmments l,�,5,8,thrnu�h I l, I 3 throu�l� l6, 18,and l�adequately address Gencon's review comments ancl no f�irtller information or claritication is r�qu�sted c�n those iterr�s. d I 5�I Corr,lr�g F'Ictcp, 5w�e 101 ■ Murrie�c7 Call�t�inlu 9'1 ib2%b65 � �elephe�ie 9�I a0A��3E]� ■ Kex�91 304 2392 Additic�n�l inf�5rm��ticm or clt�ritic[�tit�n is requested Fe�r ih� r�rnninin� commznc numbers as indicated below. REVIEW COhIlIVIENTS (.7ec�cnn's camm�nts re�ardin� tf�e refereneed repart are provide�i belaw. f'icase provide � response or corrective acti�n to the rity ot Temecula as a�propriate. 2. Site llescription —The consultdnt ackno�vletl�ed the past alignment of the oid Pala Road (currently Pechanga Parkway) but did not describe the in�pact on the sit�. Thc; consultant sh��ild elaborate on anticipaCed depths oF FI1 From past site use ancl if documentation of fill placement is a��a;lable. 3. Prnposed De��elopmeat and Grading—'fhe consultant', response provides a description nf the proposed canstruction, but they do nnt comment o�� the proposed site �radin�, includin�estintated depth n�euCs and Flls within the planned building pads.Or builciin�and rolumn IQads. 6. Labor�Yory Testin�--The consultant acknowled�ed that th� settlement analysis is based on�ceeptea data presenled in the�nGen report but did not provic�e the consolidation figure C-l that was missin�in their Fehruary�3,2t1 l7 repnrt_Con�ultant Further states t#�at they tir ill perfdrm additinnal labaratory testing as needed during construction. Cans«ltant should provide the missin�.consolidation fi�ure or elaborate on the laboratory testin�that cauld ba performed during construction tn mitigate settlement potential. 7. �'uulting—`['he Faulting section should include a discussion of the ground cracl�ing which occurred in W�If V�illey in the late Ig80's and ��rl�- 1990's. 4l�ho�t�h the consult�nt indic�tes the �Il inat recammended for the site �vill mitig�te graund crlcking, a rlisc��ssion ofthe histc�ric grotm�cr�ckir�g sha�►ld bc prc�vidcd with�n explanution ofhow the fill placed on the subject site will mitigate the ground cracking�iven that�round cr�c}�i1y�propa�ated thrdu�h en�ineered fill placed in the 1980'� in several ldcations wiChin T��neeula. fl2. Settlement--See corr7mcnt abovc tor itcm 6. 1'7. Refer�nces—A reference Fur Bach�lor Mountlin Quadran�le is included in the references. '1"he sitie is not located evithin the B��chelnr Mountain Quadran�le. Consultant shc7uld replace �vith corr�ct genlogic mapping rcfc:rcnccs. Gaocon f'ro,�ccl Nu.'C2Ei5"-22-O5 -2_ UcLnh�r 3.?017 CONCLUSIONS Based pn our review of the referenced d�cumenfis, it is our opinion that additional information and clarificatinn are required to conFarm to Riversid� Cr�unly T�ehnical Cruidelines far Review c f' Cerat�rhriic�al and Genl��ic Repnrts(2000 Edition). Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or if we may be of further seevice, please contact the undersigned at ynur convenience. Very truly yours, ��;,r:At GF GEOCON WEST, i�C.��`'� �� O�Rq�F��r _ � �� 44' 1 F o�,� ti � � f I �� # f. � � Z � � T a�cx.o�sr t - ��.� � +��, �, a�fx � � �� ; r .. � r {��R� 5 � f -"l.isa A. B;itsiatn �� Chet E. Robinson � # CEG�316 CrE 2890 �.��l� LAB:C�R:GIC:hd Distribution:(1)Addressee (l) City ofTemecula Planning Department� Attn: Scott Cooper Geoeon�'enjeol No.Y'26�2-22-f)5 •3 - Oc[ober 3,2017 EnGen Consolidation Test Reports _�_� C4iVSOL1DAT�ON TEST RFPORT � � ' ' . ; r � � I . � ? � I � . ! ' � , � C ' � � u ! ! � ' ' i . � F � � k ! , " Q.� ` �� . � . � ; ; � � j 1 � I I I FI - 1 I • � fi �' � R r - j � � � ' � � . � i f G � P ; n � . � �` . � o II � I � i ; • � i b � '' ' { l S•5� � � i � i F I I �I • � 4 � � � � ' � I � � f • � ' ; � < i ' � 1 � I i E � i � t i . f j r � � � � ' ; ; � � � �.� � � ! ` � , ' ' � ' ; � � � � � ' i i . k � 1 : " � ; ` f � " � � � � � � � � � � j ' � � � � � ; � �e.� ' � � � - ' � � i � � r � i , i k � r t � ; ` ' � ; I '� � i � � ; , � � � � f ' � � � E � f i � R � � � ° , � � � [ S.C� ' ; � ` € � f E f � � ' � � � I � � v � ' f � F ' � � ! i � ! f t • - a`: � I 1 � _ ` � j , � � � � � � � i � . � i , � F E � � � � . I � � � � � ' � I 7.sp f + � I � � 9 I f � ' E f I � ! � i ` { I r � i � i � ! � ! � � WVAT�F�ADDEn , � i � t � I � � F f , � � �.� ; . . , i � , � ! ' � � ' � ; � � 1 � � � j 1� � 4 i ' f � � ' ` I i � � � � � � I � I � ` ; ' 10.�0 f ' ` � • � i 3 ! ' ` � � � " � � i f i � F � . � � � � � � � � � _ : � � i � � � I � i I � i � 1 i i I ,z.� � � ' I � � � � � � � � t ' � � � � � 1� i � , i � , � � I � I � � ; � � i ; r � � : I ; j � 13.50 � � I ` � E ` - � . � 1 2 Appiied Pressure-ksf ��w� Dry Dens. LL PI Sp_ Overburden Pc C � Swell Press. Swell e S�t. Moist. (P�fl Gr. (kst� (ksi� � r (kst� �� o 52.5°/a 1 S.1 "/e. 93.8 2.65 0.38 0.19 0.765 . MA�'�RIAL DESCRIPI`IUN - USCS AASHTO SIL,'1"Y SAND,gROWN SM Project No. T1956-G5 Client PA1,A RAINBOW;LLC. ��r�: Project: SAMI'L�,B2�5 C�LL��'T'ED BY C.M. tocation:T�ALA RD. W H'WY 79 S. COLLECT�D C7N(1/2�/00) 'J��J{7Ylfffli2lf��afll��O�Cbf1fC111 � Eng�neersng h�eltvo�'k�orpot'dtson Plate -,.� CONSOLlQAT10N TEST REPORT � � � � � � . � . - � . � . : . , , . � ; � . � � _ aoo ` f � , . ' ; - . [ I • i ! � : I ; f . ' ; � • r ; � i . i { i j , . ' ! � . [ � • ( � } j ; ; � I , E � . z•sa , � � • . � � • _ ' � ' + � WATER ADDED �� ' � i � � • . F . o ; . . F � N � I ' R ' ' , �_� - . _ � • . . i . . , : , ` . , . i f . �.� . , I � r � ` � i i i ' � - : E . . � � � • � € I t ' I j � : �` � .� �` f { � �E � � t ! � i � � � I j € V � � � � � � E � � . E � � mfi.�0 ` � ` ` � f ! ! i � j ' { m � ' � [ � ' . � I . ; I : ` � ; a F € � G � � � f � , � � ; : � ` f � ; { E j 1 � ; I � E �so � G . � � � i � � � C t � ; j f { ► t � -` 4 J I . � � ! � i � ; � � � i � i ' � , ' ' , E � f � ; � I ; � f � ' ; � : � ! � ! � � � � � • ! � i � , j i � � 3U0 ` ` ' � � i f ' � . , � � � f � � � i � � + � . ' , • f � ! . i { s � �! t i � � , � I f � , ' I � ` • � � ! � ' ' � , k � i . � I f i � i � � � I � ! � I ' � f ' � 10.50 I f � � f j � = f ' � � : ; � � , � � . . ; � � E ; , f 1 � � � � { ; ; i , � • ( � � !� � � ; ; { i ' • i I i tz.oU ` � � � f f I f ! ; � � , I i I � I i I . . ! I ; � � � � i � f i � � � i � � � i � � � ` ; � � I � � ' � j } I � � � � � . � f � ! 1 13.50 � I I I I 1 I i i � f � , . � 1 f I ! .� 2 .5 1 2 5 Appfied Pressure-ksf ��) C7ry�ens. LL �I 5p. Overburden P� �� Cr SwHI�ress. 5w�0 �o Sat Molst. (p� �r. (ks� (ks� (ksfl � 87.5% 16.4 9'd l]0.3 2.65 0.84 0.03 p,497 MI1TERfAL DESCWPTION USCS AA8HT0 S1LTY SAND,BROWN 3M Project No. Ti556-G� Ctient: PAI,A RATNBO'1�,LLC. Remarks: PtojecY. SAMPLE B2Q 7.5 COLLECI'ED BY�.M. LocaLion:PALA R,I�.-1�WY 79 S. COLLECTED ON(1/2I/DO) L�vironmental and�aatec�irsical Engirieertng�t'e�ii,or�r Carporat�r: p�ate CONSOLti]ATiD�V TEST RE�QRT -:.sa , . � � i # � i � � � I � i E I e, i i I ` � � ' ' ' I � ' � r ' - . � � ' � � ; � ; i : . � � � r a.00 ! i , � � . , f , I i ' i � � � ! � ` ; ' � t . � � � � � I I � � i � i � f � � f f � � � � � 1 � � ! , ' � i � � ; '� I WATER ADDED i � { I f � � • � � � � E i ` � � � ; � � � � f : � � � � � . � � { � � G � ' � � ' , � F , � � � � � � ' 3 E10 � i � i i . i : � 4 i � i • � � i ' i I . � ' � � ` � � � e � ' E � i ! � r � � i � t : , f # , . , i � � � . �.� � � � , , � ' i ; i f f � 6 , f � ; � # � � � � f � � � � � � ; � ± I i � � ' � � � � � � ' � � � � i I � I � � ' � � � f ! � � � �.oa ' � I t � i i : . � ; , ` � � f I � � • � j I i � � � ` � - i � 1 � � � ! f [ � � : � , � � . � ' ; t f � f ; 1 �.�o ` i � � f , � � � , : � i , E � E � ' � ; � ' ; : ' f � 4 f ? � I f � : . � � � ' � � j , � � = I � � � : � � � . j . �.00 ' � I � : , : � � � � I ' � � ' ; j � I 3 i � � � � � ' � � E ; f � if i I I i � � i i I . f � � � � F � � � � � , . � � � � � f ; ,e.� � , � ' � k I � � I I � � � f � � 1 . � . � � , � • � f ; � 12.00 ? f , = ' � I � E � ' l '- � � I � � 1 � � � ' ' ' � i j ' 1 � ' I � � � � I ' � ' ` k 4 � � ° I � i � • � I � � � � ! � � - ( I I 13_30 ,T .2 .5 1 2 5 Appfied Pressune-ksf Natural p p�s. Sp. bv�rburden P Swell Press. Swell �at. Moist (pc� LL PI Cr. (kstj (ksf) �� (ksfl �o �o 13.5% 3.3% 100.3 2.65 0.61 0.04 0.649 MATERIAL OESCWP?lON USCS AASHTO sarin,r.i��rr•��owN � s� Project No. T195B-G5 Client: PALA RAI`N�OW,LLC. Remarks: ProjeGt: 5AMP'L�B2� 15 COLLECI'�D BY C.M. Location: PALA 1tD.-HWY 79 S. C�LLEC7'ED ON(1R1/00) �vironmental and�avtachnr�al Engineermg�ehvark Corporatsan � �� -t.� G4NS4L�aAi'iON TEST REP�RT � F � � � • ; i � � ; , , . i � r � ' � � ! t � � � i I , i ? ' • ! ' � • ! ! I � •- 0.00 � ' . . , . i '. . i , ' E y � � , ' i i ` 1 i ' • R � � , ,. � � : � , , ' � � . � ' ; � � I � ! � E i . � � i � � � � � � � 4 - � � � � ' ' f • � � I � � � I f ` ' f i � S 50 : `. . � E C . � ; . ' � i r � � ` WATER ADDED � � � ; � i � • � � � � � ; ' f R ; ; , • � ; ' � ' . f I � � � ; � n ; • I [ . 6 f F � � ` i 3.D0 i k : ' ° � • � j ' u � - f I � � i � • i f � f � � I 1 � � . . . ' I � ' f ' � i I � � 1 ` ' � � � ' ; � ; f f E ; ° � f � i . � � , E � . 4_� . � . 3 B , ' ' ` � � � • ; i ; ' � ! • � � g � < < t � 1f` � , � � � i i � .S� � � � � � � � . � � i I � - . r � � � i � E . ; 1 ; � . � . • ; �' � i ' I 600 � �: � ' k � . i i � i � i 1 m � i } � E� I � - i � •` � � ' � E r ' f � i i a E : � : � I � ` � � t � � � � � i I k � � � � � [ � � E t f � � ( t C , �_� ! � ; � f � � � i ; �I j ` � E � , � � � ; iEI ; 1` � III � � i � r � f � � � { i I � { ` E V � I I I I , � � } f � � � � � � � � � � � � F � � � � 9.� Ei ; � j � � If . ! ,' � : . � � � � ' ; � f I � ' � � i � � � ! � { 1 � 1 � � � ' � �0.50 � I � � � � � . � I � : I � , • ! � I r � � 4i � � � , r � 1 I . I � I ' ' , I + � � � � � : � � � � � ' � � j � � ; f ! ; I j ; I 1200 � � i I I I � � f � ' ! � f I [ � � � � ; � I i f � I 1 . I I � I I � � � � � � ' f I � � , } i i � � I � � I � � � � 1 � � ) � � � i � _ � � � ! + • i I i � I r - ! � 13.5� .1 .Z .S ' T 2 5 Applied Pressure-ksf Natural Dry per��. �� pl Sp. Overburden P� C C Swell �'ress. Swell e Sat 1V�oist. �P� Gr• (ks� (ks� � � (ksf� % � _ 64A% 13.1 % 107.2 2.65 268 0.04 0.544 � MA'TERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO SANDY SYI,T,�ROWN IvB, . Projeci No. T195E-CS Client PALA RAINBOW,LI,C. Remarks: , ProjecL• SAMPL�83�5 COLL�CTED BY�.M. LocaGon:�ALA RD,�HW`Y 79�. COLLEC'TED�N(]/2ll00) �vironnsental and�otecbnical Engrneering�efwork Carporation Pf ate CONS�LI'DAT1flN TEST REP�RT _,.so i � � a ' i i � � ' € I � i � � � � � � i � < < � ; E 4 � f � i o0k ° � � � � E � E ' � � • � i { + I � i i i ` � } � , f I � i i � j � ` i � ' � ' � + � f ' t f . ' r , � � � � ; ; ; � ` I ; i F i � � � � � ! � � ; � I . E �so � ' I C I � ' � � 1 � � � � F i � � ; � E I ' : � ` � I 4 i 4 ' � I ! # � • � f ? f : .. � { � � ' f � � � � � ': � I a ` I � � s ao � i � . . . } � i 1 ' � . � ' ; ' ' i ; f f' • : � )i f �' � I I . � ; � , : : � � r l � � i F � ° 4 � ° ( E' ` �E ' � � � 4.sa � � � � � � } � � � f � f j [ E, � � � � � ° � � � � � . � � I ro i ' WATER ADDED ; � � � i } I � � � 1 f `►' I F • , I F f � ! I • ; i � � � � s.aa � . F , ` ! � , � i ; E f - , � 1 � . � � f � F �` � # � � � l l � E I � � j ! � � �� I i � S . � � ' ` f ! I I I � � � � I � � � . � � ` � � � � { � i ' � I � E � � ; � � � i I f � � � e.aa � I � f � j � � � � � � I � � � I � � ; � ` f ; ' : � f � � ; [ � i C i � E � I � : 4 I � 10_50 � 1 ' � . : f f � • i � � f � � � ! t � E I � � � ` � � ; � ' � F � ' ` ' ' ' I ' ' ' I f , � � I � � � � : � � i � ' � ; ; l � � � ' I ' � ! � � F ,z.cw I � � � � , � � � � � . � J � � I � ' � I � I � � ! � i I � I I � j 1 I - � � 13.50 ,] .2 .S 7 2 5 Applied Pressure-ksf Natural Dry Dens. LL pl �. ��en P Swetl Press. Sarell Sat Moiat. (p� Gr. (�s� (ks� CC �� (kst} "/o eo 223 % �.9% 97.1 2.6� 0.15 0.08 0.7�J3 MATERIAL D�5CRIPT'I�N � U5C5 AASHTO S1L`fY FIN�-SAND,BROWN SM Project No. T1g56-G3 CilenC PALA RAINBOW,LLC. R��: Project: 5AMPLE B3Q 7.S GOLL�CTEU BY C.�f. Location:PALA RD.�HWY 79 S. COLLEC'I`�D ON(1/21/00) � Euuir�on�nental and�aoter�iifcal B�g�neering�el�i�k Ca�Doratron P�ate CONSOLlDAT#ON TEST REP�RT -,.sn , . ; � , � � � �. � � � ' € : ' ' ; ; ,, i E • � � � � I ' ` � . : � � [ r I � � � . 0.� ; �r�r . : I f . � � p . I , • . � ' � ` I I : ! � : � t f I � . i � � � . � � ; ' ' � � � � j 1 j ` � � � � I �` : � � t I ' ' { f � ' ' I f � ' E � t I . � � � Z.50 � ' f ' I iI � � { � k 4 • i i > i i : E ► � I ! ; � � � � ; � � I , i � E ( � � k � 3 0D i ' � : � ' � c . . ; � ' , � ' ' � � � ' • : � ' � ; 4.5u � � � � ' � i � � i i . I � ! � � ; j � ' � WATER ADDED � � � : � 1 ; '� � . � I 's . , � � # t + ' � j � : ' _ : , i I i . i N j � � � � � 2 i ' e � � 1 ! f � �� r � � . I , � � t ] � { I ! m i < < . i � I i ; i � i � � � � I � ' I i � � i � � � � { � � f � � � � � ' � � I ` � 7 � ; 1 � � 4 { E I � f I � � : � � . ; I i ; � i f ` ; ( j . � i • � i I 1 ! , i i 4 : . j j I r � � � i � � � I I : [ ` ' F ; � I � '. ; f I � ' � I i � I � . � I ' � : l S.aO E ' I � � � I � � • t � ; i f ; i ; : fi � : ; � f � : � � ; f � i � � . � f � P t ; � � � � I I � . � l t � , f � , � i 1 � i 1a.50 I i � f i ; � � I j ! • � � ' : ; � i � I ', , � ; ; ; ; I f � , , ; , i i , � I I � . I , i � ' � � � i = I I 1 I � � � I , • � ' I � � 'I i r f � i ' I � � � � '' � � � • I � ! I � ' ' � � � � � I �z.ao � � � I . . I s � � i . : � } � � f � ; � � � � � � ; � � I i , ; � , � ; I ! � � � � ' � � i ! ! I � � i ! � F I � 13.5� � Z � 1 2 � Appfied Pressure-ksf Nalural Ory Dens. LL pl Sp. Overburden P� C � �well Press. Swgll e Sad. Mois�t. (PCfl Gr• (ks� (ksf) ° r (ks� % � 1$.7% 5.1 9'0 96.3 2.65 Q.14 U,07 0.717 MATERIAL DESCRlWTION USCS AASH70 GRAV�LY SATTY7,BItOWN Sp Project No. 7]956-GS Client: PALA 1tAI1VDOW,LLC. Rernarks: Ptoject: SAMPL.�B3� l0 COLLEC'�b�Y C.M. Location: PALA T�.-H'W� 79 S. COLL�CTED ON(1/21;00) ��L2�rrironmentad and�eo�'inlcal Bngin�rrsg�'e�ruork Carporatiion �I�te --t ,:� �,,t� . _ . _ . . . ._- . �� _. 1 .__. :�:- . �-� -� � �� .. . - _ _ : —_ •� • ' �4. � - � -.._. • � _ • ,`Ir• - ---� J..f �4�+�� ... - �z '� • -• - i�- --- •_ � �._ � , .. . :�:y�`' � . - .. �`- . . _ -.:�. STATE t�WY 7g ��-��,�r�" �;�'."'`'r.�:: - �'' � =, � ^ ` � � � _. . . • ,. ,_ .. . "• :� ... t r�� ,� -. • �— - �-i - , �8 _.�� ,� ;�} ._ � � � @ .... - . � � �� rg *� �.. � � � . . . _ �`� --- .� � _ . � �� • ' .. �'- � s � A �� q� G ` • � .a._ �. +, : � ��' i ` C r � _- �t� . �. ! ` • -�� Afu tpt� ' . . -:: � � � . . _ � _ �� :. . . . � . �.c- [ ��r Afii ;j' ' � � . __ " ,� :; � �� au�. O . . - � �� - f� A-�k � � :�.' •,t � g` •-- a"o . . � � '�' . o - -_ : ��.- i �� a` � .-- , �� -_ � � ..�- �.�. ' . . _ . _ . . .� � . �.. . . . � Y., . f / ..w �. . � _ , _ � 1- - �. ' -. LEGE�D � �,�. �� _ . , . . � l � 84 APPROXIMA7'� LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING • � r+■+r••• A�PI�t?XIMATE LOCATION �7F GEOLOGIC CONTACT aaf _ ALLWIUM Afiu UNDOCUMEl11TEb FiIL Afe ENGI�IEERED F1LL ' EnC EN �v orat�on �.� ��.� �� M.� �.,W SI E P ' pR�JEC71ViJMBER:: T1970-�GS LEGAL�]ESCRI�'�'��N: OAT'E: JANUARY 14,2000 SCALE: 1"�80' CLIENT NAME. PALA RAtNeaW L4�C FiGURE: 7 Ear[h Stratc► Geotechnical Seri=ices, Inc. C�'e7r«hniia�, L�rts•iranmrnt�e!ar.d:Ilvreria7c Tcsrirzy �an.sul�anes October 11, 2017 Project IVo. 171610-70C Geocon Project No.T2652-22-05 Mr.Judd Kessler Oil and Water Pechanga Parkway, LP P.O. Box L Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Third Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Reference: Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Preliminary Geotechnical lnterpretive Report, Proposed Commercial Development,Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechan,ga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated February 3. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440- 010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, dated September 15. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., 2017, Response to Geocon West, Inc.'s Second Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, Ciry of Temecula, Riverside County, California Introduction Earth Strata has prepared this response to the third Review Comments letter for the above referenced project prepared by Geocon West, Inc. dated October 3, 2017. The one (1) comment is listed below followed by our response. The following changes and clarifications should be considered part of and attached to the report referenced above. 42184 REMINGTON AVENLIE, TE�IECULA, CA 92590 951-397-8315, ESGSINC.CON[ CUMMENT IIF�. 7 7. "Faulting - Consultant has described one aspect of ground cracking due to compressible soils. However, nowhere in the original report or in subsequent review responses has the Consultant indicated that they have considered the past ground cracking within the Wolf Valley and determined the risk to the site from such ground cracking should it occur in the future.The consultant should describe the previous ground cracking, indicate the distance from the site of the closest historic ground cracks and provide a statement as to the risk for future ground cracking to the site." Response - In August and October of 1987 two sets of curvilinear northwest-trending fissures were discovered in relatively new residential communities and business parks in southern Temecula. Two general hypotheses have been advanced to explain the Wolf Valley cracking; 1) subsidence resulting from increased groundwater withdrawal by Rancho California Water District or 2) aseismic creep occurring along unrecognized active faults (Corwin et al, 1991). Evidence exists to support either hypothesis, or some combination of the two; while no microseimic events have been recorded in the area, the southern residential fissures coincide in part with the Wolf Valley Fault and the northern fissures zone is now informally known as the "Murrieta Creek Fault" (Corwin et al, 1991; Willis, 1988); following the shutdown of pumping from the "suspect" wells no post-1987 cracking has been recorded, however other wells have been developed in the area, but these are generally known to be pumped at lower production rates (up to 1/z pre-fissure pump rates), which has required the water district to import water from more expensive outside sources. FER-195 (Willis, 1988) indicates that the Wolf Valley ground cracking is most likely due to subsidence of loose/compressible soils and notes their spatial correlation to the Wolf Valley Fault. Figures presented in FER-195 shows the nearest ground cracking approximately 0.6 miles southwest of the subject site - see attached Figure 2 from FER-195. Investigations by Geowest and Leighton and Associates concluded that the subsidence was due to long term groundwater withdrawal resulting in the cracking along the existing fault structures (Willis, 1988). Given the distance of the site from the recorded ground cracking and the Wolf Valley Fault; the lack of post-1987 cracking; and the recommended grading which would remove soils prone to consolidation or collapse down to competent soils (minimum of 85% relative compaction in-situ) which are not prone to the type of consolidation/collapse recognized as the underlying source of the Wolf Valley cracking; it is our conclusion that the proposed construction would be stable and the recommended removals and compacted fill will adequately mitigate the potential for damaging settlement and ground cracking. Project No. 171610-70C Page 2 October 11, 2017 The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or require further clarification,please notify this office at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ]EA�II�'7[,]H[ �']f'fl3A�'mA� cG]E��'7r]EcC]H[N][cC�]L �lEl[��][cC]E�, x�IcC. �i�li;�=:=�-:i�y;� �•,a .�-`--._.--_ .s� � � '��V ��. �f�,,'��_'t•�` • ��(� � ��'~�3 \y. ��,�� CJsf��,4�� r'•�_ f_ `��`';1�` ��tCH,a�. �E�. ��--� ''• , , � �� 1 t a_:ss� �t� + {„ � n�a. �92 Q � 1 f�:�,�. �;3?i � , � � � �3SR• � rn •. � ,' �, a �S'1•' �:_' �- ' Stephen M. Poole, P� �`�'C��'�� Aaron G.Wood, PG, ��`��, r �`tJ` Princi al En ineer ��F G�u�� Princi al Geolo ist ^�` ��`-�� P g p g ��--=--��- SMP/AGW/mw Attachment: Review Comments [Rear of Text) FER-195, Figure 2 (Rear of Text) Distribution: (2)Addressee Additional References: Corwin, E.J.; Alhadeff, S.C.; Oggel, S.P.; 1991, Earth Fissures, Urbanization and Litigation:A Case Study from the Temecula Area, Southwestern Riverside County, California, Land Subsidence (Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Land Subsidence), IAHS Publ. no.200,May 1991 Willis, Christopher J., 1988, California Division of Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-195, Ground Cracks in Wolf and Temecula Valleys, Riverside County, dated June 30. Project No. 171610-70C Page 3 October 11, 2017 Review Comments GE�C�N W E S T, i N C �G E O T E C N N 1 C A L ■ E N V I R O N M E N T A L � M A T E R I A i S � Proj ect No.T2652-22-OS October 10, 2017 Earth Strata Geotechnical Services,Inc. 42184 Remington Avenue Temecula, California 92590 Attention: Mr. Stephen Poole,GE Subject: GEOTECHNICAL THIRD-PARTY REVIEW PA17-0318 76 SERVICE STATION PECHANGA PARKWAY SWC TEMECULA AND PECHANGA PARKWAYS TEMECULA,CALIFORNIA References: 1) Response to Geocon West, Inc. 's Second Geotechnical Third-Party Review, Proposed Commercial Developrnent, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-;��0-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California,Earth Strata Geotechnical Services,Inc., Project No. 171610-70B,dated October 4,2017. 2) Response to Geocon West, Inc. 's Geotechnical Third-PaYty Review, Proposed CommeYcial Development, Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-440-010 and 961-4=10-016, Located Southwest Corner of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, Ciry of Temecula, Riverside County, CalifoYnia prepared by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services,Inc.,dated September 15,2017. 3) Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, PYoposed Comnzercial Development, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-440-010 and 961-440-016, Located on the Southwest Corner of TEMECUAL Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, CalifoYnia, prepared by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc., Project 171610-10A dated February 3,2017. Dear Mr. Poole: In accordance with the request of Mr. Scott Cooper with the city of Temecula, Geocon West, Inc. (Geocon) has completed a third-party review of the second response (Reference 1) to our review comments dated September 8, and October 3, 2017.The purpose of the review is to present otu opinion regarding the suitability of the study,conclusions,and recommendations provided within the referenced document. Geocon's review is based on County of Riverside Technical Guidelines for the Review of Geotechnical and Geologic Reports 2000 Edition, Riverside County Flood Control and Water ConseYvation Dish^ict Design Handbookfor Low Impact Development Best Management PYactices dated September 2011,California Geological Suf-vey Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California and Note 49 dated 2008,and City of Temecula Standard Plans. 41571 Corning Plo<e Suire 101 ■ Murriela,California 925C''l•7065 a Telephone 951 304 2300 r Faz 951.30a 2392 Your responses adequately address Geocon's review comments with the exception of Comment No. 7 regarding the potential hazard of ground cracks with respect to the proposed development. Additional information or clarification is requested as indicated below. REVIEW COMMENTS Geocon's comments regarding the referenced report are provided below. Please provide a response or corrective action to the city of Temecula as appropriate. 7. FaulNng — Consultant has described one aspect of ground cracking due to compressible soils. However, nowhere in the original report or in subsequent review responses has the Consultant indicated that they have considered the past gound cracking within Wolf Valley and determined the risk to the site from such ground cracking should it occur in the future. The consultant should describe the previous ground cracking,indicate the distance from the site of the closest historic ground cracks and provide a statement as to the risk for future ground cracking to the site. CONCLUSIONS Based on our review of the referenced documents, it is our opinion that additional information and clarification are required to conform to Riverside County Technical Guidelines for Review of Geotechnical and Geologic Reports(2000 Edition). Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, �r�tC�PiA�� GEOCON WEST,INC.�4r � usu4 A. �Q D��nFE&�I�+i' � a �� 4��'��E R 0��'�! �. � Y �� ElYSifH�gA N(3 � f' � U� �O� ' "� �'�' �j,� iiEDtd(i!8'I' � •��--�-�/ � -No.�gp x �n �.-� � � ;� �� ' '� ��FCA4�� * . sa A. Sattiat� Chet E. Robinson � * CEG 2316 GE 2890 `�'��! LAB:CER: hd Distribution: (1)Addressee (1)City of Temecula Planning Deparhnent,Attn: Scott Cooper Geocon Project No T2652-22-OS -2- October]0,2017 FER-195, Figure 2 �y�r"� .. c.r J,�c� "�� "� `-✓ Y �yv • ... � . _ .__ . .. ... .__ _ q ti5 tir.� � � '., r ��. ��I� ��.-Y_'".�`'��_� �i� � � qr. � �F- .� - - --. ----_ � � _. - � �_ '- � � I `�. � r. �..��' � � t xrl� . ..,.�. �.�., � ��. �; '-;,i �� 7 ['��r�-'.;�f--=� ,�a?°t.;� � ;� � �� naaa o ��ao saoo 3aoo .aca woo eaoa roaa rscr '�-�., � s' y�` 1"'",y G+,r � � � °f'Q i ' �� I � i 1 XsHlQI�?f� 3 -�� r�'� � �1 _ J� ,�� ,�' v � 1� � ,�_ iK• � ES�J� � ,G ._.�2?.. ��,j' i '��`r � s � �`��s: q�-t �; �i3 M"'+ ..- r .5 C'?NT�UIR iCJTIEi31fAL 20 F�ET I i ` ��~ '". ��!/.. r �• �� ..:'�� iT�� t � �. 1 . DO�iEC� :ISVE� qE�}i�9ENr 10•FOOT�OMi�U4�S � '1 i�1 b � y , Fy� { ._!r . . � ; �Jy,• r��TrQNfi' OE�D�1iC YERf ICAL C��ItT9DM Of 19s�9 . ��1 �` ��r -�f . L"��i 9�,;�` +�� i�,? C� ^ '��.��* n7~ ti �'�?�� 46. - _ ,`��J �Cly �� I.; • Y��r" 7�'� • ��aJ�=;�� - ' � 1^ /y r . L�f ' �S�' �•� M�`�'�� L❑ Mt� �� 'f � r �' `�. f � 4� � ..r' y L�� t+ ti ik10 Afl� I''lA?VIIUGIrLYIC NQIITJI _��'� `�L+ �•-i. ./ �, �'/. f� -�'� r= C �I�'� `� i� � MR1RAllt]M Aff Cl16FL'R OM� SN�Ei �t _ +.�r.. .1. ,�� - I `:.f �e.�:•' � ^`�•3•_�-') .a' ' L.� 1sr� ��•i �•_��. ��, �r 4r-_ �� ' �., ... � j �•.�.'�4�f;� �.�;�� ti � �''-il��{��'.�� '�i �'y,.•U.^' r�5�,��_�l�r`� �}j��5"�4�.f j+`'- � ��'v�1 f �f, y��4 t�ire +��_�.ji�F = �•�.I�.1 ,��e"� •��r' ; y��'•- v� a . ,,� f 1v ;�•r,� � ....•;' � �« ^� ��,c�l..Ll� '� ,�-� _ �`��+1r,_,.��;,r�,��`3S _��ti S ,��.i i� �S�11 T�. ��l�,1,:��f"'f��'1=•��'"��,;Y� / � �� Y�� , �� ..t �`6 . ., � �* ' 1 ,. �;- ./.,'.. `IS�� .,� ti ,� ':� „ -S�Z-�� _ �,�.� ../�.�' .--, '•, �� r.,� ;, �-� [�i ''oa � r�,^ :' • „ i �r � '�4 ,�.- '_�. ��. ,�. �'•�y��r" .,! �~ ' .- [�,`�� i 1 r- f 5 ''k - r� � � �.. /~' r..7 •l'- e , ! a'r I �ti � -�`,�r '� K JA .a � r �� :�-rY �_v � �:��;.1, � s -;E,ti.'�-r�� `1. ` �'�r^��i4�_. y�1 .��i f�J� � �`'l�.��? ' "r,_.,� ,��: �� .� ._._, �"� �4• '�'��.`"+.� • �' A�w a s� •ti '� �{.�;' l�� j�'k} �+ �I��^ - -�'r � • i� ''�' �:i?ti:}��•� K� -7�^i�: � I��, ,�.+� �.• ��•� � �� '' f J 1 _ }r �' . �� .�1 �7 r' z: i - _�,_,(� .�� ,'f" ��• Jt- rt.;° L r ...�- ��.�`Y � C •� -' • �' . � ,,.Y� L-�i L,�_ r+:• ' y� •. .. _ �T"'1'1'i�. - ��'��'�� ;��1".�'�'.lt � .%`��! 'J� �•• �� t11'.4 /t �� '� � • �4 •i� .h-=r ��Y -r: . � n_� 5� !� 9 . .S � �� S'f�.� � j �'�' � �i;r�.. � c� .s.r 1. ;�.�,=. r .,�y• ,,,,,•f �i' - 7 T.: � 1'1�� _. /, , ��"i� ^.4� 1 1��•��: r� �FY '�`y.�i� T i � y' L'� .Kh '`. l�..i �. ` / ��` ;�1�� ,��•,� � j f �y�q "f ��' �•'\^_i. Y :��z, .,� �'! ':�:•.. ..1, '.3' }�'r %J `Lr:''�.x1� ri�:'y,�. , ''"1 :�J �i /� - �� .,�'. �� i�` �'��t-!r-; �/ . , � f � �4�^.� �� •uL5`J �7 �[ �� '� �:� if-' _ •'"`N.�yr'.:7:F ^i^ L •��.,1" �,� .p+,�1..�'�...5 � ��1� fi.; ^��^.,�{ �� } [�`.� �[�, � �,� � r' •' `r. {q+ �{l.�i -� •R�f' i� \ \' i ��"l .� •:J•• ••c+ �'8� �'t�'- - - _r !-r/.�,J�`.� .�r• `�� ^� ?S�. L'?' •�.-II L,r .i:'?� `, }r ..��{` L � .�}.�.. �1 � -. ��. � .-�e:� � s �0�� 5 1 '_��'-�� .�¢. •Lr�' •' - i?i��.. .� n,l.'` .��_ t��ti�'.. � -�".' .t r / _ _ 'F'''-^ �'•'L �7 � I� 1"+`- ��' �L / �+ ,"� -�/'F.'i..fi�3 � fl� � _ � . �x,L" j ` .� ��'� (. �,,y� `�� 1•1 "�r i"_ ''Fi p� �• � .!• /' � �.� `��;'� .:I-. 1'^ _ 1 S. ��[ t 1 1 •�� _ _ �.4jM1�"':-f�..�.'J�(__: -2. •1 'f 1� ��` rr ''g"��`_:� '��5 1��t':!,�� .\ -��F� L�1 �w� .. �C�' - l� ? •L� ��t -_..::' - yy,,- ( �• . '1..� .r �� -�r�G -1S •'� _.:r=,�.1'r '� �Y �J �{• .!' "�F :3 :etil� �,�, i�r �6• � 1 �1•�r--�.�"�- �'Y-�', '��'A: �o �� - r. � �• .�:` '� �� "�:� a� J -r� .- �i .� �i,� { ::t�+� •r�, f �� / `e. a'��^' _7'� ��s - \ _ �' I �" y.� �. ��•• ,�•._:Y '.f�i•�•'4' .�J1'•'� y�i�''�' y �-� .5 � I . ��/l� j1' ): `-., �'`.' �.�y��t. �a��oYP •��' . - 1 .M1 .� • ��..^�-��.a 'r •'r-�•�'.� /.ir".,�i`r �'.{'�-'��L? :'!1�: �l�J,�c_ ;�I.I .i,�1:'� ! �r.i•,�vt �.~�._�f Itiy,rt' i� ;. �� . G. . ' . � � � `" � . '`� r' l' -� 1 t. �„ _;J'�` •:r f� � 1� l. �+} / � �y , -�:� � e - r�. ".��.+".�•-''%''- � � �'' '�,{'�� l�(y f� .. •';� • ��:� ^°ti. � ^�,.: ,�.. ,�•., �/ �� .�� .)1 ' � '�.Jr .� � ��~ - ,li i'� C 'J�"�• it�'-��.�.�:r�7�y ��.+'� ��' :L'.:-_ ,� };�� •- � \i .1� �� r �• 1 ��-��' .=�-�v~- Gi� _�'.... �Z. p ti�...V.'tty �'.r..• :�� 's ��.=.� � �-� T. y�'•�^ ' '� ti, r,a' ' � `!r �f • t � - --j ��• - �� - �ly�� "��.; _-• ,,} �. '�+- uo .3i•� � tt _ -il�i"��• �' ..'1y��' � . � 'p'�F � 'C,'Ju3 - _ "-�y•�• ��_�. 'e�= .�.:k., '.a�_,�� .""f�r .ti,i � •'� �.-� T Jf? _ .�;., r�'' ",: .� '��_ ��. ��, .� �.. � ` T_�� .;h , �,-r,,; -�--�� __� __ . � .�. - ��' `' �7,�;- " �"`'�''•' `' ;�;ax ic. �_��r�� 1 - • r �� . _,�L -�� -- � .." .r: ,�-n �,y�� J .;r- ' r 0 _'�e''��' , i^ r� ,� Rl!�'�_v ~'1• w�-.. -z+'r{ •'s'r'^• 'r .I' .:z`- ' �i '�:w-. r"i��.i i��1' �{<-'�`u Y: - '�. ��i •l� � . . � � y �tiqL . iwl. ,_ ' • ;',��" : ]" .V•:"% L.{�� ,� �r �' � • � r� ��. - - .`� ~�t �+� �.L�: ..1 � 4 tr �il� �3 v � /'] . "�.�-�Z'�•4' r�.7��'��• �� r F.��f ��•' �� •� � - � �-}�.� r✓,�` ��_ �-f^�~�:'.. _ .� .. _ ��f''. • - ;�ti+='�. 1 � �:r.;i�� '� . '� . I - � / �' � r� � r�m£ - .�: ��^ i .�:� , . .� •� ��; ,�� +,, �;.f�•�: .:�.�� - ��.,..:�;.=�v � '� i4sliaS`�.: j, f 'i+'`�.`.7.�RJ�i yti, ,r �- ,�-r.wxr'y',�•�' v,y� - •S. ti :;��_• �i i'' :r. ^°" '�a'' �� - .- ��,tti I� i -��S �2,•�ir.�•.�j 'i• •j�s � nG•.��: , . � '�� -r��_ � ,�..�:''::,.��fvr ,Y•.='•'� - t_'' . •� .�Y.� j+� � -� �.�i., _�: e .. ' ,�.s•�a7 •,r'� �j�'.��j��.�r, :i�d�[.�,r c�.'�fT'r��+ ��' Ig,�,�i1L'`°�'/ f � ti.^^ - � �� ,;:�F 'C`'�-'+�y��=7. ,� �'�^• y -� •� ' ��'�`�{• .� :�� .,r,.;r,4(.1�.-r�::: -1 •ti•-,,.�,1�, �� .7 �� ,ti ":� � .,r~_'..,_, .� I-.� .}. .r.-._�. ]� �Y.Iti� � �� 'a •�i '�� . - ffi,� -^»:��ry�` j:l' 'J•- R ��-'l4)n� �� I '�.•�� I •� ��, '��` - �� ;�� 3:- � _ .� .\ �^�- '" �Y�i l �r�� 'r - �r�.�" ,!r""'1•i�.J i��}•. -+�� l:• �i� ,' ti gw�.�.�,,t i� e • . .a �-.T-.��L"r _ J'�.i�T..• -;'��" _ �i�•'•-`��'r � -, _ ..• 'r. �}�, � '.� +''..� ti. °�� r'�c � ,.��.'�tih•�: rr'-"1�•r '��;.. .;ti. , ^`4'~'l i 4, �.. '} ��_: - ,� .`�,N_�. - 41 ,_� .Y p�. .i,e, 1 ~K''�.i�''� , '�t. ,,+^� - 1�,,;":;tii'�;{A�;L. �L,,i;:�_.�, ,.t,,�^•r � . � ,�N{�':R: :s.�'' � y�'_ `�.�� ~ ��!�u-�_• �� .�-`�^ ,'� -1.::--'�'' =�'�f '� =•' •�� 1 "�� ,ro .S .�:: E:.±�;i :�r ,,,41�,, !y (A�".�{CJ��{� y , ; - - �'��'• ��`�. �`�. �� '.��•�y, k.'�� 1.. .:L'_ _� 4 , . � � '74 I •i��'.�:I F'1 �r��f•1•i 1 L� � . '� •�^, ��' ` .L�- . ��' •t •�. .��L.�.� �� i`. f�� :-��,� ��i qi � r�7�-��,.� ,•��.. �' {.;U' �J� ��e� ! � r .'Yr.-•, tiC� �,.:1;.�^; '` :y-:�w - �> . `�'� �;�. ��..�� 1 Z �� -�n ��1,��'`.� � 1 r-� �G �,/-�-; -- . •, �L,l)+�,.;s{ .�~ r�• �p {"� f ; � � I - •�-f ,�rt;. y '�' -��`�'�::ti L ^�• �r.� , •ds�:.. I, �r �1I, �.-.. �F.L-.• _ �� :'-f . �' - �tit� . i'� f_ `'D� . .'v.. C� -1• �,�}�ilr � -•i`.r-i4i�!�.. '�"��r- ' � � t,.�`+.� � �7 .\ ti �-� L' �rS'� �� l � � � .c; ~.��n��:�'��-'�� Y ��31► � 'I. �� n., . . � . f�i�:r i � .. `7.s., �•��- 1 . _. . �}r��_ ?\ r7�"�� .. - ' �:�L � r . _ _ _ .�'r,,,rT - • ^'- .� f�,' - . � � 1�� ,` .s �'C„ .� ��'�:'1�:.. �`` ; F'.:-'� .l� � a 'pr" .� .r,�c?r_ _J ' �- :�• ti`- �<r! � _ i, `r-. � ��; 'u'` j.� .�l v. �:, � �.ft,•' .� J�.: ,�L•.`�.��- � � � �� l ..:�f - 1 �' �i,�`��'�Y arr," . ��•� � �� ' �' ':►at � � r'1.�7.� + � "' '�f � - `'.' "{; �•��:.�? .J. �--�-�� ' �'Lr� "'' .-�• •� �� . ��r_ +'* - �'"tiS ' �` � . - f. :t �� i �`Pl.-='-.--••-�_ � � �:� •� � _; �Yc: �' �+'c' ti G � ��• ..r �� . :i� �µ� � „�t� 'A� ,� � .�� •;1 '1..-.-.�y•.^r.' '�- ��'a _ � - . �: � .K..- �.3rj r . l _a �. , � :r� • . .L y� , �`_' t L r � ti„� l i �'�'Fr�'�• • . t��.'1.. �t ��C�� .�, 1" �,`.`S� , ["Y`. � ,^M1� ��•. S A�.: � :t � _t 1'1�: 1 { � �'�l� T� �L�++X :a'.,�� '�Y �! �� • ;�._ '� .`•l�-. �,'J( . � l . .S .t y�% , �V;.�.� • f �1'• 1 � � \ I� .�r� � *i � I I�., _�. �j'! • - . :� �� A � V �•.1.�J: '� `.•, � � - 'r' � �� - -rt � � . �'°�� ',�."ry� � �/ � y•� L t� ..t� � i��.�� `.+'��='•� � .•--S 1 ,.T � N�•�M1: `• J 'n•- •-� � "� � . x -` . .1 S ��•S �'� ��4 �'�: ,'� �. �� ^ _ ( � . � -^ � I r ..� 1 rk � e { I. ., .^'� ti r'- VFrA � �..:' ^i1. !//S�. � (} 'i'��-: �'f� X � C � `ti, t�� ti r ��• ��--ra� r i1'.O L ' `-• � �.l� • = •1, L•.V ' •, ��: �Y,. "'� . '"pA ��• '��; .��A ��.�T- 1�r � ��_ � � C� F].�/ . `�'r � rh� f � '`'�t��.,t i�•��%�i._`�y�� f'.-� 1 �.. �(y• _ ��r ,�:% � "' •� _�• '\` '� QZ �rb 1-wi` � _r. � it � f' � _ � ^{•. -.. R��; y� �ti� 1 1��- -�.� f - `� �Y. .9.1 � -�-?�'�'�t.. �•. � I� _`.�� .� y'9� - f � 7 �r^..�r', � ` � 1: r r J' . ; . ' �+1 � � ��.�� . � � � f �.-,� • _��di� � '�/•�� . � a �. � ti _�� r' � .F r= �r...� _ ' �''`.i i:,a � .¢�( �I i(�,, `�� ..�.:�r�µ'�"':"1~�� l.�}��.��}.".',;�h � tf- '+✓�"� S. '.!' _ ' .� �' �.i. � " ^t_ :�1�^� r, "� � �"�,�� y i.•([I'S�,..�. ��4 u�l�oh 4 '�L'l.i' - -� ,}i�' �i� ,�' `�� :�• ..�.-��,:•<•.�-•'. �' :.��i .��L�'�t'J1_f"r�.^ .';'i�- '�' ..4`�� f �': �-� ;,`, .�*I" 'r ,L } �:, ,'a �� , �' `•� .:y �'�'` � ,,. •�w ,i� `t�i� .. -=-�� .� '!�� :. � - "�',� r. �;� ��': � _ -..a � • .�' �.� 'f'cC �•.• '-.J ''�� 6. .,� . .;�' '\ ..l � '� '�r �ti� �.1_ ��1�' ��[�'f.t`. s ';N4�..�. �:�.:�i. _s •iy J� - �� ` (�,- :4-• ��;� ,.�,,_,� � �-...� :F ' , .�� ': Ys �� ;.`�, , �.,� �,.--�-�v� �a��t 3 � l �`��`" � ,R'.5+.:.1: �,�,_ ~�r - f� !'• �'t�� y�• !,� "" ��. � � ` r. - �_ � � Y -� . -.i. _ :aat'� ` ��. .r � �'��{� � yti� r� 4 . ��y , �� - ...:yff��`�- � '.�z ix •� � �• ..� Sf,�,i,� ''xl� �„ ��.��5.�}- �,�� ' .. J Li.��.�,�' � 4�ti.� .�,_��Js.` � '� y�_.,..� ,, � � l \��' /r 'r.r. 0 ii+� ro� . _ -ic�` �,'W`Y`r-„� 4 t r`- �.�• . •�� .:��.. _ ` ,� � ", f" ,. ..,� y,�, = ��g �`:�] .` � , `~- ��,.�;�. 'y � � � :.i�r _ � . � -,�,'3 _ _ �.��,. ''�� 4 �- .;�., � l'�' h'��P.•,-�/._-: '��f�_� r-_�-rl� ��. `'.�� ` f. � R wt a � � =q'ti� , . � "�Yt. _ " __'7.�� -�•� {`�� .'� � _ � ^' r, •,,.�� . :t� ,��'q ��_ [ir:? _ � '�"- '�'- ��E•�` �• �� _ �� i i �� y� �+' _.� 1� � � � ..�'��.�- -��:"� _l1 f •��1 7OC'��..'� ,r �,y 1'�. � .� - .. '- ` � .. �' Ae.�� r, .� . '�r'� �• �j ...� • T �� I � V d ��4 �. � 'E I _:. ,�t �.��„o, •� �-3 '�� - � ' . �'�,.� =� -' - � '{r� r� • � -�� ,� �vy �{�•{r'•�.Y. � • , . . . . �°.'`A .� §`• 'y�,�'. �C'<�.�,�. ��i^.�j �,`-�{+ � [ � A.• -� l I � � �:�.;��' � .�. 1 `�r,,,�,i�--�r ti �L'�� irJ• �� /'� _ { f ' ��7 � �� f/ �1 '��. �r � '�� % 4�'� '�• �� - �'�-��: r '� , '. '•. . � �. �f:,�.. �� • � t t � .� .. �� - � - �' _` r r �� ► ` �., �� .z,� �. '� �' � •s� , � .] :; � �".^''�rr .�, '' :`. �"_' :ti. ':�� Jr�Jf -�", �+ L( Gcss�° i �,ti�"� ��,�ti i � 'r'-.f �-. r-� �y�,_a� ,,��« a.• J••.� cr • • . ) c � - •� . � '� �I. - . - � •r`yrJ.. �/ �" 'L _ � 'r z i� � ^ 5.,. .S �•. � - ,�� f . ti . L '' `r� .• t ':;r n . .i . � . r '� m�~ `.�p. ;��. �;. . ..J' ./ . S - �� F' Q� �� r �� ry Y �� . k f � a�9 ` �w,y�' {��^�.'"^�'�y�•��[J�' ..��.•'ti � � r� '� �.t�. ��' 1 - �• � Y ..�� l � ! � �� p �r �i:• �•T".�.'V1 �"•`•--'- ti�� • - ^ `' r': •�• ' :r E �[ , - '� Fw � i!a � ''�. - �� y� �r -^'%. . f,,. -- �.. y l s�1' �J ''• ;v� � iF 4slw� u'�.. V Y' . . a �. � - r J• - �, �, t.,�t y ..� ��,�- �n /� �� f� '� �� •��_=:��tp1 �o..�_F��v'r.; :� , i' L�' �i _- a ' 1M [.1: o i` I jr � , •r- �,r -' . . .Y ,�.r�. . r- , � �i 1 �' � � u i ,Y � � . -.�L'_ '' r-� -i'. � 1.��J� �Z � � - y ��i �y n�� '�+ �� t � �r .7 � �� za 4 �:r►. I � 'r '`;r'"�.� �� fti-i� ' w - . .� ('' l�� ^�:yr'�. �.��'. s�='�=. �� '' �,�s., 11 � . "�cA�„�,• � �;,4�` �'.,,_� � f/�� . 1�;�� ;:•+ ,'1 ..�{,,.�` �: ��-,c. � ' � L F j !' f r..•.• .�r 4� � 1 1N�j� ��lt� [black) in tt'�e � ar�a ��-Jf 1� �� ^�_ - - �1ti.�;/•��.- .,.�• -_.� '?,��'Y_ �`�,` ,i�-�� :. • - ;4 "` ' d�;�°�,�� .�" �. �_ E,. / � ...'�:.A.��_��,, 'i�`:,��- �r'r _ '��'� J'f'� L . _ :'(,., ' �� .� i �. � �� ]�. ,.1 .� � ,r and loc�ttivn af grour3c1 �racks �or��cl iri .rt:::�;�:�'"=� ��,� �..: �' x,� =: Y m ,�` ,� .�.� `E,'�._r�.. ^��` �'�,,,��. , �� . � %� s f�.Y . D ��'� _ :f �i • �='. 1987 (r�d) t�li�.dotr�r f�ul.t f_rrm� C1f fi.cial �:��;;.��.�r �,` ;y�� .�: ;��-- „�. • , ._�r,;�� :.y , �.-1� _ - •�:, � ��`-'�,, � '�'��, r� - �� ►. �'f 95 . .I ��• � I �- `:�:�� . :;;... - .�� 1. �.�, •i.; :. �r J ,y;� � ,p .:y.,'�.�f�` ��a ,./c �1' pd %C .� • '� ��:�,, �. ��..,. ��,:��- '��'� .�:. �:: � AYCfLll.S:-��.1.4}.O �C].d� 5�7,]C�.71,CaS �O�"i�8 �''��75 �Y}'?'��,�.t.f)- ,f;-:y' ��n'G�'•}' '�--:...�-� _ .�?"+�• ��,�� •� .r �:_� i:',1�',� �d r�'n�f . s �,� t .�•ry � � �.. , r �� (��,�.�)�" . .�.fi•� "�ir.y�. ,�,� �J..f,•�..��.�..� a-l i��' �� i '� 1 �'q • . r. ��..�_Z• � � � .� .� � r� �?� t� A'4Lk�1B�E t `�.YI�ClLlc3 d� �C�C�1r71'1C�1 '� :�:�:.;,;�1"'�.�,%•�� J� ;1�i�'�;•r+�:� ti��' .� ; = ;-;. r..�'•. j� ��.-� !p�q`I ,, .� / 1w�� A� f J � s7,:�.' y.�' ,�., � ::,;,�. ..`�,,., '.k;ti�� "� 1, �� .�.� tli. �'-� � .a� 1 � i '' .. 'C�1"'r`i1lC i�S. Wi llard � �tblf V'al EF.iLl�.�� r{�:'eij•s'''�y�"`;�' ';�' _J: �'�� _ at�'`�.;� ..}�. •l' ! .--� -�;'��'ti„ �� • �� r � .. ( ��° _ `-��.,�",�:•�t t�k+ � �I' �,: •-�;• f.•�'�'�, •:,*�` �",�"' � �'•; . -,� �.� •�• '� • ' / Y ir ;�: i+ r`!�:�' � ti.:':�•L'Y'-'- �i� �, �� If:'.3��^�'��'t. Ps`� '��.. °r `� i � �p 1 \. 1 ^��s e �XGII! �x t x�}�7}. �iT� CSr�L�SS ��5! r:�f �'"��-�•;��.��(�'-' f� r ;� � i.. .�:,� �i .�:' ' r ��'. ~/� ..�1:..,-i..,, � �•- ,Y • r U 1� �• K :,. ��. �..1 .� •�� :��,�:i:�� . .-: :f,. � .�, �_t f.. :��,�-....�1_ . , �'�'- �:.� :w^r'! - .;J� L�;r-:��. �,;==��` =� �� .c��-.�~� _=�.,_ �-,' -M'-� �i�� r:, J -i • .}:�Mi.. . ��-- �aest ,.1987� , Leiqh�n �nd As�Ac�tes : r c ; r�-1 �,.. - r-=�'��:. v=: '}`N. ;; �;:` ,�. ;2.Y�{ '''':''' �":":�r''.;� �6,; �}�, •t �,• y � ;:� 4 ,�.,r. :5:. ,r•,�' .r� •�.s},�:� �`��\. �. �'`-= .fr�. .•:;;,•,s".: _ .L,- .ti ,o-;��' � i. .r ys�'• �' 1 I , �S�Q �' : ,.�!.`� - r ,..{ . � ,� �:i. - ,�,.� ;;��e�l` E�• ��. .�� •i�"� ; � � {1987� ax�d m�xiif ic�d fram Ri�erai,de ��e..y •.��' t . � ;�J�:::, .y �^�_� .�.,'. r.• ,r` �}. I:��;, �:�.-��..� . :_,� ��_-r��: �' },:. i; �� 1.f�. L r ��.. �; �C�` _ - }�# �;ti�� .. , . -=�;;a,- .,_ 1 g : �,.. 1 . ;y :� r:3 .� . :1�,}'y .,� �•:,:=. ��. :�r?:�;_;, a:}'.:�:•, r,.[,�� -i�iM7��ti.b.r.,;C�•�_-�u •L �:s. .� • rt ' , �• 4: �� N�'r"=."�^ .�,`., 9�8 v�:.�. ] ��= ~�� :� l',.; �:-• _�. � , . 4 � �r}r �� .,:�F. �'.�,:'r�f �!:• � �,.. .�i.5'f � :� �•�'1 l�;.:�:� `�=�.}.7:r +��h'"�;7lL'�;-a �J `' �_�' ' `�i ��._»�� -�_E�� :�- :�� lf• r';�;`.'•�^ ',e� :�/f"l�' � � ."�,, •.� .1r�:.`�:+.^ 7. -- � y �• ' `1r,�' - ��'�� 1 :!' �� .�.TI'�' f•�•_ '{. �� •' ..`�i��~1 - ~--��r� �• ,.��.y •,•l' �'d.��'� r•I�.� i'.��./� =�� 11l.�.�� . . -� ,r�. �.. , � • -_,,.�y. , ti1��.=.'. 'C:�. 4.� �,T ..�'-t,:: � 1 . �' �.J �.r^. ��.�_J -'f�a'p'• .l ;�.. �' . ��--✓.r� - •� 1� � r.,- '•s.• , r�r ':4':�'- ,'f;s _'y�..:'_� -'�V.:~� ;�--�-� S . .�y"` -►�;" 4 �'•; _ - !' :�._ - •� .�• ", • '�'. 1:` �+ ��. �i.,. ,i.:. `--Qr.--:,�. �=�. ,�• _ _ ,�,; a��, �- . �c��Y,} ,�" ) X'��P.r�!'JC� �G} l.fl ��G +�� J'f.x`'4 �'c";,� _ �z �` ,I i'� +. '`-.N r�f:'!�, � .. r � : }f:.. • ~ •� . � �-! � �'•� '�: ioc�tit c} - ;� �� •:. }' a =r _ �:rt �R,-M,�`�..:._..�,-. �,?;.:;�:;�: �.: -; �ti �• .�: �. �-.'� + � � � ,_..� ,�! � = � � ' �}, .� " s. .� , � . _ .� • . � �' ,; � ..r� � �,;f�: .._':�':+• y�.;f 1��:_'�s _ •.•r-y%�J= F .�;-` ��},� � , J ,%,, ��.s�-. �_, �,r�'':�:.., ;,J�=,•�•;°ir��-.�,:• .��-lj,+�1 _ f L �^�. ,�,ti•� �+�V � ��. .-1'. .J '�-�,,� rr/�..� rI /'y • '��.t J� �i• •`� �'�, l ��I15� �.�.: -_ 'Sf.�.L..`':••�;i. •1 titi .li 1• • � • - '_t ��'R�Yy� ,•� ,;,,L'�'�ir- �, r-'�.=' �_y�:� . �:-t� '� � n•�'�� ' ��. �(�y��'•' �(.�,"�;.•�� ?N'';H i:•f� .�f:�-,;.��:;.i-�r�' ��'�+jr��• •.,1�.,,\".'� � �� +i��° ..,� � �C�� .ff� C;r �. �. .�^,,t� �� •1'�'�:� .� � ' .�L� P'/�' ls��.��.��'. j. , � Yr' .�J.:, _ ,y. t°-�� „' �•' r � �; .4 �1 ..�� . �y, �. .x,. "�. � f. ,r,.._+ 1: .� •.r'1' '�� `!�.i � �..i: -� t .•1;�iJ'- >,L':� r,r_�+f�i;,`�:��. i^y��'��'� .i'-�-' ''i.. . w�R 4N �^ t � o raC'',�- r`' ,'tir� I:'•f �. .�. YC .�� r k f it.•'.� _'a": �1•r...ti;;u.,r 1 14�.�r`- y,aa r � � .7ar j� ,�- :l !� -: -.V �1 S��. ,�� V�./.- -� � �'!'ti,r'. .r `,.j,..-�'� .��r "'�.,; n� y,r� :i• 'i w "�. �- �r ' �:� • �r�:-'�i � i.� ��' �7r�r..r�: ' t �� ..:.'1�•' a�. ��f�� s "'.� ��•.. +;�� r,--�� 4i =:? ::��.��J � . {� ' ��; '1i\.y,1.,� . �,� �.� r, �+r. - 1 •� J�+ '�i�`;-•--`u>, _ .. ,.1�: .t'.. .�S.u,. .i � _,,,i .. , _... .,�� • ' r.! a� r . . . r�- . �t�� f' ,�. r• }• 1•�. ��45 Arlltrr� 1_.,,./..f�..�or.ei lGOl...L �.,.,�/�.sir�'