Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024 Logged By: AZ/AC
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
60.5 H-1
D-1
18 @ 5í: Mottled olive gray to olive brown clayey SILT, moist, stiff, iron staining, trace caliche, trace gravel, diatomaceous.
MH
D-4 @ 10í: Mottled pale olive gray and pale olive brown clayey SILT, moist, stiff, iron staining, trace caliche, trace gravel, debris, diatomaceous.
72.1 54.3
@ 15í: Mottled pale olive gray and pale olive brown clayey SILT, very moist, very stiff, iron staining, trace caliche, diatomaceous.
D-6 @ 20í: Mottled black and olive gray silty and fine sandy CLAY, very moist, very stiff to hard, trace organics.
10.9 116.2
14 17
38 D-5
47.1 74.1 DS
71.3 57.4 CN
D-7 @ 25í: Mottled black and bluish gray silty/fine sandy CLAY, very moist, hard, trace organics.
51 13.5 108.3
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
@ 2.5í: Mottled olive gray and olive brown clayey SILT, moist, medium stiff, iron staining, trace gravel, diatomaceous.
D-2
11 21 @ 7.5í: Mottled olive gray and bluish gray clayey SILT, moist, stiff, iron staining, trace gravel and debris, diatomaceous.
47.6 72.9
52.3 68.6 CN
MH
MH
CL
B-1 @ 1-5í
B-1 GS, AL, MD, EI, CC
MH
MH
CL
Artificial Fill (Af)
445
Surface: 4î AC, 6î AB
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
2403
D-12
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-1
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
30 Blows Per Foot
35 40
45 50
55 60
@ 30í: Mottled bluish gray and brownish gray clayey silty fine to medium SAND, very moist, dense, trace caliche
nodules.
D-8 56 SC 14.4 117.2
60.5 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
D-9 @ 35í: Bluish gray to black silty/sandy CLAY, very moist to wet, very stiff, trace coarse gravel, diatomaceous.
28 18.3 108.6
57.7 70.5
47.7 72.1
18.3 107.8
D-10 21 SC
D-11 27
@ 40í: Gray clayey SAND, very moist, medium dense.
@ 45í: Mottled gray and bluish gray clayey SAND, very
moist, medium dense.
24 @ 50í: Mottled olive gray and olive brown clayey/sandy SILTSTONE, very moist, very stiff, diatomaceous, minor
interbeds of fine sandstone, well bedded, thinly bedded to laminated.
MH
SC
CL
Monterey Formation (Tm)
D-13 22 @ 55í: Mottled olive gray and olive brown clayey/sandy 50.0 69.3 SILTSTONE, wet, very stiff, diatomaceous, minor interbeds of fine sandstone, well bedded, thinly bedded to
laminated, free water/seepage along bedding planes.
MH
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
445
2404
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-1
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
60 Blows Per Foot
65 70
75 80
85 90
@ 60í: Olive brown sandy SILTSTONE, wet, hard, moderately well bedded, thinly laminated, diatomaceous
D-14 66.7 59.2 50/
5.5î
MH
60.5 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
Notes:
Total Depth: 60.5 Feet.
Groundwater Not Encountered.
Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped.
Asphalt Patched with Cold Patch AC.
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
445
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2405
D-3
Log Of Boring
DepthTypeNumberUSCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
0 Blows Per Foot
5 10
15 20
25 30
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
41.5 H-2
D-1
18 @ 5í: Mottled olive gray and light gray clayey SILT, very moist, stiff, bedrock fragments, iron staining, diatomaceous.
MH
D-4
@ 10í: UPPER: Olive gray clayey SILT, moist, very stiff, bedrock fragments, diatomaceous. 46.4 74.2
@ 15í: Light gray clayey SILT, very moist, very stiff,
diatomaceous.
D-6 @ 20í: Pale yellow clayey SILT, very moist, very stiff, diatomaceous.
67.6 55.5
33 33
35 D-5
50.5 70.5
77.5 60.3
D-7
@ 25í: Pale yellow to white clayey SILTSTONE, very moist, hard, fractured.
57 26.7 96.9
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
@ 2.5í: Mottled olive gray and light gray clayey SILT, very moist, stiff, bedrock fragments, iron staining, diatomaceous.
D-2
18 20 @ 7.5í: Mottled dark brown and olive gray clayey SILT, moist, stiff, bedrock fragments, diatomaceous.
58.6 65.8
59.3 63.7
MH
MH
MH
B-1 @ 1-5í
GS, AL B-1
MH
MH
ML
Artificial Fill (Af)
Surface: 4î AC, 6î AB
Monterey Formation (Tm)
SM @ 10í: LOWER: Pale yellowish brown silty fine to medium SAND, moist, medium dense.
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
442
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2406
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-2
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
30 Blows Per Foot
35 40
45 50
55 60
@ 30í: Pale yellow to yellowish brown clayey SILTSTONE, wet, very stiff, diatomaceous.
76.7 53.7 D-8 27 MH
41.5 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
D-9 @ 35í: Pale yellow to yellowish brown clayey SILTSTONE, wet, very stiff, diatomaceous.
24 86.7 51.1
77.7 52.4
D-10 23 MH @ 40í: Reddish brown to olive gray clayey SILTSTONE, wet, very stiff, iron staining, diatomaceous.
MH
Notes:
Total Depth: 41.5 Feet.
Groundwater Not Encountered.
Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped.
Asphalt Patched with Cold Patch AC.
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
442
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2407
D-3
Log Of Boring
DepthTypeNumberUSCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
0 Blows Per Foot
5 10
15 20
25 30
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
81.5 H-3
D-1
16 @ 5í: Pale olive gray to white clayey SILT, very moist, stiff to very stiff, trace iron staining, diatomaceous.
MH
D-4 @ 10í: Mottled pale olive gray and black silty CLAY with fine sand, very moist to wet, very stiff to hard, diatomaceous.
37.7 86.0
@ 15í: Mottled olive gray and black silty CLAY with fine sand, very moist to wet, very stiff, diatomaceous.
D-6 @ 20í: Pale olive gray clayey SILT, very moist to wet, stiff, trace fine gravel, diatomaceous, bedrock fragments up to 3 inches in diameter.
75.8 54.0
26 23
22 D-5
80.3 51.9 CN
37.8 70.9
D-7 @ 25í: Mottled olive gray and black silty CLAY, very moist, very stiff, diatomaceous.
29 38.8 85.0
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
@ 2.5í: Pale olive gray to gray clayey SILT, moist, very stiff, trace coarse sand and fine gravel, diatomaceous.
D-2
24 15 @ 7.5í: Mottled olive gray and black clayey SILT with fine sand, very moist, stiff, diatomaceous.
67.3 66.0
51.4 71.4
CL
CL
MH
B-1 @ 1-5í
GS B-1
MH
MH
CL
Artificial Fill (Af)
Surface: 4î AC, 8î AB
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
441
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2408
D-12
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-3
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
30 Blows Per Foot
35 40
45 50
55 60
@ 30í: UPPER: Mottled pale olive gray and white silty CLAY, very moist, very stiff, diatomaceous.
D-8 39 CL 18.2 108.7
81.5 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
D-9 @ 35í: UPPER: Mottled pale bluish gray and black silty CLAY, very moist, hard, slightly diatomaceous, trace gravel.
35 58.2 65.1
28.5 96.5
14.9 117.0
15.1 110.8
D-10 32 MH
D-11 38
@ 40í: Mottled bluish gray and dark gray clayey SILT with fine sand, very moist to wet, very stiff, diatomaceous. @ 45í: Mottled bluish gray and black fine sandy CLAY, very moist, very stiff.
29 @ 50í: Mottled bluish gray and black fine sandy CLAY, wet, very stiff.
CL
CL
CL
D-13 45 @ 55í: Mottled bluish gray, yellowish brown, and black fine 24.9 103.6 sandy CLAY, wet, hard, bedrock fragments.
CL
@ 30í: LOWER: Yellowish brown silty fine SAND, very moist, medium dense, bedrock fragments.
SM
@ 35í: LOWER: Dark brown silty SAND, very moist, medium dense.
SM
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
441
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2409
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-3
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
60 Blows Per Foot
65 70
75 80
85 90
@ 60í: Mottled olive gray and gray clayey SILT, very moist, very stiff, diatomaceous.
D-14 27 MH 54.0 66.2
81.5 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: Groundwater Not Encountered.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
Notes:
Total Depth: 81.5 Feet.
Groundwater Not Encountered.
Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped.
Asphalt Patched with Cold Patch AC.
@ 65í: Mottled olive gray and gray clayey SILT, very moist to wet, very stiff, diatomaceous.
D-15 25 MH 51.2 66.1
@ 70í: UPPER: Mottled olive gray and gray clayey SILT, wet to saturated, stiff, diatomaceous.
D-16 13 MH 65.7 66.5
@ 75í: Dark olive brown to dark gray clayey SILTSTONE, wet, hard, laminated, diatomaceous.
D-17 88/ 68.0 55.8
11î
MH
@ 80í: Dark olive brown to dark gray clayey SILTSTONE, wet, hard, laminated, trace fine sand, diatomaceous.
D-18 94/ 63.6 58.8
11î
MH
Monterey Formation (Tm)
ML @ 70í: LOWER: Dark brown to black SILT, very moist, stiff.
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
441
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2410
D-3
Log Of Boring
DepthTypeNumberUSCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
0 Blows Per Foot
5 10
15 20
25 30
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: 55 feet.
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
76 H-4
D-1
17 @ 5í: Mottled pale olive gray and white clayey SILT, moist, stiff, trace caliche, diatomaceous.
MH
D-4 @ 10í: Mottled olive gray and white clayey SILT, very moist to wet, medium stiff, diatomaceous.
63.1 56.1 CN
@ 15í: Mottled dark brown and olive gray silty/fine sandy CLAY, very moist, very stiff.
D-6 @ 20í: Olive gray clayey fine SAND, very moist, dense, trace fine gravel.
14.9 114.1
10 40
66 D-5
84.2 50.6
14.5 110.7
D-7 @ 25í: Dark olive gray clayey fine to medium SAND, very moist, medium dense, trace fine gravel.
31 17.1 109.5
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
@ 2.5í: Mottled olive gray and pale gray clayey SILT, moist, stiff, trace caliche, diatomaceous.
D-2
18 13 @ 7.5í: Mottled pale olive gray and white clayey SILT, very moist, stiff, trace caliche, diatomaceous.
77.1 51.4
61.4 62.3 DS
MH
CL
SC
B-1 @ 1-4í
AL, EI, CC B-1
MH
MH
SC
Artificial Fill (Af)
Surface: 4î AC, 6î AB.
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
443
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2411
D-12
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-4
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
30 Blows Per Foot
35 40
45 50
55 60
@ 30í: Mottled dark olive gray and black clayey fine SAND, very moist, medium dense.
D-8 33 SC 13.8 115.3
76 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: 55 feet.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
D-9 @ 35í: Mottled dark olive gray and black clayey fine SAND, very moist, dense.
42 17.1 113.1
21.5 103.1
13.4 117.9
16.1 108.3
D-10 24 SC
D-11 32
@ 40í: Mottled dark olive gray and black clayey fine SAND, very moist, medium dense, trace claystone fragments.
@ 45í: Bluish gray clayey fine to medium SAND, very
moist, medium dense, minor clean sand interbeds up to
0.25-inch thick.
20 @ 50í: Black fine sandy CLAY, very moist to wet, stiff, minor clean sand interbeds up to 0.5-inch thick, grass/vegetation fragments.
CL
SC
SC
D-13 50/ Niguel Formation (Tn) 19.8 101.9
6î @ 55í: Yellowish brown fine to coarse SANDSTONE,
saturated, very dense, micaceous, weakly indurated.
SP
@ 55í: Groundwater
443
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2412
Log Of Boring
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
Approximate Ground
Surface Elevation (ft)
H-4
Depth
TypeNumber
USCS
(ft)
SAMPLES
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
REMARKS
60 Blows Per Foot
65 70
75 80
85 90
@ 60í: Yellowish brown fine to coarse SANDSTONE,
saturated, very dense, micaceous, weakly indurated.
D-14 90/ 18.3 109.8
9î
SP
76 Hammer Type: Auto (140lbs @ 30î)
Logged By: AZ/AC
Drill Bit Size/Type: 10î
Sampling Method(s): Modified California, Bulk
Comments:
Approximate Groundwater Depth: 55 feet.
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig Type: CME 75
Project Number: 24059-01
Appendix B
Notes:
Total Depth: 76.0 Feet.
Groundwater Not Encountered.
Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped.
Asphalt Patched with Cold Patch AC.
@ 65í: Yellowish brown medium to coarse SANDSTONE,
saturated, very dense, micaceous, weakly indurated.
D-15 50/ 15.4 115.2
6î
SP
@ 75í: Yellowish brown to yellowish gray fine to coarse SANDSTONE with silt, saturated, very dense, micaceous,
shell fragments, weakly indurated.
D-16 50/ 23.8 96.6
3.5î
SPSM
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
443
Date(s)Drilled: 4-22-2024
2413
Appendix!C!
2414
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project: 95 Argonaut Performed by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Date: 5/6/2024
Dry Soil
before
Wash
+
WContainer
Dry Soil
after #200
Wash
+
WContainer
WContainer
Wt of soil
retained on
# 200
sieve
Initial wt of
dry soil
Soil % passing
200 sieve
g g g g g %
H-1 B-1 0-5 Olive, Sandy Elastic Silt (MH) 520.19 329.13 221.19 107.94 299.00 63.90 H-2 B-1 0-5 Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand
(MH) 533.02 305.89 220.07 85.82 312.95 72.58
H-3 B-1 0-5 Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand
(MH) 466.67 288.21 222.20 66.01 244.47 73.00
MATERIALS FINER THAN 75-μm (No. 200) SIEVE by WASHING
ASTM D1140
Boring
No.
Sample
No.
Sample Description
(USCS)
Depth
(ft)
2415
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring No.: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: B-1
Depth (ft): 0-5
Soil Description: Olive, Sandy Elastic Silt (MH)
LL LL LL PL PL
- 33 27 20 - -
(g) 25.83 25.43 25.6 12.89 12.84
(g) 19.78 19.41 19.23 10.37 10.32
(g) 11.17 11.21 10.72 4.28 4.31
(%) 70.3 73.4 74.9 41.4 41.9
73 42
31 MH
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils ASTM D4318
Test
Water content
Wt. of Container
Wt. of Dry soil + Container
Wt. of Wet Soil + Container
No. of blows
Plastic Limit (PL)
Liquid Limit (LL)
Remarks:
- Fine Sample is Less than 50% of Passing
#200)
USCS
Plasticity Index (PI)
0 10
20 30
40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PLASTICITY INDEX, PI (%)
LIQUID LIMIT, LL (%)
CL - ML
CL or OL
CH or OH
ML or OL
MH or OH
Plasticity (Clays) or Compressibility (Silts)
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
70 71
72 73
74 75
10 100
Moisture content (%)
Number of blows
25 2416
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring No.: H-2 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: B-1
Depth (ft): 0-5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
LL LL LL PL PL
- 32 26 19 - -
(g) 26.3 26.4 26.47 12.6 12.96
(g) 20.2 20.1 19.97 10.29 10.57
(g) 11.27 11.2 10.98 4.25 4.18
(%) 68.3 70.8 72.3 38.2 37.4
70 38
32 MH
- Fine Sample is Less than 50% of Passing
#200)
Plasticity Index (PI)
USCS
Remarks:
Plastic Limit (PL)
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils ASTM D4318
Test
No. of blows
Wt. of Wet Soil + Container
Wt. of Dry soil + Container
Wt. of Container
Water content
Liquid Limit (LL)
0 10
20 30
40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PLASTICITY INDEX, PI (%)
LIQUID LIMIT, LL (%)
CL - ML
CL or OL
CH or OH
ML or OL
MH or OH
Plasticity (Clays) or Compressibility (Silts)
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
68 69
70 71
72 73
10 100
Moisture content (%)
Number of blows
25 2417
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring No.: H-4 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: B-1
Depth (ft): 0-5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
LL LL LL PL PL
- 31 25 18 - -
(g) 26.92 26.3 26.43 12.92 12.79
(g) 20.03 19.27 19.5 10.18 10.12
(g) 11.53 10.9 11.34 4.22 4.33
(%) 81.1 84.0 84.9 46.0 46.1
83 46
37 MH
- Fine Sample is Less than 50% of Passing
#200)
Plasticity Index (PI)
USCS
Remarks:
Plastic Limit (PL)
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils ASTM D4318
Test
No. of blows
Wt. of Wet Soil + Container
Wt. of Dry soil + Container
Wt. of Container
Water content
Liquid Limit (LL)
0 10
20 30
40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PLASTICITY INDEX, PI (%)
LIQUID LIMIT, LL (%)
CL - ML
CL or OL
CH or OH
ML or OL
MH or OH
Plasticity (Clays) or Compressibility (Silts)
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
81 82
83 84
85 10 100
Moisture content (%)
Number of blows
25 2418
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring Number: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample Number: B-1
Depth (ft) : 0-5
Soil Description: Olive, Sandy Elastic Silt (MH)
Mold size (in) 4" 91.1
Procedure B 11.7
Weight Retained on: 7.7 94.1
Remarks: 10.8
Compaction Characteristics of Soils Using Modified Effort ASTM D1557
Maximum Dry Density (pcf)
Corrected Optimum Moisture Content (%)
Corrected Maximum Dry Density (pcf)
Optimum Moisture Content (%)
70 80
90 100
110
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture Content (%)
Gs= 2.80
Gs= 2.70
2419
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring No.: H-1 Date:
Sample No.: B-1
Depth (ft): 0-5 Apparatus No.: 1
Soil Description: Olive, Sandy Elastic Silt (MH)
184.51 g 594.84 g
156.08 g 472.51 g
11.29 g 206.54 g
28.43 g 122.33 g
144.79 g 265.97 g
19.6 % 46.0 %
528.85 g
206.54 g
322.31 g
98.8 pcf 5/17/2024 10:25 0 0
82.6 pcf 5/17/2024 10:35 10 0.0000
2.68 -
51.4 % 5/18/2024 10:25 1440 0.0909
Wt. of water
Wt. of container
High
∆h, Expansion
0 0
Moisture Content
Final Specimen Info
Wt. of wet soil + cont.
Wt. of dry soil + cont.
Wt. of container
EXPANSION INDEX
ASTM D4829
5/6/2024
Wt. of wet soil + cont.
Initial Specimen Info
Wt. of water
Wt. of ring
Wt. of wet soil + ring
Wt. of wet soil
Wt. of dry soil + cont.
Wet density of soil
Wt. of dry soil
Expansion Index =
Dial
Reading
Saturation
Moisture Content
Add Distilled Water to Sample
Date & Time
Elapsed
Time
(min)
0.0909
91 Specific gravity of soil
Dry density of soil
Wt. of dry soil
2420
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: GA
Project No.: 24059-01 Checked by: KL
Boring No.: H-4 Date:
Sample No.: B-1
Depth (ft): 0-5 Apparatus No.: 2
Soil Description: Olive, Sandy Elastic Silt (MH)
163.33 g 582.98 g
138.46 g 45395.00 g
23.29 g 206.33 g
24.87 g -44812.02 g
115.17 g 45188.67 g
21.6 % -99.2 %
511.95 g
206.33 g
305.62 g
95.2 pcf 5/17/2024 11:00 0 0
78.3 pcf 5/17/2024 11:10 10 0.0000
2.68 -
50.9 % 5/18/2024 11:00 1440 0.1036
Wt. of water
Wt. of container
High
∆h, Expansion
0 0
Moisture Content
Final Specimen Info
Wt. of wet soil + cont.
Wt. of dry soil + cont.
Wt. of container
EXPANSION INDEX
ASTM D4829
5/6/2024
Wt. of wet soil + cont.
Initial Specimen Info
Wt. of water
Wt. of ring
Wt. of wet soil + ring
Wt. of wet soil
Wt. of dry soil + cont.
Wet density of soil
Wt. of dry soil
Expansion Index =
Dial
Reading
Saturation
Moisture Content
Add Distilled Water to Sample
Date & Time
Elapsed
Time
(min)
0.1036
104
Specific gravity of soil
Dry density of soil
Wt. of dry soil
2421
SAG-24-018-2
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc GA
Project Name: 95 Argonaut KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Date:
Boring No.: H-1
Sample No.: D-2
Sample Type:
Depth (ft): 5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) Type of test: Consolidated, Drained
1 2 3
1 2 4
0.002 0.002 0.002
#REF! #REF!
O 1.32 1.85 2.94
X 0.96 1.34 2.36
1.000 1.000 1.000
0.9998 0.9936 0.9883
2.416 2.416 2.416
43.8 43.8 43.8
54.3 52.5 50.4
71.1 71.4 72.3
Undisturbed Ring
Test No.
Symbol
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
HAI Project No.:
Tested by:
Checked by:
5/6/2024
ASTM D3080
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
Final Moisture Content (%)
Normal Stress (ksf)
Deformation Rate (in/min)
Peak Shear Stress (ksf)
Initial Height of Sample (in)
Diameter of Sample (in)
Height of Sample before Shear (in)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
0 1
2 3
4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
Peak
Ultimate
0 1
2 3
4 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in)
2422
SAG-24-018-2
Client: SA Geotechnical, Inc GA
Project Name: 95 Argonaut KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Date:
Boring No.: H-4
Sample No.: D-1
Sample Type:
Depth (ft): 2.5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) Type of test: Consolidated, Drained
1 2 3
1 2 4
0.002 0.002 0.002
#REF! #REF!
O 0.88 1.66 2.52
X 0.79 1.38 2.16
1.000 1.000 1.000
1.0004 0.9954 0.9909
2.416 2.416 2.416
56.4 56.4 56.4
68.8 61.8 52.6
61.0 62.8 65.8
Undisturbed Ring
Test No.
Symbol
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
HAI Project No.:
Tested by:
Checked by:
5/6/2024
ASTM D3080
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
Final Moisture Content (%)
Normal Stress (ksf)
Deformation Rate (in/min)
Peak Shear Stress (ksf)
Initial Height of Sample (in)
Diameter of Sample (in)
Height of Sample before Shear (in)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
0 1
2 3
4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
Peak
Ultimate
0 1
2 3
4 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in)
2423
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-1
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 2.5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) H (in)
Hs (in)
Hw (in)
Ha (in)
(pcf)
(%)
(%)
* Saturation is calculated based on Gs= 2.74
Load δH H Voids av Mv
(ksf) (in) (in) (in) (ksf-1) (ksf-1)
0.01 ------- 1.0000 0.676 2.085
0.2 0.0011 0.9990 0.675 2.081 1.7E-02 5.5E-03
0.4 0.0033 0.9967 0.673 2.075 3.5E-02 1.1E-02
0.8 0.0060 0.9940 0.670 2.066 2.1E-02 6.8E-03
1.6 0.0132 0.9869 0.663 2.044 2.8E-02 9.1E-03
3.2 0.0244 0.9757 0.651 2.010 2.2E-02 7.2E-03
3.2 0.0269 0.9731 0.649 2.002
6.4 0.0430 0.9571 0.633 1.952 1.5E-02 5.2E-03
12.8 0.0793 0.9208 0.597 1.840 1.7E-02 6.2E-03
25.6 0.1369 0.8632 0.539 1.663 1.4E-02 5.2E-03
6.4 0.1262 0.8739 0.550 1.696
1.6 0.1117 0.8884 0.564 1.740
0.4 0.1001 0.8999 0.576 1.776
e Comment
(%)
10.0 1.3
2.7 2.4
11.2 Water Added
Unloaded
12.6 13.7
7.9 4.3
0.6 0.3
0.1 0
Consol.
0.613
Initial Conditions
(g) (g) (g)
108.29
Height
0.553
0.324
0.900
112.80
Height of Water
Height of Solids
Initial Total Weight
66.73 1.000
Final Total Weight Final Dry Weight
0.324
Final Conditions
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
96.1 Height of Air
62.3 90.7
69.0 0.063
55.4 68.4
0.023
Saturation
Water Content
Dry Density
2424
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-1
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 2.5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
-2.0
1.6 5.2
8.8 12.4
16.0 0.1 1 10 100
Consolidation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
1.65 1.75
1.85 1.95
2.05 2.15
0.1 1 10 100
Void Ratio, e
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
2425
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-5
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 15
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) H (in)
Hs (in)
Hw (in)
Ha (in)
(pcf)
(%)
(%)
* Saturation is calculated based on Gs= 2.74
Load δH H Voids av Mv
(ksf) (in) (in) (in) (ksf-1) (ksf-1)
0.01 ------- 1.0000 0.659 1.928
0.2 0.0025 0.9975 0.656 1.921 3.9E-02 1.3E-02
0.4 0.0075 0.9925 0.651 1.907 7.2E-02 2.5E-02
0.8 0.0103 0.9897 0.648 1.898 2.0E-02 7.1E-03
1.6 0.0172 0.9828 0.641 1.878 2.5E-02 8.8E-03
3.2 0.0283 0.9717 0.630 1.846 2.0E-02 7.1E-03
3.2 0.0304 0.9696 0.628 1.839
6.4 0.0479 0.9522 0.611 1.788 1.6E-02 5.7E-03
12.8 0.0818 0.9183 0.577 1.689 1.6E-02 5.8E-03
25.6 0.1261 0.8740 0.532 1.559 1.0E-02 4.0E-03
6.4 0.1156 0.8845 0.543 1.590
1.6 0.1001 0.8999 0.558 1.635
0.4 0.0852 0.9148 0.573 1.679
e Comment
(%)
8.5 1.7
3.0 2.8
10.0 Water Added
Unloaded
11.6 12.6
8.2 4.8
1.0 0.8
0.3 0
Consol.
0.627
Initial Conditions
(g) (g) (g)
112.21
Height
0.558
0.341
0.915
117.41
Height of Water
Height of Solids
Initial Total Weight
70.29 1.000
Final Total Weight Final Dry Weight
0.341
Final Conditions
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
97.3 Height of Air
59.6 95.2
67.0 0.031
58.4 69.8
0.015
Saturation
Water Content
Dry Density
2426
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-1 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-5
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 15
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
-2.0
1.6 5.2
8.8 12.4
16.0 0.1 1 10 100
Consolidation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
1.50 1.60
1.70 1.80
1.90 2.00
0.1 1 10 100
Void Ratio, e
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
2427
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-3 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-2
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) H (in)
Hs (in)
Hw (in)
Ha (in)
(pcf)
(%)
(%)
* Saturation is calculated based on Gs= 2.74
Load δH H Voids av Mv
(ksf) (in) (in) (in) (ksf-1) (ksf-1)
0.01 ------- 1.0000 0.716 2.517
0.2 0.0028 0.9972 0.713 2.508 5.2E-02 1.5E-02
0.4 0.0068 0.9932 0.709 2.494 7.0E-02 2.0E-02
0.8 0.0115 0.9885 0.704 2.477 4.1E-02 1.2E-02
1.6 0.0219 0.9781 0.694 2.440 4.6E-02 1.3E-02
3.2 0.0338 0.9663 0.682 2.399 2.6E-02 7.7E-03
3.2 0.0359 0.9641 0.680 2.391
6.4 0.0522 0.9479 0.664 2.334 1.8E-02 5.4E-03
12.8 0.0878 0.9123 0.628 2.209 2.0E-02 6.1E-03
25.6 0.1434 0.8566 0.572 2.013 1.5E-02 5.1E-03
6.4 0.1326 0.8675 0.583 2.051
1.6 0.1168 0.8832 0.599 2.107
0.4 0.0997 0.9003 0.616 2.167
e Comment
(%)
10.0 2.2
3.6 3.4
11.7 Water Added
Unloaded
13.3 14.3
8.8 5.2
1.1 0.7
0.3 0
Consol.
0.661
Initial Conditions
(g) (g) (g)
103.32
Height
0.596
0.284
0.900
108.17
Height of Water
Height of Solids
Initial Total Weight
58.52 1.000
Final Total Weight Final Dry Weight
0.284
Final Conditions
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
96.8 Height of Air
76.6 92.3
84.8 0.055
48.6 60.0
0.020
Saturation
Water Content
Dry Density
2428
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-3 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-2
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 5
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
-4.0
0.0 4.0
8.0 12.0
16.0 0.1 1 10 100
Consolidation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
1.90 2.04
2.18 2.32
2.46 2.60
0.1 1 10 100
Void Ratio, e
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
2429
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-4 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-4
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 10
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH) H (in)
Hs (in)
Hw (in)
Ha (in)
(pcf)
(%)
(%)
* Saturation is calculated based on Gs= 2.74
Load δH H Voids av Mv
(ksf) (in) (in) (in) (ksf-1) (ksf-1)
0.01 ------- 1.0000 0.710 2.451
0.2 0.0038 0.9963 0.707 2.438 6.8E-02 2.0E-02
0.4 0.0099 0.9901 0.700 2.417 1.1E-01 3.1E-02
0.8 0.0166 0.9834 0.694 2.394 5.8E-02 1.7E-02
1.6 0.0311 0.9689 0.679 2.344 6.3E-02 1.9E-02
3.2 0.0492 0.9508 0.661 2.282 3.9E-02 1.2E-02
3.2 0.0517 0.9483 0.659 2.273
6.4 0.0729 0.9271 0.637 2.200 2.3E-02 7.1E-03
12.8 0.1117 0.8883 0.599 2.066 2.1E-02 6.8E-03
25.6 0.1643 0.8358 0.546 1.885 1.4E-02 4.9E-03
6.4 0.1536 0.8464 0.557 1.921
1.6 0.1382 0.8618 0.572 1.974
0.4 0.1201 0.8799 0.590 2.037
e Comment
(%)
12.0 3.1
5.2 4.9
13.8 Water Added
Unloaded
15.4 16.4
11.2 7.3
1.7 1.0
0.4 0
Consol.
0.689
Initial Conditions
(g) (g) (g)
103.94
Height
0.590
0.290
0.880
111.40
Height of Water
Height of Solids
Initial Total Weight
59.64 1.000
Final Total Weight Final Dry Weight
0.290
Final Conditions
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
99.9 Height of Air
74.3 97.0
86.8 0.021
49.5 64.0
0.000
Saturation
Water Content
Dry Density
2430
Client : SA Geotechnical, Inc HAI Project No.: SAG-24-018-2 Project Name: 95 Argonaut Tested by: KL
Project Number: 24059-01 Checked by: MV
Boring No.: H-4 Date: 05/06/24
Sample No.: D-4
Type of Sample: Undisturbed ring
Depth (ft): 10
Soil Description: Olive Gray, Elastic Silt with Sand (MH)
CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D2435
-2.0
2.0 6.0
10.0 14.0
18.0 0.1 1 10 100
Consolidation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
1.85 1.99
2.13 2.27
2.41 2.55
0.1 1 10 100
Void Ratio, e
Pressure, p (ksf)
Water added
2431
Project X REPORT S240515F
Corrosion Engineering Page 2
Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab 29990 Technology Dr., Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com
Soil Analysis Lab Results
Client: HAI
Job Name: 95 Argonaut
Client Job Number: SAG-24-018-2 / 24059-01
Project X Job Number: S240515F
May 17, 2024
Method
Bore# /
Description
Depth
(ft) (mg/kg) (wt%) (mg/kg) (wt%)
H-1 B-1 0-5 768.4 0.0768 156.2 0.0156
H-4 B-1 0-5 713.1 0.0713 82.9 0.0083
ASTM
D4327
ASTM
D4327
Sulfates
SO4
2-
Chlorides
ClCations and Anions, except Sulfide and Bicarbonate, tested with Ion Chromatography mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil weight ND = 0 = Not Detected | NT = Not Tested | Unk = Unknown Chemical Analysis performed on 1:3 Soil-To-Water extract PPM = mg/kg (soil) = mg/L (Liquid)
Note: Sometimes a bad sulfate hit is a contaminated spot. Typical fertilizers are Potassium chloride, ammonium sulfate or ammonium sulfate nitrate (ASN). So this is another reason why testing full corrosion series is good because we then have the data to see if those other ingredients are present meaning the soil sample is just fertilizercontaminated soil. This can happen often when the soil samples collected are simply surface scoops. This is why it's best to dig in a foot, throw away the top and test the deeper stuff. Dairy farms are also notorious for these items.
If one sample pops up much more corrosive than all others, we would recommend collecting more samples surrounding the problem sample location to determine if the peak is isolated to it. This allows us to conclude it was a contaminated sample and able to declare it an outlier.
Try out our new online forms: SOIL CORROSIVITY & THERMAL RESISTIVITY LAB REQUEST FORM & IN-SITU WENNER 4 PIN QUOTE REQUEST FORM 2432
Appendix!D!
2433
!
!
"##$
#
"#%&'()*%
##"# +
,
-./012345678/09:;3/<:=>38/?0/[email protected]/BC0 D57:76E=8/D342:76E=F/GGH.-I.-JG8/KLLJHJ@I@-GJ M57= NO M=;:24/?3E=/P=Q=1=4R=/M3R6S=47 T UVWX
P:;Y/?57=231Z [[ C:7=/?95;; X
!!
# \Z]= <596= M=;R1:]7:34
^ UV_"
`!N
a
N
^ UV_"
`!
N
a
X !
#
#
#"
"##X
^
N
^ b"
#"
N
T
"##X
^ b"
#"
N
T \Z]= <596= M=;R1:]7:34
U "##X
^
c d
N
#!!N
"##X
^
#!!
N
T N
e
e UV
+"
#
d
T
#!!
T
T N
e
!
+"
#
fg ^ gX
_f
^
#+X
"
`N
a
h
N d
"!Xi `j
#c!
,
eNc
a
#
#
^O d
#
#"
`N
a
_f N
^
#+X
"
`
N
a
h N
^ d
"!Xi `j
#c!
,
eNc
a
#
#
N
^ d
#
#"
`
N
a
T
N
W d
#
#"
`
+
" T
#
a 2434
!"# $ %&'(
)(*+ ,-
. /
010
234567889:2
;
5
0/:
<
=,>5-
9 ?@
/
A
5B9>
2
=
22
5 @1
5B9>
2
=
22
521 C 1
C
9
22
2435
! "#
$
%
&
&
#
'
%&
(
(
)%%&**
&#+ #&#+$*+
,
#
%
&#*#%&
*
%
#
%*$+
$#*
- %'
$$*+*&#+%#&#+&+
#
%$
#
(
(
)%
%
*
$ $
#
*%.*%
$*
$
#'
-
%/#
%
$
#%$
*&*
$
%%$
0*
%$*$
#
%#+
*#$
%'%
%&+
&
$
$$
&
*
###&#+$**
$
**$
&
%
#+'#&+
'
&*#%%
&%
&#
$&*#%%
'#%
$
&*#%
%
&
%&+#*%
#*%
#
*#$
&
2436
!
"
#$%&'()*+,+-().//0
1 23456
7898:;<=>=?@AB>:95CD<E:F:GBC6HI5BJ<:KBLBCMN:OC=?CBP O><BN<:M=:3=6:5N<:6H@N:6==>:6=:=Q6B@3:?C=53M:P=6@=3:4BCBP<6<C:DB>5<N:R=C:6H<:M<N@?3:A=M< C<R<C<3A<:M=A5P<36N:A=D<C<M:QE:6H<:7898:9<@NP@A:S<N@?3:TB4N:U<Q:6==>N:V<8?8W:6H< 236<C3B6@=3B>:X5@>M@3?:Y=M<:B3M:6H<:Z9YG:[:=C:\]:96B3MBCM^8:_H<:DB>5<N:C<65C3<M:QE:6H<:6U= B44>@AB6@=3N:BC<:3=6:@M<36@AB>8 O><BN<:B>N=:N<<:6H<:3<U:79;9:GBC6HI5BJ<:KBLBCM:_==>Q=`:R=C:BAA<NN:6=:6H<:P=N6:C<A<36:a9KTN R=C:6H<:A=36<CP@3=5N:7898:B3M:KBUB@@8 GM@6@=3 SE3BP@Ab:Y=36<CP@3=5N:7898:cd]\:V5e fB6@65M< S<A@PB>:M<?C<<N gg8hi\hi[g f=3?@65M< S<A@PB>:M<?C<<NW:3<?B6@D<:DB>5<N:R=C:U<N6<C3:>=3?@65M<N F]][8[c\cig[ 9@6<:Y>BNN chi:PjN:V9@6<:A>BNN:S^ 94<A6CB>:O<C@=M O<BJ:;C=53M:ZAA<><CB6@=3 _@P<:K=C@L=3 k<65C3:4<C@=M:@3:E<BCN c\[h 2437
!
" #$%&&'$&%()*+ ,*-.*+$+( /*(%0 123245627725879: 1232;5879277258: 1232;5827725<79: 1232;5<7927725<: 1232;5<27725=79: 1232;5=792772=: 1232;=2772=79: 1232;=792772<: 1232;<2772<79: 1232;<7927728: 1232;82772879: 1232;8792772>6: 9 89 ?9 ,0*@$@(2#)@(%+A$B2'CD
F9
.24E-:
G9 <=9 H G79 G I79
J%&+)(DK$24JL:
I F79 F 97 9 ?79
9M2,*+(')ND()*+2(*2O%P%'K <= <9 8=
9 89 ?9 F9
,0*@$@(2#)@(%+A$B2'CD.24E-:
G9 <=9
H G79 G I79 I F79
J%&+)(DK$24JL:
F 979 9 ?79
2438
!
"#$$%&'()*%*+)*+,)(-.&/(01%22&12%*+.34(5.*%6 01%22&12%*+.3(*%&21*) 789:;<=>8;?@ABCDEFGHIJ KLM88AN<M8=;N98BOPOOODODODODGHIQR STU=V;@:<A=W@9?@<BOPXYZ[CC[FG\ ]1,.^1&1_(*%&21*) 789:;<=>8;?@ABC``OPD[YDGHIJ KLM88AN<M8=;N98BOPOOOZDEYXC[`GHIQR 5.*%6) a?<<8ABYOOGb 78c?A:NdBOGb e;NM8BOPOEGb f1%3(g.^1&(%66().#&,1)h WBXPXZ ;BYCPCZGij klBYPCCGm f._1(g6%&21)*($n&(o+3h WBXP`[ ;BDPFYGij klBOPDYGm p@<9;?q:9?@<BYOPOCGb f._1(g6%&21)*($n&nrl(o+3h WBXP`[ ;BZPD`Gij klBOPCGm p@<9;?q:9?@<BEPO`Gb 0+),&1*+s%*+.3 ;BjtuGvGOPOwGjxyGvGYOOOPOwGzGvGCOPOGij WBjtuGvGDPDwGjxyGvG[PDwGzGvGOPC kBjtuGvG{ZPOwGjxyGvGZPOwGzGvGOPFGm |})+6.3(~1') kB{GPPG{CPF kB{CPFGPPG{CPO kB{CPOGPPG{YPF k B{YPFGPPG{YPO kB{YPOGPPG{OPF kB{OPFGPPGOPO kBOPOGPPGOPF kBOPFGPPGYPO kBYPOGPPGYPF kBYPFGPPGCPO kBCPOGPPGCPF kBCPFGPPG 2439
!
"#$%%&#%$'()*+,)*'&(-.')&/ 01234560576 6012345 89:5 3 ; <= >1? >@7 @A B CDEEFGHIJKLMEN OPQRST NUVWX OYZ[\]Y^_`Z[a`bbQ[cNd EVNe fVgg WVNE ggfVfgEhi EEVeWWhj eWVNE gXVkk jSlm]GRnoZJbSl]]p[qrsQt]GSu[cNd ggVkv fVEg gVNg ggfVkWehi EEVvgEhj NgUVkN XVfU wbQ`Z]GS[qxbSZ[oIPu[GSI[cgd NkVkE fVNk NVgg ggfVvWUhi EEVfkNhj XEVeN NVvf CDEEFGHIJKLMEg OPQRST NvVvN OYZ[\]Y^_`Z[a`bbQ[cNd EVNe fVvN WVgk ggfVfgEhi EEVeWWhj eWVNE UVNk jSlm]GRnoZJbSl]]p[qrsQt]GSu[cNd ggVkv fVEg gVNg ggfVkWehi EEVvgEhj NgUVkN vVWX rySYZQ`pS[YbRg[ced kVgN fVWW WVeN ggfVkWNhi EEVvgXhj NgkVUf EVWe wbQ`Z]GS[qxbSZ[oIPu[GSI[cgd NkVkE fVNe NVgN ggfVvWUhi EEVfkNhj XEVeN NVvN CDEEFGHIJKLMEg[q]mRu xG`p NNVkg z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVegf vVeE vVee gVWe ggfVfNXhi EEVegfhj WVWW XVgX z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVeUk gWVkU eVWf gVeN ggfVfNXhi EEVeUkhj WVWW NVWg z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVeeN kVkE vVek gVvv ggfVfNXhi EEVeeNhj WVWW gVfU CDEEFGHIJKLMEN[q]mRu xG`p NNVeE z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVegf vVeE vVee gVWe ggfVfNXhi EEVegfhj WVWW XVgg z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVeUk gWVkU eVWf gVeN ggfVfNXhi EEVeUkhj WVWW NVWg z]`ZRO]_GySL`Z`RS{[nggfVfNX|[EEVeeN kVkE vVek gVvv ggfVfNXhi EEVeeNhj WVWW gVfe 2440
Appendix!E!
2441
Summary of Slope Stability Analysis
Filename Description Factor of Safety (FS)
Static Pseudostatic
01, 01p Global Stability of 25-foot High Fill Slope 2.38 1.46 Project No.: 24059-01
Project Name: Meritage/ 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo
2442
95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
Global Stability of 25' High Slopes
SA Geotechnical, Inc. C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical - Projects\2024\24059-01 Meritage - 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01.gsd Spencer Method
PLATE C.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500
GEOSTASEÆ v4.30.32 by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 2.381
B 1
B 2
B 3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500 No. FS
1 2.381
2 2.381
3 2.387
4 2.387
5 2.390
6 2.391
7 2.394
8 2.394
9 2.395
10 2.396
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru -Uw Fact Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (unsat) No. Options 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.0 24.0 0.000 0.0 1
2443
95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
Global Stability of 25' High Slopes
SA Geotechnical, Inc. C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical - Projects\2024\24059-01 Meritage - 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01.gsd Spencer Method
PLATE C.1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500
GEOSTASEÆ v4.30.32 by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 2.381
B 1
B 2
B 3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500 No. FS
1 2.381
2 2.381
3 2.387
4 2.387
5 2.390
6 2.391
7 2.394
8 2.394
9 2.395
10 2.396
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru -Uw Fact Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (unsat) No. Options 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 1
2444
*** GEOSTASE(R) ***
** GEOSTASE(R) (c)Copyright by Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,S.E.,BC.GE ** ** Current Version 4.30.32‐Double Precision, Sept 2023 ** (All Rights Reserved‐Unauthorized Use Prohibited)
********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SOFTWARE (2D & 3D)
Simplified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or General Equilibrium (GE) Options. (Spencer, Morgenstern‐Price, USACE, and Lowe & Karafiath) Including Pier/Pile, Planar Reinf, Nail, Tieback, Line Loads Applied Forces, Fiber‐Reinforced Soil (FRS), Distributed Loads Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Strength Envelope, Anisotropic Strengths, Water Surfaces, 3‐Stage Rapid Drawdown 2‐ or 3‐Stage Pseudo‐Static & Simplified Newmark Seismic Analyses. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Date: 5/ 28/ 2024
Analysis Time:
Analysis By: SA Geotechnical, Inc.
Input File Name: C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical ‐ Projects\2024\24059‐01 Meritage ‐ 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01.gsd
Output File Name: C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical ‐ Projects\2024\24059‐01 Meritage ‐ 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01.OUT
Unit System: English
PROJECT: 95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
DESCRIPTION: Global Stability of 25' High Slopes
2445
PROFILE BOUNDARY DATA
3 Surface Boundaries
3 Total Boundaries
Boundary X ‐ 1 Y ‐ 1 X ‐ 2 Y ‐ 2 Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.000 422.000 60.000 422.000 1 2 60.000 422.000 110.000 447.000 1 3 110.000 447.000 160.000 447.000 1 User Specified X‐Origin = 0.000(ft)
User Specified Y‐Origin = 400.000(ft)
SURFACE BOUNDARY POINT COORDINATES
(Information Only‐Not Used Directly)
Point No. X‐COORD Y‐COORD
1 0.000 422.000
2 60.000 422.000
3 110.000 447.000
4 160.000 447.000
SUBSURFACE BOUNDARY POINT COORDINATES
(Information Only‐Not Used Directly)
Point No. X‐COORD Y‐COORD
PROFILE BOUNDARY SLOPES AND ANGLES
BND No. Slope Angle(Deg.)
1 0.000 0.000
2 0.500 26.565
3 0.000 0.000
MOHR‐COULOMB SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil Defined
2446
Soil Number Moist Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore (‐Uw) Water Water and Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Fact. Surface Option Description (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Ratio(ru) No. 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.00 24.00 0.000 0.0 1 0
TRIAL FAILURE SURFACE DATA
Circular Trial Failure Surfaces Have Been Generated Using A Random Procedure.
2000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
2000 Surfaces Generated at Increments of 0.0600(in) Equally Spaced Within the Start Range Along The Specified Surface Between X = 55.00(ft)
and X = 65.00(ft)
Each Surface ends within a Range Between X = 110.00(ft) and X = 140.00(ft)
All surfaces are generated left to right for both a left and right sliding slope.
Unless XCLUDE Lines Were Specified, The Minimum Elevation To Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 400.00(ft)
Specified Maximum Radius = 100000.000(ft)
3.000(ft) Line Segments Were Used For Each Trial Failure Surface.
The Spencer Method Was Selected for FS Analysis.
Selected fx function = Constant (1.0)
2447
SELECTED CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS FOR SPENCER METHOD:
Initial estimate of FS = 1.500
FS tolerance = 0.000001000
Initial estimate of theta(deg) = 15.00
Theta tolerance(radians) = 0.0001000
Minimum theta(deg) = ‐45.00 ; Maximum theta(deg) = 45.00 Theta convergence Step Factor = 5000.00
Maximum number of iterations = 50
Allowable negative side force = ‐1000.0(lbs)
Maximum force imbalance = 100.000000(lbs)
Maximum moment imbalance = 100.000000 (ft/lbs)
Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00
Specified Tension Crack Water Depth Factor = 0.000
Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 2000
WARNING! The Factor of Safety Calculation for one or More Trial Surfaces Did Not Converge in 50 Iterations.
Number of Trial Surfaces with Non‐Converged FS = 242
Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 1758
Percentage of Trial Surfaces With Non‐Converged and/or
Non‐Valid FS Solutions of the Total Attempted = 12.1 % Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values:
FS Max = 7.876 FS Min = 2.381 FS Ave = 2.890
Standard Deviation = 0.400 Coefficient of Variation = 13.85 % Critical Surface is Sequence Number 860 of Those Analyzed. *****BEGINNING OF DETAILED GEOSTASE OUTPUT FOR CRITICAL SURFACE FROM A SEARCH***** 2448
BACK‐CALCULATED CIRCULAR SURFACE PARAMETERS:
Circle Center At X = 73.583338(ft) ; Y = 471.872496(ft); and Radius = 51.705663(ft) Circular Trial Failure Surface Generated With 25 Coordinate Points Point X‐Coord. Y‐Coord.
No. (ft) (ft)
1 59.93747 422.00000
2 62.85286 421.29254
3 65.80437 420.75534
4 68.78207 420.39023
5 71.77593 420.19843
6 74.77588 420.18059
7 77.77181 420.33676
8 80.75364 420.66642
9 83.71134 421.16846
10 86.63494 421.84119
11 89.51460 422.68235
12 92.34063 423.68910
13 95.10352 424.85806
14 97.79396 426.18528
15 100.40290 427.66631
16 102.92155 429.29615
17 105.34144 431.06933
18 107.65441 432.97986
19 109.85270 435.02132
20 111.92888 437.18684
21 113.87598 439.46912
22 115.68743 441.86048
23 117.35715 444.35288
24 118.87950 446.93792
25 118.91136 447.00000
Iter. Theta FS FS
No. (deg) (Moment) (Force)
2449
(fx=1.0) Lambda Delta FS 1 15.0000 2.446791 2.358132 0.268 0.8865890E‐01 2 19.9500 2.277947 2.410070 0.363 0.1321227E+00 3 16.9874 2.389777 2.378405 0.305 0.1137135E‐01 4 17.2227 2.382173 2.380855 0.310 0.1318158E‐02 5 17.2535 2.381161 2.381176 0.311 0.1509128E‐04 6 17.2532 2.381173 2.381173 0.311 0.2018040E‐07 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 2.381 Theta (fx = 1.0) = 17.25 Deg Lambda = 0.311
The Spencer Method Has Been Selected For Analysis.
Selected fx function = Constant (1.0)
SELECTED CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS FOR ANALYSIS METHOD:
Initial estimate of FS = 1.500
FS tolerance = 0.000001000
Initial estimate of theta(deg) = 15.00
Theta tolerance(radians) = 0.0001000
Minimum theta(deg) = ‐45.00 ; Maximum theta(deg) = 45.00 Theta convergence Step Factor = 5000.00
Maximum number of iterations = 50
Maximum force imbalance = 100.000000(lbs)
Maximum moment imbalance(if Applicable) = 100.000000 (ft/lbs) Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00
Tension Crack Water Force = 0.00(lbs)
Specified Tension Crack Water Depth Factor = 0.000 ( 0.00% Filled ) Depth of Tension Crack (zo) at Side of Last Slice = 0.000(ft) Depth of Water in Tension Crack = 0.000(ft)
2450
Theoretical Tension Crack Depth = 11.199(ft)
NOTE: In Table 1 following, when a tension crack with water is present on the first slice (right facing slope) or on the last slice (left facing slope), the "side force" in the tension crack is set equal to the water pressure resultant. *** Table 1 ‐ Line of Thrust(if applicable) and Slice Force Data *** Slice X Y Side Force fx Force Angle Vert. Shear No. Coord. Coord. h/H (lbs) (Deg) Force(lbs) 1 60.00 422.00 1.000+ 14.21 1.000 17.25 4.2 2 62.85 422.10 0.376 846.01 1.000 17.25 250.9 3 65.80 422.15 0.336 1938.72 1.000 17.25 575.0 4 68.78 422.29 0.316 3153.82 1.000 17.25 935.4 5 71.78 422.53 0.303 4386.02 1.000 17.25 1300.9 6 74.78 422.87 0.292 5547.84 1.000 17.25 1645.5 7 77.77 423.32 0.283 6568.74 1.000 17.25 1948.3 8 80.75 423.88 0.275 7394.31 1.000 17.25 2193.1 9 83.71 424.55 0.266 7985.59 1.000 17.25 2368.5 10 86.63 425.32 0.258 8318.33 1.000 17.25 2467.2 11 89.51 426.18 0.249 8382.18 1.000 17.25 2486.1 12 92.34 427.15 0.239 8179.80 1.000 17.25 2426.1 13 95.10 428.20 0.227 7725.88 1.000 17.25 2291.5 14 97.79 429.33 0.214 7045.96 1.000 17.25 2089.8 15 100.40 430.54 0.198 6175.20 1.000 17.25 1831.5 16 102.92 431.81 0.177 5156.95 1.000 17.25 1529.5 17 105.34 433.11 0.150 4041.22 1.000 17.25 1198.6 18 107.65 434.41 0.111 2883.00 1.000 17.25 855.1 19 109.85 435.58 0.047 1740.49 1.000 17.25 516.2 20 110.00 435.65 0.040 1659.55 1.000 17.25 492.2 21 111.93 435.96 0.000‐ 735.94 1.000 17.25 218.3 22 113.88 319.35 0.000‐ 12.72 1.000 17.25 3.8 23 115.69 445.03 0.616 ‐377.52 1.000 17.25 ‐112.0 24 117.36 445.45 0.413 ‐395.07 1.000 17.25 ‐117.2 25 118.88 446.96 0.419 ‐13.96 1.000 17.25 ‐4.1 2451
26 118.91 447.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 17.25 0.0 NOTE: A value of 0.000‐ for h/H indicates that the line of thrust is at or below the lower boundary of the sliding mass. A value of 1.000+ for h/H indicates that the line of thrust is at or above the upper boundary of the sliding mass.
***Table 2 ‐ Geometry Data on the 26 Slices***
Slice Width Height X‐Cntr Y‐Cntr‐Base Y‐Cntr‐Top Alpha Beta Base Length No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (deg) (ft) 1 0.06 0.01 59.97 421.99 422.00 ‐13.64 0.00 0.06 2 2.85 1.07 61.43 421.64 422.71 ‐13.64 26.57 2.94 3 2.95 3.14 64.33 421.02 424.16 ‐10.32 26.57 3.00 4 2.98 5.07 67.29 420.57 425.65 ‐6.99 26.57 3.00 5 2.99 6.85 70.28 420.29 427.14 ‐3.67 26.57 3.00 6 3.00 8.45 73.28 420.19 428.64 ‐0.34 26.57 3.00 7 3.00 9.88 76.27 420.26 430.14 2.98 26.57 3.00 8 2.98 11.13 79.26 420.50 431.63 6.31 26.57 3.00 9 2.96 12.20 82.23 420.92 433.12 9.63 26.57 3.00 10 2.92 13.08 85.17 421.50 434.59 12.96 26.57 3.00 11 2.88 13.78 88.07 422.26 436.04 16.28 26.57 3.00 12 2.83 14.28 90.93 423.19 437.46 19.61 26.57 3.00 13 2.76 14.59 93.72 424.27 438.86 22.93 26.57 3.00 14 2.69 14.70 96.45 425.52 440.22 26.26 26.57 3.00 15 2.61 14.62 99.10 426.93 441.55 29.58 26.57 3.00 16 2.52 14.35 101.66 428.48 442.83 32.91 26.57 3.00 17 2.42 13.88 104.13 430.18 444.07 36.23 26.57 3.00 18 2.31 13.22 106.50 432.02 445.25 39.56 26.57 3.00 19 2.20 12.38 108.75 434.00 446.38 42.88 26.57 3.00 20 0.15 11.87 109.93 435.10 446.96 46.21 26.57 0.21 21 1.93 10.82 110.96 436.18 447.00 46.21 0.00 2.79 22 1.95 8.67 112.90 438.33 447.00 49.53 0.00 3.00 23 1.81 6.34 114.78 440.66 447.00 52.86 0.00 3.00 24 1.67 3.89 116.52 443.11 447.00 56.18 0.00 3.00 25 1.52 1.35 118.12 445.65 447.00 59.51 0.00 3.00 2452
26 0.03 0.03 118.90 446.97 447.00 62.83 0.00 0.07
***Table 2A ‐ Coordinates of Slice Points Defining the Slip Surface*** Point X‐Pt Y‐Pt
No. (ft) (ft)
1 59.937469 422.000000
2 60.000000 421.984826
3 62.852858 421.292536
4 65.804370 420.755344
5 68.782070 420.390233
6 71.775932 420.198432
7 74.775879 420.180587
8 77.771811 420.336758
9 80.753644 420.666419
10 83.711338 421.168461
11 86.634937 421.841192
12 89.514599 422.682350
13 92.340630 423.689101
14 95.103517 424.858057
15 97.793958 426.185283
16 100.402896 427.666310
17 102.921548 429.296153
18 105.341437 431.069325
19 107.654415 432.979858
20 109.852695 435.021318
21 110.000000 435.174961
22 111.928879 437.186835
23 113.875975 439.469118
24 115.687431 441.860483
25 117.357147 444.352881
26 118.879503 446.937922
27 118.911365 447.000000
2453
***Table 3 ‐ Force and Pore Pressure Data On The 26 Slices (Excluding Reinforcement)*** Ubeta Ubeta Ualpha Earthquake Force Stress Force Pore Force Distributed Slice Weight Top Top Bot Pressure ‐Uw Horiz Vert Load No. (lbs) (lbs) (psf) (lbs) (psf) (psf) (lbs) (lbs) (psf) 1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 2 337.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 3 1019.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 4 1661.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 5 2254.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 6 2787.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 7 3255.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 8 3650.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 9 3968.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 10 4207.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 11 4363.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 12 4438.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 13 4433.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 14 4351.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 15 4196.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 16 3975.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 17 3695.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 18 3364.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 19 2992.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 20 192.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 21 2295.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 22 1857.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 23 1262.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 24 715.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 25 226.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 26 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 TOTAL WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 65504.32(lbs)
EFFECTIVE WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 65504.32(lbs)
TOTAL AREA OF SLIDING MASS = 595.49(ft2)
2454
***TABLE 4 ‐ SOIL STRENGTH & SOIL OPTIONS DATA ON THE 26 SLICES*** Slice Soil Cohesion Phi(Deg) Options
No. Type (psf)
1 1 400.00 24.00
2 1 400.00 24.00
3 1 400.00 24.00
4 1 400.00 24.00
5 1 400.00 24.00
6 1 400.00 24.00
7 1 400.00 24.00
8 1 400.00 24.00
9 1 400.00 24.00
10 1 400.00 24.00
11 1 400.00 24.00
12 1 400.00 24.00
13 1 400.00 24.00
14 1 400.00 24.00
15 1 400.00 24.00
16 1 400.00 24.00
17 1 400.00 24.00
18 1 400.00 24.00
19 1 400.00 24.00
20 1 400.00 24.00
21 1 400.00 24.00
22 1 400.00 24.00
23 1 400.00 24.00
24 1 400.00 24.00
25 1 400.00 24.00
26 1 400.00 24.00
SOIL OPTIONS:
A = ANISOTROPIC SHEAR STRENGTH
C = CURVED STRENGTH ENVELOPE (TANGENT PHI & C)
F = FIBER‐REINFORCED SOIL (FRS)
M = INDEPENDENT MULTI‐STAGE SHEAR STRENGTH
2455
N = NONLINEAR UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
R = RAPID DRAWDOWN OR RAPID LOADING (SEISMIC) SHEAR STRENGTH S = SHANSEP UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
NOTE: Phi and C in Table 4 are modified values based on specified Soil Options (if any).
***TABLE 5 ‐ Total Base Stress Data on the 26 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Total Total Total No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Vert. Stress Normal/Vert. * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) Stress Ratio 1 ‐13.64 59.97 0.06 114.19 0.83 136.820 2 ‐13.64 61.43 2.94 257.11 118.20 2.175 3 ‐10.32 64.33 3.00 502.93 345.44 1.456 4 ‐6.99 67.29 3.00 716.17 558.12 1.283 5 ‐3.67 70.28 3.00 896.54 752.97 1.191 6 ‐0.34 73.28 3.00 1046.36 929.33 1.126 7 2.98 76.27 3.00 1167.54 1086.61 1.074 8 6.31 79.26 3.00 1261.74 1224.28 1.031 9 9.63 82.23 3.00 1330.42 1341.87 0.991 10 12.96 85.17 3.00 1374.94 1438.99 0.955 11 16.28 88.07 3.00 1396.55 1515.32 0.922 12 19.61 90.93 3.00 1396.49 1570.59 0.889 13 22.93 93.72 3.00 1375.97 1604.62 0.858 14 26.26 96.45 3.00 1336.22 1617.30 0.826 15 29.58 99.10 3.00 1278.52 1608.58 0.795 16 32.91 101.66 3.00 1204.17 1578.49 0.763 17 36.23 104.13 3.00 1114.58 1527.13 0.730 18 39.56 106.50 3.00 1011.23 1454.68 0.695 19 42.88 108.75 3.00 895.70 1361.38 0.658 20 46.21 109.93 0.21 809.17 1305.15 0.620 21 46.21 110.96 2.79 730.42 1190.10 0.614 22 49.53 112.90 3.00 530.57 953.92 0.556 23 52.86 114.78 3.00 329.81 696.87 0.473 24 56.18 116.52 3.00 136.34 428.26 0.318 2456
25 59.51 118.12 3.00 ‐47.05 149.01 ‐0.316 26 62.83 118.90 0.07 ‐142.16 3.41 ‐41.635
***TABLE 5A ‐ Total Base Force Data on the 26 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Total Total Total No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Vert. Force Normal/Vert. * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) Force Ratio 1 ‐13.64 59.97 0.06 7.35 0.05 140.790 2 ‐13.64 61.43 2.94 754.77 337.20 2.238 3 ‐10.32 64.33 3.00 1508.80 1019.57 1.480 4 ‐6.99 67.29 3.00 2148.50 1661.91 1.293 5 ‐3.67 70.28 3.00 2689.62 2254.28 1.193 6 ‐0.34 73.28 3.00 3139.07 2787.94 1.126 7 2.98 76.27 3.00 3502.62 3255.40 1.076 8 6.31 79.26 3.00 3785.22 3650.58 1.037 9 9.63 82.23 3.00 3991.27 3968.84 1.006 10 12.96 85.17 3.00 4124.81 4207.03 0.980 11 16.28 88.07 3.00 4189.65 4363.60 0.960 12 19.61 90.93 3.00 4189.46 4438.53 0.944 13 22.93 93.72 3.00 4127.90 4433.38 0.931 14 26.26 96.45 3.00 4008.67 4351.24 0.921 15 29.58 99.10 3.00 3835.55 4196.67 0.914 16 32.91 101.66 3.00 3612.52 3975.66 0.909 17 36.23 104.13 3.00 3343.75 3695.49 0.905 18 39.56 106.50 3.00 3033.68 3364.64 0.902 19 42.88 108.75 3.00 2687.10 2992.70 0.898 20 46.21 109.93 0.21 172.23 192.26 0.896 21 46.21 110.96 2.79 2035.79 2295.56 0.887 22 49.53 112.90 3.00 1591.72 1857.38 0.857 23 52.86 114.78 3.00 989.42 1262.35 0.784 24 56.18 116.52 3.00 409.02 715.08 0.572 25 59.51 118.12 3.00 ‐141.15 226.84 ‐0.622 26 62.83 118.90 0.07 ‐9.92 0.11 ‐91.181
2457
***TABLE 6 ‐ Effective and Base Shear Stress Data on the 26 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) (psf) 1 ‐13.64 59.97 0.06 114.19 450.84 189.33 2 ‐13.64 61.43 2.94 257.11 514.47 216.06 3 ‐10.32 64.33 3.00 502.93 623.92 262.02 4 ‐6.99 67.29 3.00 716.17 718.86 301.89 5 ‐3.67 70.28 3.00 896.54 799.17 335.62 6 ‐0.34 73.28 3.00 1046.36 865.87 363.63 7 2.98 76.27 3.00 1167.54 919.82 386.29 8 6.31 79.26 3.00 1261.74 961.76 403.90 9 9.63 82.23 3.00 1330.42 992.34 416.75 10 12.96 85.17 3.00 1374.94 1012.16 425.07 11 16.28 88.07 3.00 1396.55 1021.78 429.11 12 19.61 90.93 3.00 1396.49 1021.76 429.10 13 22.93 93.72 3.00 1375.97 1012.62 425.26 14 26.26 96.45 3.00 1336.22 994.92 417.83 15 29.58 99.10 3.00 1278.52 969.23 407.04 16 32.91 101.66 3.00 1204.17 936.13 393.14 17 36.23 104.13 3.00 1114.58 896.24 376.39 18 39.56 106.50 3.00 1011.23 850.23 357.06 19 42.88 108.75 3.00 895.70 798.79 335.46 20 46.21 109.93 0.21 809.17 760.27 319.28 21 46.21 110.96 2.79 730.42 725.20 304.56 22 49.53 112.90 3.00 530.57 636.23 267.19 23 52.86 114.78 3.00 329.81 546.84 229.65 24 56.18 116.52 3.00 136.34 460.70 193.48 25 59.51 118.12 3.00 ‐47.05 379.05 159.19 26 62.83 118.90 0.07 ‐142.16 336.71 141.40
***TABLE 6A ‐ Effective and Base Shear Force Data on the 26 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized 2458
No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Shear Force Shear Force * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 ‐13.64 59.97 0.06 7.35 29.01 12.18 2 ‐13.64 61.43 2.94 754.77 1510.31 634.27 3 ‐10.32 64.33 3.00 1508.80 1871.76 786.07 4 ‐6.99 67.29 3.00 2148.50 2156.57 905.68 5 ‐3.67 70.28 3.00 2689.62 2397.50 1006.86 6 ‐0.34 73.28 3.00 3139.07 2597.60 1090.89 7 2.98 76.27 3.00 3502.62 2759.47 1158.87 8 6.31 79.26 3.00 3785.22 2885.29 1211.71 9 9.63 82.23 3.00 3991.27 2977.03 1250.24 10 12.96 85.17 3.00 4124.81 3036.48 1275.21 11 16.28 88.07 3.00 4189.65 3065.35 1287.33 12 19.61 90.93 3.00 4189.46 3065.27 1287.29 13 22.93 93.72 3.00 4127.90 3037.86 1275.78 14 26.26 96.45 3.00 4008.67 2984.77 1253.49 15 29.58 99.10 3.00 3835.55 2907.70 1221.12 16 32.91 101.66 3.00 3612.52 2808.40 1179.42 17 36.23 104.13 3.00 3343.75 2688.73 1129.16 18 39.56 106.50 3.00 3033.68 2550.68 1071.19 19 42.88 108.75 3.00 2687.10 2396.38 1006.38 20 46.21 109.93 0.21 172.23 161.82 67.96 21 46.21 110.96 2.79 2035.79 2021.25 848.85 22 49.53 112.90 3.00 1591.72 1908.68 801.57 23 52.86 114.78 3.00 989.42 1640.52 688.95 24 56.18 116.52 3.00 409.02 1382.11 580.43 25 59.51 118.12 3.00 ‐141.15 1137.16 477.56 26 62.83 118.90 0.07 ‐9.92 23.49 9.87 Average Effective Normal Stress = 922.6529(psf)
Average Available Shear Strength = 810.7915(psf)
Total Length of Failure Surface = 69.0698(ft)
INPUT PARAMETERS FOR SIMPLIFIED 3D ANALYSIS
Composite Phi (deg)= 41.308
3D Depth (Vertical difference between ends of Slip Surface) = 25.00(ft) 2459
L/D(1): L = 25.00(ft) L/D(2): L = 50.00(ft) L/D(3): L = 75.00(ft) L/D(4): L = 100.00(ft) L/D(5): L = 125.00(ft) L/D(6): L = 150.00(ft) SUM OF MOMENTS = ‐0.109727E‐03 (ft/lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = ‐0.1675105E‐08 SUM OF FORCES = ‐.762124E‐06 (lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = ‐0.1163472E‐10 Sum of Available Shear Forces = 56001.19(lbs)
Sum of Mobilized Shear Forces = 23518.32(lbs)
FS Balance Check: FS = 2.381173
**** END OF GEOSTASE OUTPUT ****
2460
95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
Global Stability of 25' High Slopes (Pseudo-Static)
SA Geotechnical, Inc. \01p.gsd
Spencer Method
PLATE C.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500
GEOSTASEÆ v4.30.32 by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 1.458
kh = 0.29000
B 1
B 2
B 3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500 No. FS
1 1.458
2 1.459
3 1.461
4 1.465
5 1.472
6 1.478
7 1.485
8 1.486
9 1.492
10 1.507
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru -Uw Fact Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (unsat) No. Options 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.0 24.0 0.000 0.0 1
2461
95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
Global Stability of 25' High Slopes (Pseudo-Static)
SA Geotechnical, Inc. \01p.gsd
Spencer Method
PLATE C.1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500
GEOSTASEÆ v4.30.32 by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 1.458
kh = 0.29000
B 1
B 2
B 3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
400
420
440
460
480
500
400
420
440
460
480
500 No. FS
1 1.458
2 1.459
3 1.461
4 1.465
5 1.472
6 1.478
7 1.485
8 1.486
9 1.492
10 1.507
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru -Uw Fact Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (unsat) No. Options 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 1
2462
*** GEOSTASE(R) ***
** GEOSTASE(R) (c)Copyright by Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,S.E.,BC.GE ** ** Current Version 4.30.32‐Double Precision, Sept 2023 ** (All Rights Reserved‐Unauthorized Use Prohibited)
********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SOFTWARE (2D & 3D)
Simplified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or General Equilibrium (GE) Options. (Spencer, Morgenstern‐Price, USACE, and Lowe & Karafiath) Including Pier/Pile, Planar Reinf, Nail, Tieback, Line Loads Applied Forces, Fiber‐Reinforced Soil (FRS), Distributed Loads Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Strength Envelope, Anisotropic Strengths, Water Surfaces, 3‐Stage Rapid Drawdown 2‐ or 3‐Stage Pseudo‐Static & Simplified Newmark Seismic Analyses. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Date: 5/ 28/ 2024
Analysis Time:
Analysis By: SA Geotechnical, Inc.
Input File Name: C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical ‐ Projects\2024\24059‐01 Meritage ‐ 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01p.gsd
Output File Name: C:\Users\Reza Saberi\SA Geotechnical, Inc\SA Geotechnical ‐ Projects\2024\24059‐01 Meritage ‐ 95 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo\Engineering\Sted\General Slope\01p.OUT
Unit System: English
PROJECT: 95 Argonaut. Aliso Viejo
DESCRIPTION: Global Stability of 25' High Slopes (Pseudo‐Static) 2463
PROFILE BOUNDARY DATA
3 Surface Boundaries
3 Total Boundaries
Boundary X ‐ 1 Y ‐ 1 X ‐ 2 Y ‐ 2 Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.000 422.000 60.000 422.000 1 2 60.000 422.000 110.000 447.000 1 3 110.000 447.000 160.000 447.000 1 User Specified X‐Origin = 0.000(ft)
User Specified Y‐Origin = 400.000(ft)
SURFACE BOUNDARY POINT COORDINATES
(Information Only‐Not Used Directly)
Point No. X‐COORD Y‐COORD
1 0.000 422.000
2 60.000 422.000
3 110.000 447.000
4 160.000 447.000
SUBSURFACE BOUNDARY POINT COORDINATES
(Information Only‐Not Used Directly)
Point No. X‐COORD Y‐COORD
PROFILE BOUNDARY SLOPES AND ANGLES
BND No. Slope Angle(Deg.)
1 0.000 0.000
2 0.500 26.565
3 0.000 0.000
MOHR‐COULOMB SOIL PARAMETERS
1 Type(s) of Soil Defined
2464
Soil Number Moist Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore (‐Uw) Water Water and Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Fact. Surface Option Description (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Ratio(ru) No. 1 Fill 110.0 110.0 400.00 24.00 0.000 0.0 1 0
SEISMIC (EARTHQUAKE) DATA
Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (PGA) = 0.290(g) Default Velocity = 1.450(ft) per second
Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.29000(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) (NOTE:Input Velocity = 0.0 will result in default Peak
Velocity = 2 times(PGA) times 2.5 fps or 0.762 mps)
Specified Seismic Pore‐Pressure Factor = 0.000
Horizontal Seismic Force is Applied at Center of Gravity of Slices
TRIAL FAILURE SURFACE DATA
Circular Trial Failure Surfaces Have Been Generated Using A Random Procedure.
2000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
2000 Surfaces Generated at Increments of 0.0600(in) Equally Spaced Within the Start Range Along The Specified Surface Between X = 55.00(ft)
and X = 65.00(ft)
Each Surface ends within a Range Between X = 110.00(ft) and X = 140.00(ft)
All surfaces are generated left to right for both a left and right sliding slope.
Unless XCLUDE Lines Were Specified, The Minimum Elevation To Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 400.00(ft)
2465
Specified Maximum Radius = 100000.000(ft)
3.000(ft) Line Segments Were Used For Each Trial Failure Surface.
The Spencer Method Was Selected for FS Analysis.
Selected fx function = Constant (1.0)
SELECTED CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS FOR SPENCER METHOD:
Initial estimate of FS = 1.500
FS tolerance = 0.000001000
Initial estimate of theta(deg) = 15.00
Theta tolerance(radians) = 0.0001000
Minimum theta(deg) = ‐45.00 ; Maximum theta(deg) = 45.00 Theta convergence Step Factor = 5000.00
Maximum number of iterations = 50
Allowable negative side force = ‐1000.0(lbs)
Maximum force imbalance = 100.000000(lbs)
Maximum moment imbalance = 100.000000 (ft/lbs)
Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00
Specified Tension Crack Water Depth Factor = 0.000
Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 2000
WARNING! The Factor of Safety Calculation for one or More Trial Surfaces Did Not Converge in 50 Iterations.
Number of Trial Surfaces with Non‐Converged FS = 1779
Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 221
Percentage of Trial Surfaces With Non‐Converged and/or
2466
Non‐Valid FS Solutions of the Total Attempted = 89.0 % Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values:
FS Max = 1.907 FS Min = 1.458 FS Ave = 1.673
Standard Deviation = 0.100 Coefficient of Variation = 5.97 % Critical Surface is Sequence Number 8 of Those Analyzed. *****BEGINNING OF DETAILED GEOSTASE OUTPUT FOR CRITICAL SURFACE FROM A SEARCH***** BACK‐CALCULATED CIRCULAR SURFACE PARAMETERS:
Circle Center At X = 79.072422(ft) ; Y = 461.584595(ft); and Radius = 46.189706(ft) Circular Trial Failure Surface Generated With 29 Coordinate Points Point X‐Coord. Y‐Coord.
No. (ft) (ft)
1 55.27014 422.00000
2 57.88998 420.53836
3 60.59919 419.24987
4 63.38632 418.13997
5 66.23963 417.21334
6 69.14707 416.47388
7 72.09638 415.92472
8 75.07512 415.56818
9 78.07072 415.40575
10 81.07054 415.43813
11 84.06194 415.66517
12 87.03229 416.08592
13 89.96906 416.69860
14 92.85986 417.50063
15 95.69250 418.48863
16 98.45503 419.65843
17 101.13580 421.00509
18 103.72349 422.52293
2467
19 106.20720 424.20555
20 108.57643 426.04585
21 110.82121 428.03607
22 112.93206 430.16782
23 114.90007 432.43209
24 116.71694 434.81934
25 118.37502 437.31950
26 119.86730 439.92202
27 121.18748 442.61592
28 122.33001 445.38984
29 122.87389 447.00000
Iter. Theta FS FS
No. (deg) (Moment) (Force)
(fx=1.0) Lambda Delta FS 1 15.0000 1.669854 1.332393 0.268 0.3374611E+00 2 19.9500 1.647384 1.378190 0.363 0.2691943E+00 3 39.4653 9.550143 1.745311 0.823 0.7804832E+01 4 19.2530 1.653452 1.371193 0.349 0.2822590E+00 5 18.4988 1.658690 1.363842 0.335 0.2948478E+00 6 36.1598 0.000000 1.641211 0.731 0.1641211E+01 7 21.1879 1.633066 1.391134 0.388 0.2419319E+00 8 23.1140 1.598474 1.412737 0.427 0.1857370E+00 9 29.4789 0.000000 1.501027 0.565 0.1501027E+01 10 23.8147 1.580714 1.421087 0.441 0.1596267E+00 11 24.3602 1.564324 1.427786 0.453 0.1365382E+00 12 27.5854 1.384097 1.471473 0.522 0.8737655E‐01 13 26.3271 1.478043 1.453533 0.495 0.2451021E‐01 14 26.6029 1.461048 1.457360 0.501 0.3687567E‐02 15 26.6518 1.457865 1.458044 0.502 0.1790882E‐03 16 26.6495 1.458014 1.458012 0.502 0.1202523E‐05 17 26.6495 1.458013 1.458013 0.502 0.3293546E‐07 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.458 Theta (fx = 1.0) = 26.65 Deg Lambda = 0.502
2468
The Spencer Method Has Been Selected For Analysis.
Selected fx function = Constant (1.0)
SELECTED CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS FOR ANALYSIS METHOD:
Initial estimate of FS = 1.500
FS tolerance = 0.000001000
Initial estimate of theta(deg) = 15.00
Theta tolerance(radians) = 0.0001000
Minimum theta(deg) = ‐45.00 ; Maximum theta(deg) = 45.00 Theta convergence Step Factor = 5000.00
Maximum number of iterations = 50
Maximum force imbalance = 100.000000(lbs)
Maximum moment imbalance(if Applicable) = 100.000000 (ft/lbs) Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00
Tension Crack Water Force = 0.00(lbs)
Specified Tension Crack Water Depth Factor = 0.000 ( 0.00% Filled ) Depth of Tension Crack (zo) at Side of Last Slice = 0.000(ft) Depth of Water in Tension Crack = 0.000(ft)
Theoretical Tension Crack Depth = 11.199(ft)
NOTE: In Table 1 following, when a tension crack with water is present on the first slice (right facing slope) or on the last slice (left facing slope), the "side force" in the tension crack is set equal to the water pressure resultant. *** Table 1 ‐ Line of Thrust(if applicable) and Slice Force Data *** Slice X Y Side Force fx Force Angle Vert. Shear No. Coord. Coord. h/H (lbs) (Deg) Force(lbs) 2469
1 57.89 421.93 0.950 3030.29 1.000 26.65 1359.2 2 60.00 421.91 0.965 5333.39 1.000 26.65 2392.2 3 60.60 421.88 0.863 6054.86 1.000 26.65 2715.8 4 63.39 421.85 0.668 9202.53 1.000 26.65 4127.6 5 66.24 421.85 0.586 12349.95 1.000 26.65 5539.3 6 69.15 421.93 0.540 15298.87 1.000 26.65 6862.0 7 72.10 422.10 0.510 17906.63 1.000 26.65 8031.7 8 75.08 422.38 0.488 20071.76 1.000 26.65 9002.8 9 78.07 422.76 0.471 21725.73 1.000 26.65 9744.7 10 81.07 423.25 0.457 22827.80 1.000 26.65 10239.0 11 84.06 423.84 0.445 23361.35 1.000 26.65 10478.3 12 87.03 424.53 0.435 23331.13 1.000 26.65 10464.7 13 89.97 425.32 0.425 22760.74 1.000 26.65 10208.9 14 92.86 426.20 0.416 21690.43 1.000 26.65 9728.8 15 95.69 427.17 0.407 20174.76 1.000 26.65 9049.0 16 98.46 428.23 0.397 18280.37 1.000 26.65 8199.3 17 101.14 429.36 0.387 16083.52 1.000 26.65 7214.0 18 103.72 430.56 0.377 13667.69 1.000 26.65 6130.4 19 106.21 431.82 0.364 11120.94 1.000 26.65 4988.1 20 108.58 433.12 0.350 8533.38 1.000 26.65 3827.5 21 110.00 433.97 0.339 6906.36 1.000 26.65 3097.7 22 110.82 434.45 0.338 6007.06 1.000 26.65 2694.4 23 112.93 435.81 0.335 3761.86 1.000 26.65 1687.3 24 114.90 437.13 0.323 1902.94 1.000 26.65 853.5 25 116.72 437.71 0.237 481.61 1.000 26.65 216.0 26 118.38 441.92 0.476 ‐468.44 1.000 26.65 ‐210.1 27 119.87 442.85 0.413 ‐932.69 1.000 26.65 ‐418.3 28 121.19 444.38 0.403 ‐917.26 1.000 26.65 ‐411.4 29 122.33 446.06 0.415 ‐450.28 1.000 26.65 ‐202.0 30 122.87 447.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 26.65 0.0 NOTE: A value of 0.000‐ for h/H indicates that the line of thrust is at or below the lower boundary of the sliding mass. A value of 1.000+ for h/H indicates that the line of thrust is at or above the upper boundary of the sliding mass.
***Table 2 ‐ Geometry Data on the 30 Slices***
2470
Slice Width Height X‐Cntr Y‐Cntr‐Base Y‐Cntr‐Top Alpha Beta Base Length No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (deg) (ft) 1 2.62 0.73 56.58 421.27 422.00 ‐29.16 0.00 3.00 2 2.11 1.96 58.94 420.04 422.00 ‐25.44 0.00 2.34 3 0.60 2.76 60.30 419.39 422.15 ‐25.44 26.57 0.66 4 2.79 4.30 61.99 418.69 423.00 ‐21.71 26.57 3.00 5 2.85 6.73 64.81 417.68 424.41 ‐17.99 26.57 3.00 6 2.91 9.00 67.69 416.84 425.85 ‐14.27 26.57 3.00 7 2.95 11.11 70.62 416.20 427.31 ‐10.55 26.57 3.00 8 2.98 13.05 73.59 415.75 428.79 ‐6.83 26.57 3.00 9 3.00 14.80 76.57 415.49 430.29 ‐3.10 26.57 3.00 10 3.00 16.36 79.57 415.42 431.79 0.62 26.57 3.00 11 2.99 17.73 82.57 415.55 433.28 4.34 26.57 3.00 12 2.97 18.90 85.55 415.88 434.77 8.06 26.57 3.00 13 2.94 19.86 88.50 416.39 436.25 11.78 26.57 3.00 14 2.89 20.61 91.41 417.10 437.71 15.51 26.57 3.00 15 2.83 21.14 94.28 417.99 439.14 19.23 26.57 3.00 16 2.76 21.46 97.07 419.07 440.54 22.95 26.57 3.00 17 2.68 21.57 99.80 420.33 441.90 26.67 26.57 3.00 18 2.59 21.45 102.43 421.76 443.21 30.39 26.57 3.00 19 2.48 21.12 104.97 423.36 444.48 34.12 26.57 3.00 20 2.37 20.57 107.39 425.13 445.70 37.84 26.57 3.00 21 1.42 19.97 109.29 426.68 446.64 41.56 26.57 1.90 22 0.82 19.33 110.41 427.67 447.00 41.56 0.00 1.10 23 2.11 17.90 111.88 429.10 447.00 45.28 0.00 3.00 24 1.97 15.70 113.92 431.30 447.00 49.00 0.00 3.00 25 1.82 13.37 115.81 433.63 447.00 52.73 0.00 3.00 26 1.66 10.93 117.55 436.07 447.00 56.45 0.00 3.00 27 1.49 8.38 119.12 438.62 447.00 60.17 0.00 3.00 28 1.32 5.73 120.53 441.27 447.00 63.89 0.00 3.00 29 1.14 3.00 121.76 444.00 447.00 67.61 0.00 3.00 30 0.54 0.81 122.60 446.19 447.00 71.34 0.00 1.70
***Table 2A ‐ Coordinates of Slice Points Defining the Slip Surface*** 2471
Point
X‐Pt Y‐Pt
No. (ft) (ft)
1 55.270135 422.000000
2 57.889984 420.538361
3 60.000000 419.534845
4 60.599191 419.249872
5 63.386325 418.139971
6 66.239630 417.213338
7 69.147070 416.473882
8 72.096379 415.924724
9 75.075116 415.568179
10 78.070716 415.405751
11 81.070541 415.438127
12 84.061938 415.665168
13 87.032286 416.085918
14 89.969056 416.698602
15 92.859860 417.500635
16 95.692501 418.488633
17 98.455032 419.658429
18 101.135799 421.005088
19 103.723492 422.522929
20 106.207197 424.205550
21 108.576434 426.045852
22 110.000000 427.307986
23 110.821211 428.036073
24 112.932058 430.167815
25 114.900069 432.432088
26 116.716944 434.819339
27 118.375017 437.319497
28 119.867295 439.922017
29 121.187482 442.615918
30 122.330009 445.389838
31 122.873887 447.000000
2472
***Table 3 ‐ Force and Pore Pressure Data On The 30 Slices (Excluding Reinforcement)*** Ubeta Ubeta Ualpha Earthquake Force Stress Force Pore Force Distributed Slice Weight Top Top Bot Pressure ‐Uw Horiz Vert Load No. (lbs) (lbs) (psf) (lbs) (psf) (psf) (lbs) (lbs) (psf) 1 210.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 61.1 0.0 0.00 2 455.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 132.2 0.0 0.00 3 181.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 52.7 0.0 0.00 4 1318.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 382.4 0.0 0.00 5 2112.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 612.6 0.0 0.00 6 2879.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 835.0 0.0 0.00 7 3604.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1045.4 0.0 0.00 8 4274.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1239.7 0.0 0.00 9 4876.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1414.2 0.0 0.00 10 5399.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1565.9 0.0 0.00 11 5834.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1692.0 0.0 0.00 12 6174.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1790.7 0.0 0.00 13 6415.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1860.4 0.0 0.00 14 6553.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1900.4 0.0 0.00 15 6588.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1910.5 0.0 0.00 16 6522.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1891.5 0.0 0.00 17 6359.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1844.2 0.0 0.00 18 6105.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1770.7 0.0 0.00 19 5769.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1673.2 0.0 0.00 20 5360.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1554.7 0.0 0.00 21 3126.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 906.7 0.0 0.00 22 1746.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 506.3 0.0 0.00 23 4155.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 1205.2 0.0 0.00 24 3398.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 985.6 0.0 0.00 25 2672.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 775.2 0.0 0.00 26 1993.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 578.1 0.0 0.00 27 1375.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 398.9 0.0 0.00 28 832.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 241.4 0.0 0.00 29 376.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 109.2 0.0 0.00 30 48.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 14.0 0.0 0.00 TOTAL WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 106724.37(lbs)
2473
EFFECTIVE WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 106724.37(lbs)
TOTAL AREA OF SLIDING MASS = 970.22(ft2)
***TABLE 4 ‐ SOIL STRENGTH & SOIL OPTIONS DATA ON THE 30 SLICES*** Slice Soil Cohesion Phi(Deg) Options
No. Type (psf)
1 1 400.00 24.00
2 1 400.00 24.00
3 1 400.00 24.00
4 1 400.00 24.00
5 1 400.00 24.00
6 1 400.00 24.00
7 1 400.00 24.00
8 1 400.00 24.00
9 1 400.00 24.00
10 1 400.00 24.00
11 1 400.00 24.00
12 1 400.00 24.00
13 1 400.00 24.00
14 1 400.00 24.00
15 1 400.00 24.00
16 1 400.00 24.00
17 1 400.00 24.00
18 1 400.00 24.00
19 1 400.00 24.00
20 1 400.00 24.00
21 1 400.00 24.00
22 1 400.00 24.00
23 1 400.00 24.00
24 1 400.00 24.00
25 1 400.00 24.00
26 1 400.00 24.00
27 1 400.00 24.00
28 1 400.00 24.00
29 1 400.00 24.00
2474
30 1 400.00 24.00
SOIL OPTIONS:
A = ANISOTROPIC SHEAR STRENGTH
C = CURVED STRENGTH ENVELOPE (TANGENT PHI & C)
F = FIBER‐REINFORCED SOIL (FRS)
M = INDEPENDENT MULTI‐STAGE SHEAR STRENGTH
N = NONLINEAR UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
R = RAPID DRAWDOWN OR RAPID LOADING (SEISMIC) SHEAR STRENGTH S = SHANSEP UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
NOTE: Phi and C in Table 4 are modified values based on specified Soil Options (if any).
***TABLE 5 ‐ Total Base Stress Data on the 30 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Total Total Total No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Vert. Stress Normal/Vert. * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) Stress Ratio 1 ‐29.16 56.58 3.00 906.73 80.39 11.279 2 ‐25.44 58.94 2.34 978.07 215.97 4.529 3 ‐25.44 60.30 0.66 1139.32 303.32 3.756 4 ‐21.71 61.99 3.00 1239.72 473.16 2.620 5 ‐17.99 64.81 3.00 1469.91 740.28 1.986 6 ‐14.27 67.69 3.00 1642.62 990.34 1.659 7 ‐10.55 70.62 3.00 1770.62 1222.27 1.449 8 ‐6.83 73.59 3.00 1862.02 1435.11 1.297 9 ‐3.10 76.57 3.00 1922.30 1627.94 1.181 10 0.62 79.57 3.00 1955.35 1799.97 1.086 11 4.34 82.57 3.00 1964.12 1950.46 1.007 12 8.06 85.55 3.00 1950.97 2078.78 0.939 13 11.78 88.50 3.00 1917.86 2184.39 0.878 14 15.51 91.41 3.00 1866.52 2266.84 0.823 15 19.23 94.28 3.00 1798.53 2325.78 0.773 16 22.95 97.07 3.00 1715.40 2360.97 0.727 17 26.67 99.80 3.00 1618.59 2372.25 0.682 2475
18 30.39 102.43 3.00 1509.54 2359.59 0.640 19 34.12 104.97 3.00 1389.75 2323.03 0.598 20 37.84 107.39 3.00 1260.73 2262.72 0.557 21 41.56 109.29 1.90 1133.61 2196.39 0.516 22 41.56 110.41 1.10 1095.16 2126.08 0.515 23 45.28 111.88 3.00 928.35 1968.79 0.472 24 49.00 113.92 3.00 730.90 1727.01 0.423 25 52.73 115.81 3.00 542.25 1471.17 0.369 26 56.45 117.55 3.00 364.05 1202.36 0.303 27 60.17 119.12 3.00 198.18 921.72 0.215 28 63.89 120.53 3.00 46.73 630.41 0.074 29 67.61 121.76 3.00 ‐87.90 329.68 ‐0.267 30 71.34 122.60 1.70 ‐185.03 88.56 ‐2.089
***TABLE 5A ‐ Total Base Force Data on the 30 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Total Total Total No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Vert. Force Normal/Vert. * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) Force Ratio 1 ‐29.16 56.58 3.00 2720.19 210.61 12.916 2 ‐25.44 58.94 2.34 2285.27 455.71 5.015 3 ‐25.44 60.30 0.66 755.95 181.75 4.159 4 ‐21.71 61.99 3.00 3719.16 1318.76 2.820 5 ‐17.99 64.81 3.00 4409.74 2112.25 2.088 6 ‐14.27 67.69 3.00 4927.85 2879.35 1.711 7 ‐10.55 70.62 3.00 5311.86 3604.86 1.474 8 ‐6.83 73.59 3.00 5586.07 4274.81 1.307 9 ‐3.10 76.57 3.00 5766.89 4876.67 1.183 10 0.62 79.57 3.00 5866.04 5399.60 1.086 11 4.34 82.57 3.00 5892.36 5834.60 1.010 12 8.06 85.55 3.00 5852.90 6174.70 0.948 13 11.78 88.50 3.00 5753.57 6415.05 0.897 14 15.51 91.41 3.00 5599.56 6552.98 0.855 15 19.23 94.28 3.00 5395.60 6588.10 0.819 16 22.95 97.07 3.00 5146.21 6522.25 0.789 17 26.67 99.80 3.00 4855.76 6359.46 0.764 2476
18 30.39 102.43 3.00 4528.62 6105.89 0.742 19 34.12 104.97 3.00 4169.24 5769.71 0.723 20 37.84 107.39 3.00 3782.18 5360.93 0.706 21 41.56 109.29 1.90 2156.70 3126.71 0.690 22 41.56 110.41 1.10 1201.93 1745.96 0.688 23 45.28 111.88 3.00 2785.05 4155.81 0.670 24 49.00 113.92 3.00 2192.70 3398.77 0.645 25 52.73 115.81 3.00 1626.75 2672.93 0.609 26 56.45 117.55 3.00 1092.16 1993.61 0.548 27 60.17 119.12 3.00 594.53 1375.46 0.432 28 63.89 120.53 3.00 140.18 832.26 0.168 29 67.61 121.76 3.00 ‐263.70 376.67 ‐0.700 30 71.34 122.60 1.70 ‐314.47 48.17 ‐6.529
***TABLE 6 ‐ Effective and Base Shear Stress Data on the 30 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) (psf) 1 ‐29.16 56.58 3.00 906.73 803.70 551.23 2 ‐25.44 58.94 2.34 978.07 835.47 573.02 3 ‐25.44 60.30 0.66 1139.32 907.26 622.26 4 ‐21.71 61.99 3.00 1239.72 951.96 652.92 5 ‐17.99 64.81 3.00 1469.91 1054.45 723.21 6 ‐14.27 67.69 3.00 1642.62 1131.34 775.95 7 ‐10.55 70.62 3.00 1770.62 1188.33 815.03 8 ‐6.83 73.59 3.00 1862.02 1229.03 842.95 9 ‐3.10 76.57 3.00 1922.30 1255.86 861.35 10 0.62 79.57 3.00 1955.35 1270.58 871.44 11 4.34 82.57 3.00 1964.12 1274.48 874.12 12 8.06 85.55 3.00 1950.97 1268.63 870.11 13 11.78 88.50 3.00 1917.86 1253.88 860.00 14 15.51 91.41 3.00 1866.52 1231.03 844.32 15 19.23 94.28 3.00 1798.53 1200.76 823.56 16 22.95 97.07 3.00 1715.40 1163.75 798.17 17 26.67 99.80 3.00 1618.59 1120.64 768.61 2477
18 30.39 102.43 3.00 1509.54 1072.09 735.31 19 34.12 104.97 3.00 1389.75 1018.76 698.73 20 37.84 107.39 3.00 1260.73 961.31 659.33 21 41.56 109.29 1.90 1133.61 904.72 620.51 22 41.56 110.41 1.10 1095.16 887.60 608.77 23 45.28 111.88 3.00 928.35 813.33 557.83 24 49.00 113.92 3.00 730.90 725.42 497.54 25 52.73 115.81 3.00 542.25 641.42 439.93 26 56.45 117.55 3.00 364.05 562.09 385.52 27 60.17 119.12 3.00 198.18 488.23 334.86 28 63.89 120.53 3.00 46.73 420.80 288.61 29 67.61 121.76 3.00 ‐87.90 360.86 247.50 30 71.34 122.60 1.70 ‐185.03 317.62 217.84
***TABLE 6A ‐ Effective and Base Shear Force Data on the 30 Slices*** Slice Alpha X‐Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Shear Force Shear Force * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 ‐29.16 56.58 3.00 2720.19 2411.11 1653.69 2 ‐25.44 58.94 2.34 2285.27 1952.06 1338.85 3 ‐25.44 60.30 0.66 755.95 601.97 412.87 4 ‐21.71 61.99 3.00 3719.16 2855.88 1958.75 5 ‐17.99 64.81 3.00 4409.74 3163.34 2169.63 6 ‐14.27 67.69 3.00 4927.85 3394.02 2327.84 7 ‐10.55 70.62 3.00 5311.86 3564.99 2445.10 8 ‐6.83 73.59 3.00 5586.07 3687.08 2528.84 9 ‐3.10 76.57 3.00 5766.89 3767.59 2584.06 10 0.62 79.57 3.00 5866.04 3811.73 2614.33 11 4.34 82.57 3.00 5892.36 3823.45 2622.37 12 8.06 85.55 3.00 5852.90 3805.88 2610.32 13 11.78 88.50 3.00 5753.57 3761.65 2579.99 14 15.51 91.41 3.00 5599.56 3693.08 2532.96 15 19.23 94.28 3.00 5395.60 3602.28 2470.68 16 22.95 97.07 3.00 5146.21 3491.24 2394.52 17 26.67 99.80 3.00 4855.76 3361.92 2305.83 2478
18 30.39 102.43 3.00 4528.62 3216.27 2205.93 19 34.12 104.97 3.00 4169.24 3056.27 2096.19 20 37.84 107.39 3.00 3782.18 2883.93 1977.99 21 41.56 109.29 1.90 2156.70 1721.23 1180.53 22 41.56 110.41 1.10 1201.93 974.13 668.12 23 45.28 111.88 3.00 2785.05 2439.98 1673.50 24 49.00 113.92 3.00 2192.70 2176.25 1492.62 25 52.73 115.81 3.00 1626.75 1924.27 1319.79 26 56.45 117.55 3.00 1092.16 1686.26 1156.55 27 60.17 119.12 3.00 594.53 1464.70 1004.59 28 63.89 120.53 3.00 140.18 1262.41 865.84 29 67.61 121.76 3.00 ‐263.70 1082.59 742.51 30 71.34 122.60 1.70 ‐314.47 539.80 370.23 Average Effective Normal Stress = 1251.9641(psf)
Average Available Shear Strength = 957.4103(psf)
Total Length of Failure Surface = 82.6995(ft)
INPUT PARAMETERS FOR SIMPLIFIED 3D ANALYSIS
Composite Phi (deg)= 37.406
3D Depth (Vertical difference between ends of Slip Surface) = 25.00(ft) L/D(1): L = 25.00(ft) L/D(2): L = 50.00(ft) L/D(3): L = 75.00(ft) L/D(4): L = 100.00(ft) L/D(5): L = 125.00(ft) L/D(6): L = 150.00(ft) Average Elevation of Point of Application of kh on Sliding Mass = 430.801(ft) SUM OF MOMENTS = ‐0.324693E‐03 (ft/lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = ‐0.3042346E‐08 SUM OF FORCES = ‐.196472E‐04 (lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = ‐0.1840930E‐09 Sum of Available Shear Forces = 79177.39(lbs)
Sum of Mobilized Shear Forces = 54305.01(lbs)
FS Balance Check: FS = 1.458013
**** END OF GEOSTASE OUTPUT ****
2479
Appendix!F!
2480
E-1
APPENDIX E
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPECIFICATIONS
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s).
1.2 Geotechnical Consultant: Prior to commencement of work, the project owner shall employ a geotechnical consultant. 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 grading.
Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing.
During grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all keyway bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill.
The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of subgrade and fill materials and perform adequate relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction and assess if, in their opinion, if the work was performed in substantial compliance 2481
E-2
with the geotechnical report(s) and these specifications. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide test results to the owner on a routine and frequent basis.
1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with applicable grading codes, the project plans, and these specifications.
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 "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork planned for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations.
The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork 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).
If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are corrected.
2.0 PREPARATION OF FILL AREAS
2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material, man-made structures, and similar debris shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. Borrow areas shall be cleared and grubbed to the extent necessary to provide a suitable fill material.
Concrete fragments that are free of reinforcing street may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 3 and 4. Earth fill material 2482
E-3
shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent organic matter. Nesting of organic materials shall not be allowed.
If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered hazardous waste.
As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of such fluids may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed.
The Geotechnical Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of potentially hazardous materials; however, if observations, odors, or soil discoloration are suspect, the Geotechnical Consultant may request from the owner the termination of grading operations until such materials are deemed not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations.
2.2 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement.
A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches.
2.3 Processing: Ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches.
Ground that is not satisfactory shall be removed/overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. After scarification, the surface should be moisture conditioned, as necessary, to achieve the proper moisture content and compacted in accordance with Section 4 of these specifications.
2.4 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading.
2483
E-4
2.5 Benching: Fills to be placed on ground sloping steeper than 5H:1V (horizontal to vertical units) shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for fill placement.
3.0 FILL MATERIAL
3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material.
3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or other underground construction.
3.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1 and/or requirements defined in the project geotechnical report(s). The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before import begins so that suitability can be determined, and appropriate laboratory tests performed.
4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers.
Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout.
2484
E-5
4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with ASTM International (ASTM Test Method D1557).
4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction and uniformity.
Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557.
4.4 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant’s discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches).
4.5 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals required by the governing agency and as deemed necessary by the Geotechnical Consultant in order to adequately qualify the fill material. In general, it should be anticipated that tests will be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill, unless recommended otherwise by the Geotechnical Consultant. In addition, test(s) shall be taken on slope faces and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope as deemed necessary by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met.
2485
E-6
4.6 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and location of each compaction test. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. Alternatively, GPS units may be used to determine the approximate location/coordinates of the field density tests.
5.0 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION
Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and standard details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. The Contractor should consider videoing the subdrains shortly after burial to check proper installation and functionality. The Contractor is responsible for the performance of subdrains.
6.0 EXCAVATION
Excavations, including over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical report(s) and plans are estimates. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant.
7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS
7.1 Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations.
7.2 Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction.
Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface, except in traveled ways (see Section 7.6 below).
2486
E-7
7.3 Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant.
7.4 Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction.
At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill, unless required differently by the governing agency or the Geotechnical Consultant.
7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill 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 and method.
7.6 Trench backfill in the upper foot measured from finish grade within existing or future traveled way, shoulder, and other paved areas (or areas to receive pavement) should be placed to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction. 2487
Symbols ñ Locations are Approximate
LEGEND
GEOTECHNICAL MAP
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
Project Number: 24059-01
Date: May 31, 2024
Plate 1
H-4
TD: 76í
Af @ 0-55í
Tn @ 55í+
GW @ 55í
Approximate Location of Hollow Stem Auger Boring,
Showing Total Depth, Depth to Earth Units, and Depth to Groundwater in Feet.
Af
Earth Units - Circled Where Buried
Artificial Fill Tm Monterey Formation
H-1
TD: 60.5í
Af @ 0-50í
Tm @ 50í+
North
Scale: 1î = 30í
(On 18îx24î Plot)
Basemap Source: X Engineering & Consulting (May 2024)
Af
Tm
Af
Tn
Af
Tm
A
Aí
B
Bí
B Bí Geotechnical Cross-Section
H-4
TD: 76í
Af @ 0-55í
Tn @ 55í+
GW @ 55
H-2
TD: 41.5í
Af @ 0-25í
Tm @ 25í+
H-3
TD: 81.5í
Af @ 0-75í
Tm @ 75í+
95 Argonaut
Af
Tm
Fault, Dotted Where Buried
Tn Niguel Formation
Af
Tm
2488
Geotechnical Cross-Section A-Aí
A Aí
370
400
430
340
N27W
Scale: 1 inch=30 feet
Legend
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
Project Number: 24059-01
Date: May 31, 2024
Plate 2
460
340
370
400
430
460
Existing Building (To Be Demolished)
H-1
T.D. 60.5í
Artificial Fill (Af)
310 310
Intersection
B-Bí
Glenwood Drive
Property Line
Monterey Formation (Tm)
490
H-3
T.D. 81.5í
Property Line
?
?
490
2489
Geotechnical Cross-Section B-Bí
B Bí
370
400
430
340
N80E
Scale: 1 inch=30 feet
Legend
Meritage Homes
Proposed Residential Development
95 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo, California
Project Number: 24059-01
Date: May 31, 2024
Plate 3
460
340
370
400
430
460
Existing Building (To Be Demolished)
H-4
(Projected 20í)
T.D. 76í
GW @ 55í
Artificial Fill (Af)
310 310
Intersection
A-Aí
Property Line
Monterey Formation (Tm)
490
H-2
T.D. 41.5í
Property Line
Existing
Water Tank
?
490
?
Argonaut
Approximate Groundwater Level
(During Drilling)
Niguel Formation
(Tn)
Monterey Formation (Tm)
2490
95 Argonaut Residential Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
FCS
APPENDIX G:
Noise Supporting Information
2491
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2492
Mobile Construction Activity Noise Calculation
Receptor: Noise Level Calculation Prior to Implementation of Noise Attenuation Requirements No. Equipment Description Lmax Lmax Leq
1 Grader 85 1 40 200 1 3 70.0 60.0 990558.2453
2 Excavator 85 1 40 250 1 3 68.0 57.1 507165.8216
3 Dozer 85 1 40 250 1 3 68.0 57.1 507165.8216
4 Front End Loader 80 1 40 250 1 3 63.0 52.1 160379.9148 5 Backhoe 80 1 40 250 1 3 63.0 52.1 160379.9148
6 7
8 9
10 Notes: Lmax[4] 70 Leq 64
[1] Percentage of time activity occurs each hour
[2] Soft ground terrain between project site and receptor. [3] Shielding due to terrain or structures
[4] Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Receiving residential property line
Shielding
(dBA)[3]
Calculated (dBA)
Energy
Reference
(dBA) 50 ft
Quantity
Usage
factor[1]
Distance to
Receptor
Ground
Effect[2]
2493
Residential Grade Mechanical Equipment
Receptor: Noise Level Calculation Prior to Implementation of Noise Attenuation Requirements No. Equipment Description Lmax Lmax Leq
1 Residential grade mechanical ventilation equipment 70 1 80 200 1 3 30.5 11.3 13.53205531 2 Residential grade mechanical ventilation equipment 70 1 80 210 1 3 30.1 10.7 11.68949816 3 Residential grade mechanical ventilation equipment 70 1 80 220 1 3 29.7 10.1 10.16683344 4 Residential grade mechanical ventilation equipment 70 1 80 230 1 3 29.3 9.5 8.897546023 5 6
7 8
9 10
Notes: Leq 16
[1] Percentage of time activity occurs each hour
[2] Soft ground terrain between project site and receptor [3] Shielding due to rooftop parapet/structural shielding Calculated (dBA)
Energy
Nearest Residential Receptor
Reference
(dBA) 3 ft
Quantity
Usage
factor[1]
Distance to
Receptor
Ground
Effect[2]
Shielding
(dBA)[3]
2494
Figure 1
Field Noise Measurement Locations
SOURCE: Google Maps.
N
LEGEND
Noise Measurement Location 2
2 1
2495
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name 831_Data.001 Computer's File Name SLM_0002509_831_Data_001.34.ldbin Meter 831
Firmware 2.403
User GT Location
Description Aliso Viejo Argonaut
Note On north side of the project site, approximately 90 ft south of Glenwood Dr CL Start Time 2024-05-06 12:23:20 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2024-05-06 12:38:20 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 57.9 dB
LAE 87.4 dB SEA --- dB
EA 61.0 µPa²h
LZpeak 103.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:23:20
LASmax 72.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54
LASmin 44.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:26
LAeq 57.9 dB
LCeq 68.2 dB LCeq - LA eq 10.4 dB
LAI eq 60.3 dB LAI eq - LAeq 2.4 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 65.0 dB 5 0:00:26.0
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
57.9 dB 57.9 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
57.9 dB 57.9 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 57.9 dB 68.2 dB 76.9 dB
Ls(max) 72.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54 82.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:24:21 91.7 dB 2024-05-06 12:23:20 LF(max) 78.9 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54 84.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:24:21 97.4 dB 2024-05-06 12:23:20 LI(max) 82.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54 84.9 dB 2024-05-06 12:24:21 100.7 dB 2024-05-06 12:23:20 LS(min) 44.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:26 58.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:28 63.4 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:44 LF(min) 43.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:25 56.2 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:26 61.2 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:41 LI(min) 43.5 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:24 59.9 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:27 64.7 dB 2024-05-06 12:26:44 LPeak(max) 93.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54 92.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:34:54 103.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:23:20 Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 63.8 dB
LAS 10.0 61.9 dB
LAS 33.3 56.8 dB
LAS 50.0 54.8 dB
LAS 66.6 52.4 dB
LAS 90.0 48.8 dB
2496
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name 831_Data.002 Computer's File Name SLM_0002509_831_Data_002.28.ldbin Meter 831
Firmware 2.403
User GT Location
Description Aliso Viejo Argonaut
Note Near Southwest Corner of Project Site, approximately 70 ft east & 60 ft north of Argonaut CLs Start Time 2024-05-06 12:41:52 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2024-05-06 12:56:52 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 56.0 dB
LAE 85.5 dB SEA --- dB
EA 39.8 µPa²h
LZpeak 99.9 dB 2024-05-06 12:41:52
LASmax 73.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:30
LASmin 43.2 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:10
LAeq 56.0 dB
LCeq 66.1 dB LCeq - LA eq 10.1 dB
LAI eq 58.5 dB LAI eq - LAeq 2.5 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 65.0 dB 3 0:00:34.3
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LZpeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
56.0 dB 56.0 dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
56.0 dB 56.0 dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 56.0 dB 66.1 dB 70.0 dB
Ls(max) 73.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:30 75.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:53:40 92.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:41:52 LF(max) 78.1 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:30 78.8 dB 2024-05-06 12:42:05 94.7 dB 2024-05-06 12:41:52 LI(max) 79.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:30 81.5 dB 2024-05-06 12:42:05 97.5 dB 2024-05-06 12:41:52 LS(min) 43.2 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:10 58.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:00 61.4 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:10 LF(min) 42.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:09 56.3 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:09 59.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:07 LI(min) 43.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:09 59.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:00 62.6 dB 2024-05-06 12:51:07 LPeak(max) 91.3 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:30 89.0 dB 2024-05-06 12:54:29 99.9 dB 2024-05-06 12:41:52 Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 5.0 62.1 dB
LAS 10.0 58.5 dB
LAS 33.3 51.9 dB
LAS 50.0 49.8 dB
LAS 66.6 48.0 dB
LAS 90.0 45.7 dB
2497
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2498
95 Argonaut Residential Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
FCS
APPENDIX H:
Public Service Letters
2499
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2500
!
"
"
#
$
%
&
'()*++, -. /0123456 /7892 :8;<2 = >;98?;36847 @02<;A6 BCD/ = CE> F02G HIJKLM HNOP QHNOPHIJKLR+PSJT+NUV W46;X(Y Z[Z\[]^]_ `a^b cd e2 fYKNg hY*Pi QijY*PiRSPLkOK)*TP+lV BA mY))YNlJKM X+nn QX+nnmY))YNlJKR+PSJT+NUVo p+lOM qOlrYN*g QqOlrYN*gp+lOR+PSJT+NUVo s)+LLOYNM dYUiJK QdYUiJKs)+LLOYNR+PSJT+NUVo tOPYK)M uNOL QuNOLtOPYK)R+PSJT+NUVo vOIYNLM XJlg QXJlgvOIYNLR+PSJT+NUVo w*Yx 'N)Oy QJ+N)OyRSPLkOK)*TP+lV z{{| }~{{
¡¢£¤¥¦§¨© ª«¬® ¯«°{± ²«° ~{ ³¯´µ }°°¶°} · ¸¹ º»¼½ ¾¼ ¿¾ÀÁ¼  ÃÀ¾ÄÀ¾ ź¼ÁÀÆ ÇÈ Â Éà Ê{« ±}¶ ²«° ~{ }°°¶°} Ë}° ° { ± ³¯´µ ˶ | { ~{±}Ì Í{°° }| |{«± Ì{« ²«° ~{ ¯Îϵ · ÎÐÑ {±±° Ò¶± z{±¶ ¶° {« ͱ¶ °«ÍÓ¶°{ }| ˶ ¬ }|¶Ô ¶}Õ Í{°°Ö ×{|| ر} ¶° ±Ì µ°°¶°} ´¶ }°} } ˶ ¬ Ó¶Ë¶Ô Ì{« ²«° }| °|¶Ô Ì{« } ~{±} °Í{° Ð }|Ó}Ö {« {±±° } }° ~{{Ë°® Ù ³¯´µ }° }¬¶¶Ì { Í{Ó¶| ~¶ Í{¶{ °Ó¶° { ¶° °¶ Ú ×¶° Í{ ˶ ²«¶ } ³¯´µ ª«| ´¶ Û{¶{ µÔ± Ò¶± z{±¶ · Û±¶ ª«ÍÓ¶°{ ÜÙÝÞßÜàÞáÚßâ ãäåæçåäèçéêëìçíæ ×{|| ر}· µ°°¶°} ´¶ }°} · Û} ÑÓ¶Ë ª¶{ ÜÙÝÞßÜàÞáÙîÚ ïçððñòïïòíåëóèçéêëìçíæ ôõö÷õøùúû
•
2501
!
"
##$
%&'()*&+),'-' ./012345167689120:
2502
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact your IT Department Outlook
Re: 95 Argonaut Residential Project – School Services
From Hampton, Clark D. <[email protected]>
Date Tue 12/17/2024 1:06 PM
To Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Cc Alex Ortiz <[email protected]>
Mr. Welch,
I answered the service quesons from the leer below. Please let me know if you have any quesons.
Service Quesons
1. Please idenfy the Capistrano Unified School District’s (CUSD) area of enrollment.
The enre CUSD district is shaded in below map:
The schools that serve the address (95 Argonaut) are:
Oak Grove Elementary School
Boundary for Oak Grove is purple shaded area
•
2503
Aliso Viejo Middle School
Boundary for Aliso Viejo MS is gray shaded area
Aliso Niguel High School
Boundary for Aliso Niguel HS is purple shaded area
e
)\)~- 6
_ Also'iiejo
I
f
l
I
2504
2. Please provide an esmate of the current standard student generaon factors for elementary, middle, and high school students used by the CUSD and the target student enrollment that CUSD would like to achieve.
The student projecons for the project are:
TK—5 13
6–8 4
9–12. 5
Total 23
3. Please describe concerns related to potenal populaon growth associated with the Housing Development Project. Please describe any measures that you would recommend to reduce potenal concerns/challenges.
CUSD can accommodate the number of students from the development. The developer will be required to pay Level 1 Developer Fees.
Thank you
Clark
| Clark Hampton | Deputy Superintendent, Business and Support Services | | Capistrano Unified School District | 33122 Valle Road, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | (949) 234-9211 "A school isn't only a building. It's an expression of beliefs and atudes about ourselves and the generaons of young people for whom it is planned. In its silent language of space, scale and shape, the structure stands for what we are, what we think 2505
of ourselves and what we believe we can become."
From: Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 9:57 AM
To: Hampton, Clark D. <[email protected]>
Cc: Alex Orz <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 95 Argonaut Residenal Project – School Services Dear Deputy Superintendent Clark Hampton,
FirstCarbon Soluons (FCS) is preparing a Dra Inial Study/Migated Negave Declaraon (Dra IS/MND) to idenfy any potenal environmental impacts that would result from implementaon of the 95 Argonaut Residenal Project in the City of Aliso Viejo, California that requires review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The aached pdf shows the full leer with project descripon as well as relevant exhibits maps showing the proposed rezoning areas. Inside you will find the Service Quesons we have for School Services.
We greatly appreciate your experse and assistance in this maer. Your responses will help us ensure that our analysis is accurate and complete. To ensure a mely compleon of our analysis, please provide your response via e-mail no later than the End of December 2024. I understand the Holidays make for unusual schedules. If you have any quesons, please contact me by email at [email protected] Thank you again and I wish you the best during these Holidays.
Sincerely
Henry Welch
ES Analyst
[email protected]
Available Working Hours
Monday: 9:00am - 4:30pm
Tuesday -Thursday: 10:30am - 5pm
LinkedIn | Facebook | X
•• • FCS
An ADEC Innovation
2506
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact your IT Department Outlook
FW: 95 Argonaut Residential Project – Park Services
From So Kim <[email protected]>
Date Tue 12/17/2024 5:08 PM
To Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Cc Lizzy Mendoza <[email protected]>; Shaun Pelletier <[email protected]> Hi Henry,
Provided below are responses from the City.
1. Please identify the current parks and recreational facility centers of the Aliso Viejo Recreation & Community Services. Please describe the existing conditions of these parks and recreational facility centers. The City oversees the operations at the Aliso Viejo Ranch, Iglesia Community Center, the Aliso Viejo Aquatic Center, and the Aliso Viejo Center. The City owns and manages Iglesia Park and Vista Park. All these facilities and parks are in great condition.
2. Please identify current park and recreational facility center usage for the City. Aliso Viejo Ranch hosts all rental and recreational programs for the City. This facility is managed by the Recreation & Community Services Department. The Iglesia Community Center and Park is a space managed by the Boys & Girls Club of Capistrano Valley as an after-school program for youth in the community.
The Aliso Viejo Aquatic Center is managed by Premier Aquatics for swimming lessons. The Aliso Viejo Center is managed by Wedgewood Weddings as a banquet center.
3. Please provide an estimate of the current park acres per 1,000 residents and the target ratio that the Aliso Viejo Recreation & Community Services would like to achieve. The City owns and manages Vista Park and Iglesia Park. The total acreage of these two parks is 7.4 acres. The Master Homeowners Association is responsible for 21 parks and 600 acres of landscape. The City’s Conservation/Open Space Element states that as of 2003, the City had a ratio of 5.37 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. It further states that the standard is 5 acres per 1,000 residents and that new development shall provide fees or dedicate land per the City’s code.
4. Please describe concerns related to potential population growth associated with the proposed project. Please describe any measures that you would recommend to reduce potential concerns/challenges. The proposed project may have several concerns related to population rise, such as, potential increase to traffic/congestion, strain on infrastructure, change in character of the immediate and larger area, and other environmental impacts, etc. Examples of mitigation measures may include some type of improvement or upgrades to traffic management, infrastructure, police/fire services etc.
So Kim | Director of Community Development
City of Aliso Viejo
12 Journey, Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
T: 949-425-2527
avcity.org
•
ALISO VIEJO
2507
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our City of Aliso Viejo network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
From: Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 10:00 AM
To: Lizzy Mendoza <[email protected]>; Recreaon Department <[email protected]> Cc: Alex Orz <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 95 Argonaut Residenal Project – Park Services Dear Recreation & Community Services Manager Lizzy Mendoza, FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) is preparing a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft IS/MND) to identify any potential environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the 95 Argonaut Residential Project in the City of Aliso Viejo, California that requires review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The attached pdf shows the full letter with project description as well as relevant exhibits maps showing the proposed rezoning areas. Inside you will find the Service Questions we have for Park Services.
We greatly appreciate your expertise and assistance in this matter. Your responses will help us ensure that our analysis is accurate and complete. To ensure a timely completion of our analysis, please provide your response via e-mail no later than the End of December 2024. I understand the Holidays make for unusual schedules. If you have any questions, please contact me by email at [email protected]
Thank you again and I wish you the best during these Holidays.
Sincerely
Henry Welch
ES Analyst
[email protected]
Available Working Hours
Monday: 9:00am - 4:30pm
Tuesday -Thursday: 10:30am - 5pm
LinkedIn | Facebook | X
------- -------
•• • FCS
An ADEC Innovation
2508
Confidential Communications: This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received.
2509
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact your IT Department Outlook
RE: Question about total Park Square Footage
From Chris Weaver <[email protected]>
Date Wed 12/18/2024 4:14 PM
To Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Hi Henry,
Roughly 179 Acres of Parks. (Unverified)
Chris Weaver
Director of Parks & Landscape
Aliso Viejo Community Association
130 Vantis Dr., Suite 110
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
(949) 243-7750 Phone
(949) 425-1372 Fax
www.avca.net
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.
From: Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 12:53 PM
To: Chris Weaver <[email protected]>
Subject: Queson about total Park Square Footage
•
ALISO VllEJO
COMMUN ITI' SSOClftTIO:N
2510
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when replying to this email and/or opening attachments. Only open attachments when they are expected and you know the content is safe.
Hello,
My name is Henry Welch and I had a quick question about the total square footage/acres of the 21 parks under the AVCA in Aliso Viejo . On the home page, I see that there is "21 parks and 600 acres of landscape", but I was curious in just park area itself.
I'm researching the current Parkland to resident ratio for the City.
Thank you so much for your assistance and I wish you a lovely Holiday Season.
Henry Welch
ES Analyst
[email protected]
Available Working Hours
Monday: 9:00am - 4:30pm
Tuesday -Thursday: 10:30am - 5pm
HOLIDAY Hours
Monday: 9-5
Tuesday: 1pm-4pm
Wed & Thurs: Off
Friday: Available 2-5pm
LinkedIn | Facebook | X
•• • FCS
An ADEC Innovation
2511
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact your IT Department Outlook
FW: 95 Argonaut Residential Project – Library Services
From Oakley, Julie <[email protected]>
Date Fri 12/20/2024 3:14 PM
To Henry Welch <[email protected]>
1 attachment (4 MB)
Final Library.pdf;
Hello Henry,
Per your request, please see the answers below:
Let me know if you have any further quesons as the project develops.
Thank you,
Julie A. Oakley
Library Administraon
1501 E. St. Andrew Place, Santa Ana, CA 92705
Office: 714-566-3024| Cell: 714-788-7312
Service Quesons
1. Please idenfy the Aliso Viejo Library’s current library membership for the City.
OC Public Libraries (OCPL) provides library services to the City of Aliso Viejo through its systemwide network of 32 branches across the county. Membership is not specific to individual branches, meaning that residents of Aliso Viejo have access to resources and services throughout the enre OCPL system.
Because the library closed in early 2024 for a tenant enhancement project, stascs provided are from the calendar year 2023. That year the Aliso Viejo Library had 140,931 visitors, with an average daily aendance of 470 people.
2. Please provide an esmate of the current Aliso Viejo Library services demand and the target rao that the Aliso Viejo Library would like to achieve.
The site is currently closed for tenant enhancements but will reopen in 2025, with services targeng all ages from toddlers to seniors. Based on other remodel projects, upon reopening an increase in usage is expected as the space will be redesigned to include quiet study rooms, more electricity, seang available throughout the branch, and a new program room added for events.
3. Please describe concerns related to potenal populaon growth associated with the project. Please describe any measures that you would recommend to reduce potenal concerns/challenges. •
eoc
Public Libraries
~n Doors. F'rtt Aooeu , Community .
2512
The projected increase of 61 townhomes at an average resident count of 3 people per unit (esmate of 183 new residents) would not have a significant impact on the library and its services. The branch is two miles from the proposed project, and we would welcome those in the new community to visit the branch and see what OCPL has to offer.
From: Henry Welch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 9:56 AM
To: alisoviejo, ocpl <[email protected]>
Cc: Alex Orz <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 95 Argonaut Residenal Project – Library Services Aenon: This email originated from outside the County of Orange. Use cauon when opening aachments or links.
Dear Aliso Viejo Library Staff,
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) is preparing a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft IS/MND) to identify any potential environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the 95 Argonaut Residential Project in the City of Aliso Viejo, California that requires review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The attached pdf shows the full letter with project description as well as relevant exhibits maps showing the proposed rezoning areas. Inside you will find the Service Questions we have for Library Services.
We greatly appreciate your expertise and assistance in this matter. Your responses will help us ensure that our analysis is accurate and complete. To ensure a timely completion of our analysis, please provide your response via e-mail no later than the End of December 2024. I understand the Holidays make for unusual schedules. If you have any questions, please contact me by email at [email protected]
Thank you again and I wish you the best during these Holidays.
Sincerely
Henry Welch
ES Analyst
[email protected]
Available Working Hours
Monday: 9:00am - 4:30pm
Tuesday -Thursday: 10:30am - 5pm
2513
LinkedIn | Facebook | X
•• • FCS
An ADEC Innovation
2514
95 Argonaut Residential Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
FCS
APPENDIX I:
Transportation Supporting Information
2515
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2516
DATE: June 4, 2025
TO: Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
FROM: Alex So, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
JOB NO: 16039-01 VMT
ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
SCREENING EVALUATION
Urban Crossroads, Inc. has completed a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation for the Argonaut Residential development (Project), which is located at 95 Argonaut (on the southeast corner of Glenwood Drive and Argonaut) in the City of Aliso Viejo.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project site is located at 95 Argonaut which is currently developed with a 49,975-square-foot office building. The existing office building is currently occupied. The Project includes demolition of the existing structures on-site for the development of 61 3-story (12 2-bedroom, 26 3-bedroom, and 24 4-bedroom units) townhomes on approximately 2.85 acres. A site plan for the proposed Project is found in Attachment A.
BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires all lead agencies to adopt VMT as the measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects.
To comply with CEQA, the City of Aliso Viejo adopted Transportation Impact Guidelines for CEQA and General Plan Consistency (May 2022) (1) (City Guidelines). This VMT screening has been prepared based on the adopted City Guidelines.
VMT SCREENING
City Guidelines outline appropriate screening criteria for identifying when a proposed land use project is expected to have a less-than-significant impact, thus avoiding the need for a more detailed analysis.
The screening criteria are divided into the following:
• Step 1: Transit Priority Areas (TPA) Screening
• Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening
2517
Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
June 4, 2025
16039-05 VMT
• Step 3: Project Type Screening
A land use project needs only to meet one of the above screening criteria to result in a less than significant impact.
STEP 1: TRANSIT PRIORITY AREAS (TPA) SCREENING
Consistent with guidance identified in the City Guidelines, projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) or High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA) (i.e., within ½ mile of an existing “major transit stop”1 or an existing stop along a “high-quality transit corridor”2 ) may be presumed to have a less
than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. However, the presumption may not be appropriate if a project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or highincome residential units.
Consistent with City Guidelines, Aliso Viejo does not have any TPAs within the City.
TPA screening criteria is not met.
STEP 2: LOW VMT AREA SCREENING
As noted in the City Guidelines, projects located in low VMT areas (below the City of Aliso Viejo General Plan Buildout average) are presumed to be less than significant. The sub-regional Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) version 5.1 was used to measure VMT performance within individual traffic analysis zones (TAZs) in the Orange County region. The Project’s physical location in OCTAM was used to determine VMT generated by the existing TAZ as compared to the City’s impact threshold of General Plan Buildout average VMT per service population. Based on the OCTAM model results, the City’s General Plan Buildout average is 26.2 VMT per service population is shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1: CITY OF ALISO VIEJO VMT PER CAPITA
General Plan Buildout
Service Population 73,056
Total VMT 1,914,152
Threshold VMT per Service Population 26.2
The TAZ containing the proposed Project (TAZ 1542) was selected, and the OCTAM base year (2019) and horizon year (2050) models were used to calculate the baseline (2025) VMT per service population measure using straight-line interpolation, as shown in Table 2. 1 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”). 2 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.”). 2518
Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
June 4, 2025
16039-05 VMT
TABLE 2: EXISTING TAZ 1542 VMT PER SERVICE POPULATION
Baseline
Service Population 3,398
Total VMT 96,124
VMT per Service Population 28.3
City Threshold VMT per Service Population 26.2
Is TAZ 1542 in a Low VMT Area? No
The Project’s TAZ 1542 was shown to generate 28.3 VMT per service population, exceeding the General Plan buildout VMT per service population. Therefore, the Project is not located within a low VMT-generating area.
Low VMT Area screening criteria is not met.
STEP 3: PROJECT TYPE SCREENING
The City Guidelines state that local serving uses such as; day care centers, non-destination hotels, affordable housing, places of worship, municipal services, and other local essential services may also be presumed to have a less than significant impact as local serving in nature and would tend to shorten vehicle trips. The Project does not include any local serving uses.
The City Guidelines also consider small projects that generate fewer than 110 net new daily vehicle trips to have a less than significant VMT impact. The Argonaut Residential Trip Generation Assessment (Urban Crossroads, June 2025) estimates the Project to generate a net increase of 79 daily vehicle trips, which does not exceed the 110 daily vehicle trip threshold.
Small Projects screening criteria is met.
CONCLUSION
Based on our review of the City’s VMT screening types, the Project meets the Project Type screening criteria and is considered to have a less than significant VMT impact; no additional VMT analysis is required.
If you have any questions, please contact me directly at [email protected].
2519
16039-05 VMT
REFERENCES
1. City of Aliso Viejo. Transportation Impact Guidelines for CEQA and General Plan Consistency. May 2020.
2520
16039-05 VMT
ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT SITE PLAN
2521
16039-
05 VMT 2522
DATE: June 4, 2025
TO: Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
FROM: Charlene So, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
JOB NO: 16039-06 TG Memo
ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION ASSESSMENT
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to provide the following Trip Generation Assessment for the Argonaut Residential development (Project), located at 95 Argonaut (on the southeast corner of Glenwood Drive and Argonaut) in the City of Aliso Viejo. This trip generation assessment describes the proposed Project trip generation and determines whether any traffic operations analysis is required based on the City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines for CEQA and General Plan Consistency (City Guidelines), dated May 2020. The purpose of the following trip generation assessment is to determine if any additional peak hour intersection operations analysis is required based on the City Guidelines.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The Project site is located at 95 Argonaut which is currently developed with a 49,975-square-foot office building. The existing office building is currently occupied (the occupancy rate at the time of the driveway counts in May 2024 was 45 percent). The Project includes demolition of the existing structures on-site for the development of 61 3-story (12 2-bedroom, 26 3-bedroom, and 24 4-bedroom units) townhomes on approximately 2.85 acres. A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown in Exhibit 1. As indicated in Exhibit 1, access to the site will be accommodated via Argonaut.
2523
Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
June 4, 2025
16039-04 TG Memo.docx
EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to, and produced by, a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to, and produced by, specific land uses being proposed for a given development.
EXISTING USE
As noted previously, the site is currently developed with an occupied 49,975-square-foot office building. In an effort to understand the existing traffic associated with the existing uses, traffic counts were collected at all applicable driveways on Tuesday, May 7, 2024, through Thursday, May 9, 2024. Table 1 below summarizes the average existing trip generation based on the count data collected over the three consecutive days for the existing used located at 95 Argonaut. The existing site generates an average of 150 two-way trips per day, with 17 trips during the AM peak hour and 11 trips during the PM peak hour. A detailed summary of the count data collected at 95 Argonaut is provided in Attachment A.
2524
Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
June 4, 2025
16039-04 TG Memo.docx
TABLE 1: EXISTING OFFICE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (EMPIRICAL DATA) At the time the driveway counts were conducted for the existing office use, the building was not fully occupied. The building was approximately 45 percent occupied at the time the driveway counts were conducted in May 2024. As such, in order to consider the by-right office use trip generation associated with the existing use, the trip generation in Table 1 was increased to account for the 55 percent vacancy. Table 2 summarizes the existing office use trip generation, which is anticipated to generate 333 two-way trips per day with 38 AM peak hour trips and 24 PM peak hour trips at full occupancy.
Table 2: Existing Office Trip Generation Summary (100% Occupancy)
PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed Project includes the redevelopment of the site to accommodate 62 3-story townhomes. Trip generation estimates for the proposed Project have been developed using data from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) for Multifamily (Low-Rise) Housing (ITE Land Use Code 220). Table 3 summarizes the ITE trip generation rates and the resulting Project trip generation. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate 418 two-way trips per day with 25 AM peak hour trips and 32 PM peak hour trips.
Existing Surveyed Site In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Existing Use: 95 Argonaut1
Passenger Cars: 15 2 17 3 8 11 142
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Average Total Trips (45% Occupancy) 15 2 17 3 8 11 150
1 Average data presented based on driveway counts conducted on May 7th through May 9th, 2024.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Existing Surveyed Site In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Existing Use: 95 Argonaut1
Passenger Cars: 33 5 38 6 19 24 316
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Average Total Trips (100% Occupancy) 33 5 38 6 19 24 333 1 Average May 7th through May 9th, 2024 count data increased for full occupancy.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
2525
Johanna Crooker, Meritage Homes
June 4, 2025
16039-04 TG Memo.docx
TABLE 3: PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
The trip generation for the proposed Project and the net change in trips as compared to the existing office use (assuming 100% occupancy) are summarized in Table 4. As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project is anticipated to result in a net increase of 79 two-way trips per day with a net reduction of 13 AM peak hour trips and a net increase of 8 PM peak hour trips as compared to the existing office use (per Table 2).
TABLE 4: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
FINDINGS
The City Guidelines require a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) if a project generates more than 100 vehicle trips during either the AM or PM peak hours, generate more than 1,600 vehicles per day (ADT), or if a project adds more than 51 peak hour trips to either the AM or PM peak hours to any intersection. As shown in both Table 4, the Project is anticipated to generate fewer than 1,600 net new daily trips and fewer than 50 net new peak hour trips. As such, additional traffic analysis is not required for this Project based on the City Guidelines. The City reserves the right to require additional traffic analysis in the event there are safety concerns, a project is located in a sensitive area, access/operational issues, presence of nearby substandard intersection or roadway segment, and/or request from an affected agency.
If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at [email protected].
ITE LU
Land Use Code Units1
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Generation Rates:2
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 220 DU 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 Land Use Quantity Units1
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Generation Summary:
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 61 DU 6 19 25 20 12 32 412 1 DU = Dwelling Units
2 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition (2021).
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Quantity Units1In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Existing Use: Office (Table 2) 49.975 TSF 33 5 38 6 19 24 333 Proposed Project: Residential 62 DU 6 19 25 20 12 32 412 Net Change in Trips -27 14 -13 14 -7 8 79
1 TSF = Thousand Square Feet; DU = Dwelling Units
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
2526
16039-04 TG Memo.docx
ATTACHMENT A: DRIVEWAY COUNTS
2527
16039-04 TG Memo.docx
TABLE A-1: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY BY DAY
Land Use In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Tuesday, May 7, 2024
Passenger Cars: 12 1 13 0 11 11 127
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tuesday Total Trips 12 1 13 0 11 11 127
Wednesday, May 8, 2024
Passenger Cars: 14 1 15 7 4 11 143
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Wednesday Project Trips 14 1 15 7 4 11 154
Thursday, May 9, 2024
Passenger Cars: 18 5 23 1 10 11 154
2-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
3-axle Trucks: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Thursday Project Trips 18 5 23 1 10 11 158
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
2528
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
0:00 0 0 0 0 0 0:00 0 0 0 0 0
0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0:15 1 0 0 0 1
0:30 0 0 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0 0 0
0:45 0 0 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 1 0 0 0 1 5:30 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 1 0 0 0 1
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 1 0 0 0 1 6:45 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 4 0 0 0 4 7:30 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 2 0 0 0 2 7:45 1 0 0 0 1
8:00 4 0 0 0 4 8:00 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 2 0 0 0 2 8:15 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 1 0 0 0 1 8:30 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 2 0 0 0 2 9:00 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 1 0 0 0 1 9:15 1 0 0 0 1
9:30 1 0 0 0 1 9:30 1 0 0 0 1
9:45 1 0 0 0 1 9:45 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 1 0 0 0 1 10:00 2 0 0 0 2
10:15 0 0 0 0 0 10:15 1 0 0 0 1
10:30 4 0 0 0 4 10:30 1 0 0 0 1
10:45 4 0 0 0 4 10:45 2 0 0 0 2
11:00 3 0 0 0 3 11:00 1 0 0 0 1
11:15 1 0 0 0 1 11:15 2 0 0 0 2
11:30 2 0 0 0 2 11:30 1 0 0 0 1
11:45 3 0 0 0 3 11:45 5 0 0 0 5
Exiting
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Tuesday, May 7, 2024
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2529
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Exiting
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Tuesday, May 7, 2024
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
12:00 2 0 0 0 2 12:00 2 0 0 0 2
12:15 1 0 0 0 1 12:15 1 0 0 0 1
12:30 1 0 0 0 1 12:30 1 0 0 0 1
12:45 1 0 0 0 1 12:45 2 0 0 0 2
13:00 3 0 0 0 3 13:00 3 0 0 0 3
13:15 1 0 0 0 1 13:15 1 0 0 0 1
13:30 1 0 0 0 1 13:30 2 0 0 0 2
13:45 2 0 0 0 2 13:45 3 0 0 0 3
14:00 1 0 0 0 1 14:00 0 0 0 0 0
14:15 0 0 0 0 0 14:15 1 0 0 0 1
14:30 1 0 0 0 1 14:30 2 0 0 0 2
14:45 0 0 0 0 0 14:45 0 0 0 0 0
15:00 2 0 0 0 2 15:00 1 0 0 0 1
15:15 5 0 0 0 5 15:15 3 0 0 0 3
15:30 0 0 0 0 0 15:30 2 0 0 0 2
15:45 0 0 0 0 0 15:45 0 0 0 0 0
16:00 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 0 0 0 0 0
16:15 0 0 0 0 0 16:15 6 0 0 0 6
16:30 0 0 0 0 0 16:30 2 0 0 0 2
16:45 0 0 0 0 0 16:45 2 0 0 0 2
17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 1 0 0 0 1
17:15 1 0 0 0 1 17:15 0 0 0 0 0
17:30 0 0 0 0 0 17:30 2 0 0 0 2
17:45 0 0 0 0 0 17:45 1 0 0 0 1
18:00 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 0 0 0
18:15 0 0 0 0 0 18:15 0 0 0 0 0
18:30 0 0 0 0 0 18:30 0 0 0 0 0
18:45 0 0 0 0 0 18:45 0 0 0 0 0
19:00 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 1 0 0 0 1
19:15 0 0 0 0 0 19:15 1 0 0 0 1
19:30 0 0 0 0 0 19:30 0 0 0 0 0
19:45 0 0 0 0 0 19:45 0 0 0 0 0
20:00 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 0 0 0 0 0
20:15 1 0 0 0 1 20:15 0 0 0 0 0
20:30 0 0 0 0 0 20:30 0 0 0 0 0
20:45 0 0 0 0 0 20:45 0 0 0 0 0
21:00 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0 0 0
21:15 0 0 0 0 0 21:15 1 0 0 0 1
21:30 0 0 0 0 0 21:30 0 0 0 0 0
21:45 2 0 0 0 2 21:45 2 0 0 0 2
22:00 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 0 0 0 0 0
22:15 0 0 0 0 0 22:15 0 0 0 0 0
22:30 0 0 0 0 0 22:30 0 0 0 0 0
22:45 0 0 0 0 0 22:45 1 0 0 0 1
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 0 0 0 0 0
23:15 0 0 0 0 0 23:15 0 0 0 0 0
23:30 0 0 0 0 0 23:30 0 0 0 0 0
23:45 0 0 0 0 0 23:45 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 63 0 0 0 63 64 0 0 0 64
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2530
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
0:00 0 0 0 0 0 0:00 0 0 0 0 0
0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0:15 0 0 0 0 0
0:30 0 0 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0 0 0
0:45 0 0 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 1 0 0 0 1 5:30 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 1 0 0 0 1
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 1 0 0 0 1 6:45 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 1 0 0 0 1 7:00 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 1 0 0 0 1 7:15 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 2 0 0 0 2 7:30 1 0 0 0 1
7:45 3 0 0 0 3 7:45 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 2 0 0 0 2 8:00 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 6 0 0 0 6 8:15 1 0 0 0 1
8:30 2 0 0 0 2 8:30 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 4 0 0 0 4 8:45 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 2 0 0 0 2 9:00 2 0 0 0 2
9:15 0 0 0 0 0 9:15 1 0 0 0 1
9:30 2 1 0 0 3 9:30 1 0 0 0 1
9:45 1 0 0 0 1 9:45 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 1 0 0 0 1
10:15 0 0 0 0 0 10:15 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 3 0 0 0 3 10:30 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 1 0 0 0 1 10:45 3 0 0 0 3
11:00 3 0 0 0 3 11:00 4 0 0 0 4
11:15 2 0 0 0 2 11:15 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 1 0 0 0 1 11:30 1 0 0 0 1
11:45 1 1 0 0 2 11:45 3 1 0 0 4
Exiting
Wednesday, May 8, 2024
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2531
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Exiting
Wednesday, May 8, 2024
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
12:00 2 0 0 0 2 12:00 1 0 0 0 1
12:15 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 3 0 0 0 3
12:30 3 0 0 0 3 12:30 1 0 0 0 1
12:45 1 0 0 0 1 12:45 1 0 0 0 1
13:00 1 1 0 0 2 13:00 1 1 0 0 2
13:15 0 1 0 0 1 13:15 1 0 0 0 1
13:30 1 0 0 0 1 13:30 0 1 0 0 1
13:45 2 0 0 0 2 13:45 3 0 0 0 3
14:00 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 0 0 0 0
14:15 1 0 0 0 1 14:15 1 0 0 0 1
14:30 2 0 0 0 2 14:30 0 0 0 0 0
14:45 0 1 0 0 1 14:45 1 1 0 0 2
15:00 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 3 0 0 0 3
15:15 1 0 0 0 1 15:15 2 0 0 0 2
15:30 0 0 0 0 0 15:30 2 0 0 0 2
15:45 0 0 0 0 0 15:45 2 0 0 0 2
16:00 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 2 0 0 0 2
16:15 1 0 0 0 1 16:15 1 0 0 0 1
16:30 0 0 0 0 0 16:30 6 0 0 0 6
16:45 0 0 0 0 0 16:45 1 0 0 0 1
17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 1 0 0 0 1
17:15 1 0 0 0 1 17:15 2 0 0 0 2
17:30 1 0 0 0 1 17:30 0 0 0 0 0
17:45 5 0 0 0 5 17:45 1 0 0 0 1
18:00 2 0 0 0 2 18:00 1 0 0 0 1
18:15 0 1 0 0 1 18:15 1 1 0 0 2
18:30 1 0 0 0 1 18:30 0 0 0 0 0
18:45 0 0 0 0 0 18:45 1 0 0 0 1
19:00 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0 0 0
19:15 0 0 0 0 0 19:15 0 0 0 0 0
19:30 0 0 0 0 0 19:30 0 0 0 0 0
19:45 0 0 0 0 0 19:45 4 0 0 0 4
20:00 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 3 0 0 0 3
20:15 0 0 0 0 0 20:15 0 0 0 0 0
20:30 1 0 0 0 1 20:30 1 0 0 0 1
20:45 3 0 0 0 3 20:45 1 0 0 0 1
21:00 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0 0 0
21:15 0 0 0 0 0 21:15 0 0 0 0 0
21:30 1 0 0 0 1 21:30 0 0 0 0 0
21:45 0 0 0 0 0 21:45 1 0 0 0 1
22:00 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 2 0 0 0 2
22:15 0 0 0 0 0 22:15 0 0 0 0 0
22:30 1 0 0 0 1 22:30 0 0 0 0 0
22:45 0 0 0 0 0 22:45 1 0 0 0 1
23:00 1 0 0 0 1 23:00 0 0 0 0 0
23:15 0 0 0 0 0 23:15 1 0 0 0 1
23:30 0 0 0 0 0 23:30 0 0 0 0 0
23:45 0 0 0 0 0 23:45 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 71 6 0 0 77 72 5 0 0 77
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2532
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
0:00 0 0 0 0 0 0:00 0 0 0 0 0
0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0:15 0 0 0 0 0
0:30 0 0 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0 0 0
0:45 0 0 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 1 0 0 0 1 5:15 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 1 0 0 0 1
5:45 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 1 0 0 0 1 6:30 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 1 0 1 0 2 7:00 1 0 1 0 2
7:15 2 0 0 0 2 7:15 1 0 0 0 1
7:30 2 0 0 0 2 7:30 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 1 0 0 0 1 7:45 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 7 0 0 0 7 8:00 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 2 0 0 0 2 8:15 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 2 0 0 0 2 8:30 1 0 0 0 1
8:45 7 0 0 0 7 8:45 4 0 0 0 4
9:00 7 0 0 0 7 9:00 1 0 0 0 1
9:15 2 0 0 0 2 9:15 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 0 0 0 0 0 9:30 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 1 0 0 0 1 9:45 4 0 0 0 4
10:00 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 1 0 0 0 1
10:15 1 0 0 0 1 10:15 2 0 0 0 2
10:30 6 0 0 0 6 10:30 3 0 0 0 3
10:45 1 0 0 0 1 10:45 1 0 0 0 1
11:00 2 0 0 0 2 11:00 5 0 0 0 5
11:15 0 0 0 0 0 11:15 2 0 0 0 2
11:30 2 0 0 0 2 11:30 3 0 0 0 3
11:45 2 0 0 0 2 11:45 2 0 0 0 2
Exiting
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Thursday, May 9, 2024
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2533
City:
Location:
Date:
Count Type:
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Pass
Veh
Large
2 Axle 3 Axle 4+ Axle Total
Exiting
Aliso Viejo
95 Argonaut
Thursday, May 9, 2024
Classified Driveway Count
Entering
12:00 4 0 0 0 4 12:00 1 0 0 0 1
12:15 1 0 0 0 1 12:15 3 0 0 0 3
12:30 2 0 0 0 2 12:30 2 0 0 0 2
12:45 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 0 0 0 0 0
13:00 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 2 0 0 0 2
13:15 2 0 0 0 2 13:15 2 0 0 0 2
13:30 4 0 0 0 4 13:30 2 0 0 0 2
13:45 2 0 0 0 2 13:45 3 0 0 0 3
14:00 1 0 0 0 1 14:00 0 0 0 0 0
14:15 1 0 0 0 1 14:15 2 0 0 0 2
14:30 1 0 0 0 1 14:30 1 0 0 0 1
14:45 0 0 0 0 0 14:45 2 0 0 0 2
15:00 1 0 0 0 1 15:00 1 0 0 0 1
15:15 1 1 0 0 2 15:15 3 1 0 0 4
15:30 0 0 0 0 0 15:30 1 0 0 0 1
15:45 1 0 0 0 1 15:45 2 0 0 0 2
16:00 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 1 0 0 0 1
16:15 0 0 0 0 0 16:15 2 0 0 0 2
16:30 0 0 0 0 0 16:30 6 0 0 0 6
16:45 0 0 0 0 0 16:45 1 0 0 0 1
17:00 1 0 0 0 1 17:00 1 0 0 0 1
17:15 1 0 0 0 1 17:15 0 0 0 0 0
17:30 0 0 0 0 0 17:30 1 0 0 0 1
17:45 0 0 0 0 0 17:45 1 0 0 0 1
18:00 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 0 0 0
18:15 0 0 0 0 0 18:15 0 0 0 0 0
18:30 0 0 0 0 0 18:30 0 0 0 0 0
18:45 0 0 0 0 0 18:45 1 0 0 0 1
19:00 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0 0 0
19:15 1 0 0 0 1 19:15 1 0 0 0 1
19:30 0 0 0 0 0 19:30 0 0 0 0 0
19:45 0 0 0 0 0 19:45 0 0 0 0 0
20:00 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 0 0 0 0 0
20:15 0 0 0 0 0 20:15 0 0 0 0 0
20:30 0 0 0 0 0 20:30 0 0 0 0 0
20:45 0 0 0 0 0 20:45 0 0 0 0 0
21:00 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0 0 0
21:15 0 0 0 0 0 21:15 0 0 0 0 0
21:30 0 0 0 0 0 21:30 0 0 0 0 0
21:45 0 0 0 0 0 21:45 0 0 0 0 0
22:00 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 0 0 0 0 0
22:15 0 0 0 0 0 22:15 0 0 0 0 0
22:30 2 0 0 0 2 22:30 0 0 0 0 0
22:45 0 0 0 0 0 22:45 1 0 0 0 1
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 1 0 0 0 1
23:15 1 0 0 0 1 23:15 0 0 0 0 0
23:30 0 0 0 0 0 23:30 1 0 0 0 1
23:45 0 0 0 0 0 23:45 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 77 1 1 0 79 77 1 1 0 79
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268 2534
95 Argonaut Residential Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Aliso Viejo, Orange County, California
State Clearinghouse Number 2025100301
PREPARED FOR:
City of Aliso Viejo
12 Journey, Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
949.425.2525
Contact: So Kim, Community Development Director
PREPARED BY:
FirstCarbon Solutions
250 Commerce, Suite 210
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Cecilia So, Project Director
Tsui Li, Project Manager
October 28, 2025
2535
2536
95 Argonaut Residential Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
FCS 1
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/ESSite/Shared Documents/ES/Active Projects/4940 MLC Holdings/0049 Argonaut Residential ISMND/DOCUMENTS/02 - ISMND/08 - Final ISMND/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx
PREFACE
Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require a Lead Agency to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) whenever it adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in conjunction with a project approval.
The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures occurs during project implementation.
The Draft IS/MND prepared for the proposed 95 Argonaut Street Residential Project (proposed project) concluded that project implementation could result in potentially significant effects on the environment, and mitigation measures were incorporated into the proposed project or are required as a condition of project approval that reduce these potential impacts to a less than significant level. This MMRP documents how and when the mitigation measures adopted by the Lead Agency will be implemented and confirms that potential environmental impacts are reduced to less than significant levels as identified in the Draft IS/MND.
This document does not discuss those subjects that the environmental analysis demonstrates would result in less than significant impacts and for which no mitigation was proposed or necessary. 2537
2538
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 3
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Table 1: 95 Argonaut Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
2.4 Biological Resources
MM BIO-1a: Nesting Bird Pre-construction Surveys
If ground-disturbing or vegetation-removing construction activities or tree removal is proposed during the breeding/nesting season for migratory birds (February 1 through September 15), a qualified Biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for special-status birds and other migratory birds within the construction area, including a 300-foot survey buffer (where accessible), no more than 3 days prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities in the construction area.
Review and approval of
pre-construction survey
report prepared by a
qualified Biologist
Prior to the start of
ground-disturbing or
vegetation-removing
construction activities
during the
breeding/nesting
season (February 1
to September 15)
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
MM BIO-1b: Avoidance of Active Avian Nests
If an active nest (i.e., occupied by eggs or fledglings) is located during pre-construction surveys or at any point during the construction phase of the proposed project, the City of Aliso Viejo shall be notified regarding the status of the nest. Furthermore, construction activities shall be restricted as necessary to avoid disturbance of the nest until the eggs or fledglings no longer are in the nest or a qualified Biologist deems disturbance potential to be minimal. Restrictions may include establishment of exclusion zones (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 300 feet around an active raptor nest and a 50-foot radius around an active migratory bird nest) or alteration of the construction schedule.
Provide notification to
the City of Aliso Viejo,
establish exclusion
zones on construction
plans or alter the
construction schedule;
monitoring of
construction site by a
qualified Biologist;
periodic site inspection
Prior to and during
construction
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
2.5 Cultural Resources
MM CUL-1: Prior to the initiation of construction activities, all construction personnel conducting ground disturbance at the site Verify retention of a
qualified Archaeologist;
WEAP training shall
occur prior to the
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
2539
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 4
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
shall be provided a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) cultural resources “tailgate” training. The training shall include visual aids, a discussion of applicable laws and statutes relating to archaeological resources, types of resources that may be found within the project site, and procedures to be followed in the event such resources are encountered. The training shall be conducted by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology.
An Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall conduct an updated survey of the site following demolition and exposure of native soils and prior to any project-related trenching or grading to check for the inadvertent exposure of cultural materials.
This shall be followed by archaeological monitoring during the grading and trenching phase of the proposed project. At the completion of these phases, archaeological monitoring shall be reduced to periodic “spot checks.” In the event exposed soils indicate cultural materials may be present, this may be followed by regular or full-time archaeological monitoring as determined by the Archaeologist.
Verify Worker
Environmental
Awareness Program
(WEAP) training; Site
inspection and
submittal of
documentation
initiation of
construction
activities;
Updated site survey
shall occur after
demolition and
exposure of native
soils and prior to any
project-related
trenching or grading;
Archaeological
monitoring shall occur
during grading and
trenching
MM CUL-2: In the event that buried archaeological resources are discovered during construction, operations shall stop within a 100- foot radius of the find and an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Archaeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in Site inspection;
submittal of
documentation;
Submission of DPR
forms; and
incorporation of final
Cultural Mitigation
Measures, if any, into
During construction;
upon discovery of
buried archaeological
resources
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
2540
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 5
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
accordance with Section15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria. If the resources are determined to be unique historic resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. The Lead Agency, along with other relevant or Tribal officials, shall be contacted upon the discovery of cultural resources to begin coordination on the disposition of the find(s).
Treatment of any significant cultural resources shall be undertaken with the approval of the Lead Agency. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Upon coordination with the Lead Agency, any archaeological artifacts recovered shall be donated to an appropriate Tribal custodian or a qualified scientific institution where they would be afforded applicable cultural resources laws and guidelines.
future construction
plans
MM CUL-3: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 shall be followed. If during Site monitoring;
inclusion of notes on
construction plans;
submittal of
documentation;
In the event of the
discovery of human
remains during
ground-disturbing
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
2541
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 6
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
the course of project construction, there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken:
1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site where human remains are discovered and/or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine whether the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98.
2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the MLD or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission.
• The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation.
Submission of
correspondence with
Coroner and NAHC,
activities or during
project construction;
NAHC notification
shall occur within 24
hours after discovery
2542
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 7
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
• The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the
NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the
landowner.
2.7 Geology and Soils
Conditions of Approval
COA GEO-1: In accordance with Municipal Code 13.08.170, Soil Engineering and Engineering Geology Reports, a soil engineering and engineering geology report shall be required for grading projects unless otherwise waived by the building official. The reports shall include information appropriate for the site including any information required by the building official. Recommendations included in the reports and approved by the building official shall be incorporated in the grading plans or specifications.
Accordingly, prior to issuance of grading permit, the project applicant shall provide grading plans or specifications that include all recommendations from the proposed project’s May 31, 2024, Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Due Diligence Study prepared by SA Geotechnical, Inc., or from the latest geotechnical study for the proposed project.
Submission of soil
engineering and
engineering geology
report and inclusion in
project plans; site
inspection; submission
of plans
Prior to the issuance
of a grading permit;
during and following
project construction
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
Mitigation Measures
MM GEO-1: The project applicant shall enlist a qualified Paleontologist (meeting the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology [SVP]) to prepare a Worker Environmental
Awareness Program (WEAP) presentation for construction
personnel. It will include information on paleontological resources, Documentation of
retention of a qualified
Paleontologist; Verify
WEAP training; site
inspection; submittal of
Paleontologist
retention and WEAP
training shall occur
prior to grading and
construction;
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning Department
2543
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 8
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
laws protecting them, types of fossils that could occur at the project site, and protocol for unanticipated discoveries. In the event that fossils are discovered during construction, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted. The contractor shall notify the qualified Paleontologist to examine the discovery. The qualified Paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed in accordance with SVP standards, evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
Based on the significance of the find, the qualified Paleontologist shall determine procedures to be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find. If, in consultation with the qualified Paleontologist, it is determined that avoidance is not feasible, the qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a
Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) to outline salvage and recovery procedures. If deemed necessary by the qualified Paleontologist, the PRIMP shall include construction monitoring requirements as well. The PRIMP shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and the approved plan shall be implemented.
documentation;
Submission and city
approval of PRIMP
Documentation shall
be submitted after the
discovery of
paleontological
resources during
construction;
If necessary, the
PRIMP shall be
approved by the City
prior to resuming
construction activities
2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measures
2544
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 9
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx MM TCR-1 :Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to
Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities
The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by both the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation. The Monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development prior to the earlier date of either: (1) the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or (2) the issuance of any permit required to commence any grounddisturbing activity.
The Monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribes.
Monitor logs shall identify and describe any discovered Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), including, but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, Tribal Cultural Resources, or TCRs), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of Monitor logs shall be provided Retention of Tribal
Monitor; submittal of
copy of executed
contract to City;
Copies of monitor logs;
inclusion of notes on
construction plans;
submittal of daily
monitoring logs
Submittal of written
notice of completion
from Monitor
Retention of a Native
American Monitor
shall occur prior to
the commencement
of ground-disturbing
activity, and shall
conclude upon written
confirmation of the
completion of grounddisturbing activities or
confirmation that
there is no potential
for impacts to TCRs;
Submittal of executed
contract shall occur
prior to the
commencement of
ground-disturbing
activity or the
issuance of any
permit to commence
ground-disturbing
activity,
City of Aliso Viejo
Community
Development
Director; City of Aliso
Viejo Planning
Department.
2545
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 10
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
to the project applicant and the Director of Community
Development upon written request to the Tribe.
On-site Tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following: (1) written confirmation to the Monitor and the Lead Agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Monitor to the Director of Community Development that no future planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact to TCRs.
MM TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural
Resource Objects (Non-funerary/Non-ceremonial)
Upon discovery of any Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) shall cease. The City shall consult with the project Archaeologist and initiate Native American consultation procedures with the project’s consulting Tribes (Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation). The consultation effort is intended to be a meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and considering carefully the views of others in a manner that is cognizant of all parties’ cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement on the appropriate treatment and disposition of TCRs discovered. A Cultural Resources and Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the Archaeologist in coordination with the consulting Tribes (Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Site inspection and
submittal of
documentation;
consultation with the
project Archaeologist
and NAHC;
incorporation of final
Cultural Mitigation
Measures, if any, into
future construction
plans
Upon discovery of
TCRs during
demolition, grading,
and excavation
City of Aliso Viejo
Planning
Department.
NAHC Monitor
2546
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 11
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation) and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this plan. Project construction shall not resume within the immediate vicinity of the discovery (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) until a Cultural Resources and Monitoring Treatment Plan is prepared and implemented. The plan may include, but would not be limited to, reburying, relocating, recording, and/or another culturally appropriate treatment. If it is determined that mutual agreement cannot be reached within 30 days of the initial consultation meeting, the TCR(s) under review shall be reinterred on-site in a location free from future grounddisturbing construction activities. This measure does not apply to the finding of human remains, which must comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.
MM TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains
and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects
A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 shall be followed.
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
Site monitoring.
inclusion of notes on
construction plans;
submittal of
documentation
During grounddisturbing activitiesCity of Aliso Viejo
Planning
Department.
NAHC Monitor
2547
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 12
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/MMRP/49400049 Argonaut Residential Project MMRP.docx Requirements Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
D. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.
E. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
As described above: MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, MM CUL-3, COA GEO-1, MM GEO-1, MM TCR-1, MM TCR-2, MM TCR-3. 2548
95 Argonaut Residential Project
ADMINISTRATIVE FINAL
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
State Clearinghouse Number 2025100301
PREPARED FOR:
City of Aliso Viejo
12 Journey, Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
949.425.2525
Contact: So Kim, Community Development Director
PREPARED BY:
FirstCarbon Solutions
250 Commerce, Suite 210
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Cecilia So, Project Director
Tsui Li, Project Manager
October 28, 2025
2549
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2550
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE FINAL IS/MND
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO TABLE OF CONTENTS
FCS iii
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/ISMND/2 - Final ISMND/49400049 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Table of Contents
1 - Introduction 1
2 - Response to Written Comments 1
2551
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2552
95 Argonaut Residential Project Administrative Final IS/MND City of Aliso Viejo
FCS 1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/ISMND/2 - Final ISMND/49400049 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx 1 - INTRODUCTION
Although a lead agency is not required to provide written responses to comments on proposed Negative Declarations (NDs) or Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Aliso Viejo has evaluated the comments received on the 95 Argonaut Residential Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2025100301) (proposed project) Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft IS/MND) and has elected to provide responses to the following significant environmental comments. None of the comments received results in the need to recirculate the Draft IS/MND or to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Furthermore, no comments require revisions or clarifications to the Draft IS/MND.
The Final IS/MND includes the following contents:
• Draft IS/MND (provided under separate cover)
• Draft IS/MND appendices (provided under separate cover) • Responses to Written Comments
• Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (provided under separate cover) 2 - RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS
A list of public agencies, organizations, and individuals that provided comments on the Draft IS/MND is presented below. Each comment has been assigned a code. Individual comments within each communication have been numbered so comments can be crossed-referenced with responses.
Following this list, the text of the communication is reprinted and followed by the corresponding response.
Author Author Code
State Agencies
California Department of Toxic Substances Control....................................................................... DTSC 2553
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2554
dtsc.ca.gov
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
October 10, 2025
So Kim
Community Development Director
City of Aliso Viejo
12 Journey Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
[email protected]
RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT DATED OCTOBER 7, 2025, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2025100301 Dear So Kim,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 95 Argonaut Residential Project (Project). The proposed Project involves the demolition of an existing two-story, approximately 48,000-squarefoot office building, along with the associated surface parking lot and landscaping. The site would be redeveloped with a residential infill community consisting of up to 61 three-story townhomes distributed across eight buildings. The townhomes would range in size from approximately 1,210 to 1,765 square feet and would offer a mix of two-, three- and four-bedroom units, each with an attached private two-car garage. The Project would also include 28 guest parking areas, pedestrian walkways, landscaped open spaces, and a recreational amenity area.
DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comments:
1. When agricultural crops and/or land uses are proposed or rezoned for residential use, several contaminants of concern (COCs) can be present. The Lead Agency shall identify the amounts of Pesticides and Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) historically used on the property. If present, OCPs requiring further analysis are DTSC
2 1
2555
So Kim
October 10, 2025
dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, toxaphene, and dieldrin. Additionally, any level of arsenic present would require further analysis and sampling and must meet approved local area baselines or thresholds. If they do not, remedial action must take place to mitigate them below those thresholds. Additional COCs may be found in mixing/loading/storage areas, drainage ditches, farmhouses, or any other outbuildings and should be sampled and analyzed. If smudge pots had been routinely utilized, additional sampling for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and/or Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons may be required. These recommendations should be adhered to and become part of the environmental document. Please refer to the DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage for the most recent guidance and screening levels.
2. DTSC recommends all imported soil/fill material be tested to ensure all COCs meet screening levels as outlined in DTSC's Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. Furthermore, DTSC advises referencing the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil/fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil/fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil/fill material are suitable for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the soil/fill and knowledge of prior land use.
3. The City of Aliso Viejo should consider soil testing as mentioned in comment #1.
If, in the event any COC results are above DTSC residential screening levels, DTSC recommends the City of Aliso Viejo address the contaminations within the Project area through an Environmental Site Assessment and/or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency, DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If entering into one of DTSC’s voluntary agreements, please note that DTSC uses a single standard Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application for all agreement types. Please apply for DTSC oversight using this link: Request for Agency Oversight Application. Submittal of the online application includes an agreement to pay costs incurred during agreement preparation. If you have any DTSC
4 3
2 Continued
2556
So Kim
October 10, 2025
questions about the application portal, please contact the relevant Regional Brownfield Coordinator for your Project.
DTSC would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MND for the 95 Argonaut Residential Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California’s people and environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like clarification on DTSC’s comments, please respond to this letter or via our CEQA Review email for additional guidance.
Sincerely,
Dave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP-Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
y
DTSC
4 Continued
5 2557
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2558
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT A DMINISTRATIVE FINAL IS/MND
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO RESPONSES TO WRITTEN COMMENTS
FCS 7
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/ISMND/2 - Final ISMND/49400049 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx State Agencies
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Response to DTSC-1
The commenter states that they have reviewed the project and summarizes the project description.
This comment is noted, and no response is necessary.
Response to DTSC-2
The commenter explains that former agricultural land may contain contaminants of concern (COC), such as pesticides and organochlorine pesticides, which may require sampling and remediation.
Previous agricultural uses were analyzed in the Draft IS/MND. The project site is currently a commercial lot and has been used for similar purposes since 1982. The project site has not had agriculture uses since 1981. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) performed by Hillman Consulting, which reviews concerns of hazardous substances, confirmed that the project site had no Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC), Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC), or Recognized Environmental Condition (REC). As noted in Section 2.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, given the 43 years since any agricultural use as well as the grading activities of current development, any remaining pesticide contamination is unlikely and therefore this is not considered to be a REC in connection with the project site. As such, the Phase I ESA determined that the previous agricultural use is not considered a REC, and impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. The issues raised in this comment have been fully addressed by the analysis in Section 2.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Response to DTSC-3
The commenter recommends all imported soil/fill be tested for COC, and that proper documentation be used to ensure soil is suitable for intended land use.
The geotechnical report by SA Geotechnical INC stated that the existing fill materials are considered suitable for reuse as compacted fill for the site. As noted in the response above, the Phase I ESA determined that the previous agricultural uses are not a REC. Should new fill be needed, per Condition of Approval GEO-1, recommendations included in the reports and approved by the building official shall be incorporated in the grading plans or specifications. This includes the recommendation that the geotechnical consultant evaluate and accept any import of soils prior to transportation to the subject site. With these conditions and the project’s compliance with California Building Standards Code (CBC) requirements, impacts would be less than significant, and the issues raised in this comment have been fully addressed by the analysis provided in the Draft IS/MND.
Response to DTSC-4
The commenter recommends that the City of Aliso Viejo do the soil testing mentioned in DTSC-2. If, in the event results are above DTSC residential screening levels, the commenter recommends the City address the contaminations through an ESA and/or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency.
2559
95 ARGONAUT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT A DMINISTRATIVE FINAL IS/MND
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN COMMENTS CITY OF ALISO VIEJO
8 FCS
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/4940/49400049/ISMND/2 - Final ISMND/49400049 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx Please see Response to DTSC-2. The comment and recommendation will be noted and reviewed by the City.
Response to DTSC-5
This comment consists of concluding statements No further response is required. 2560
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO
VIEJO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ASSOCIATED LAND
USE MAP FROM BUSINESS PARK TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 61-UNIT RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME
COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 95 ARGONAUT (APN: 623-091-01)
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2024, MLC Holdings, Inc. (“Applicant”) submitted a general plan amendment, zone change, vesting tentative tract map, site development permit, and a development agreement application to demolish an existing office building and accommodate the construction of a multi-family residential community at 95 Argonaut (“Project”);
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the proposed Project and has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#2025100301) (“IS/MND”) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) for the Project;
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public review to receive and provide initial feedback on concept plans for the Project; WHEREAS, on November 5, 2025, the City Council held a study session to discuss development agreements and impact fees;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, discussed the parameters of the public benefit contributions of the Development Agreement, and continued the meeting to December 3, 2025, to allow the Applicant additional time to address easement encroachment issues with the Aliso Viejo Community Association;
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2025, the City gave public notice of the City Council public hearing for consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment GPA-2025-00002, Zone Change ZC-2025-00002, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340 and Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001, for the Project by advertising in a newspaper of general circulation; by posting notices at City Hall and the Project site; and by mailing notices to owners of property within 300 feet, to the project applicant, and to local agencies that provide water, sewage, electricity and schools; WHEREAS, on December 3, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing as prescribed by law and considered written and verbal public testimony that was submitted prior to the hearing and during the hearing, and evidence and recommendations presented by staff in the agenda report and oral presentation; and
2561
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all of the recitals set forth above are true and correct. The above recitals are hereby incorporated as substantive findings of this Resolution.
Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, § 15000 et seq.) (Collectively, “CEQA”), the City Council adopted Resolution No._______, determining that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of the Project would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment, provided appropriate mitigation measures, as identified in the MMRP, are imposed on the Project.
Section 3. Findings for General Plan Amendment GPA-2025-00002.
Pursuant to AVMC 15.78.020 (General Plan Amendments), the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and approves an amendment to the General Plan land use designation and associated land use map from Business Park to High Density Residential, as set forth in Exhibit “A”, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
1. Public Welfare. Approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. While the Site is located within a larger business park, it is at an entry corner, providing a natural transition between the non-residential uses and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Directly across from the site to the north are established multifamily and single-family residential communities. Notably, the adjacent multi-family development shares several characteristics with the Project, including large buildings, each composed of six attached units. The architectural style is also complementary, featuring stucco exteriors, tile roofing, wrought iron balconies, recessed entryways, and shared open space without private driveways. The single-family tract homes surrounding that multi-family community are also similar in architectural style in terms of color, exterior finish, design, and materials.
Additionally, the Site is situated in an area with established infrastructure, including roads, utilities, and public services, that can adequately support residential development. As part of the environmental assessment, the Project required comprehensive studies addressing air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources, geotechnical conditions, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation impacts. As discussed further in the Environmental Assessment section below, these studies concluded that the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts with the implementation of proposed mitigation measures. The Project plans also cleared preliminary review by the Orange County Fire Authority. Furthermore, the Project aligns with the City’s 2562
housing goals by facilitating the development of new housing opportunities. Future construction on the Project site will be subject to plan check review and inspection process to ensure full compliance with applicable building and safety standards.
2. Internal General Plan Consistency. The amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan listed below in that it incorporates landscaping aligned with the City Council-approved plant palette, emphasizing low-water, drought-tolerant species; features building materials, colors, and architectural design that are compatible with the surrounding residential communities; includes a development impact fee that a portion of which is consistent the City’s parkland ordinance; proposes three affordable housing units restricted to very low-income households, thereby enhancing housing diversity and affordability; and introduces rezoning to facilitate residential development that includes affordable units in support of the City’s housing objectives. In the General Plan, 'COS' refers to Conservation and Open Space policies, 'H' for Housing policies and goals, and 'LU' for Land Use policies.
Policy COS-1.2 Reduce the amount of water used for landscaping and increase use of native and low water plants. Maximize use of native, lowwater plants for landscaping of areas adjacent to sidewalks or other impermeable surfaces.
Policy COS-4.2 Encourage and maintain high-quality architectural and landscaping designs that enhance or complement the community’s visual character.
Policy COS-7.5 Ensure that new development provides park land and/or improvements at a fair share ratio, pursuant to the City’s Parkland Ordinance.
Goal H-1: Encourage a diversity of housing types and provide affordability levels within Aliso Viejo to meet the needs of community residents. Policy H-1.1 Identify sites appropriate for the development of a variety of housing types and price ranges to meet the needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community through the disbursement of affordable units in projects.
Policy H-1.2 Encourage through the use of density bonuses and rezoning to allow for residential development, development of affordable housing opportunities throughout the community, as well as development of housing for elderly and low- and moderate-income households near public transportation services.
Policy H-1.4 Ensure that a portion of future residential development is affordable to low- and very-low-income households by designating certain sites as having the potential to be used for residential uses. Policy H-3.8 Review existing zoning policies and explore zoning changes to facilitate the development of affordable housing.
Policy LU-12.2 As a condition upon new development, require payment of park fees and/or dedication and provision of parkland, recreation facilities and/or multi-use trails that improve the public and private recreation system. 2563
3. Land Use Compatibility. In the case of amendments to the general plan land use policy map, the new designation is compatible with the designations on nearby properties. The Project site is located at the edge of a larger business park and directly across from established multi-family and single-family residential neighborhoods. The adjacent multi-family development shares several characteristics with the Project, including large attached-unit buildings, stucco exteriors, tile roofing, wrought iron balconies, recessed entryways, and shared open space without private driveways. These similarities ensure architectural and functional continuity between the Project and existing residential uses.
Furthermore, the transition from non-residential uses within the business park to residential neighborhoods is reinforced by the Project site’s location at a corner entry, creating a natural buffer.
4. Property Suitability. In the case of amendments to the general plan land use policy map, the new designation is suitable for the location, access, visual character and topography of the subject property. The property is located along established roadways with adequate vehicular and pedestrian access and is supported by existing infrastructure, including utilities and public services, sufficient to accommodate residential development. The Project site is generally level, with a slight descending slope from east to west, and sits several feet below the street elevations to the north and west. Proposed grading will consist primarily of recompaction and limited export to further level the Project site, resulting in finished elevations comparable to current conditions. Architecturally, the Project incorporates building styles, materials, and landscaping consistent with adjacent residential communities, ensuring visual compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. The Site’s position at the entry corner of the business park further enhances its suitability, providing a natural transition between non-residential and residential uses.
Section 4. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 5: Location of Documents. The administrative record for the Project is maintained at City Hall located at 12 Journey, Suite 100, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. The custodian of records is the City Clerk.
Section 6: Effective Date. This General Plan Amendment shall not take effect unless and until Zone Change, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340, Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001, and the Development Agreement are each approved by the City Council and have become effective, and the associated Development Agreement is approved by the City Council and executed by both parties thereto. 2564
Section 7. Execution of Resolution. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3
rd day of December 2025.
__________________________
Tiffany Ackley
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Kathy Bailor, Interim City Clerk 2565
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO )
I, KATHY BAILOR, City Clerk of the City of Aliso Viejo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2025-__ duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo at their regular meeting held on the 3 rd
day of December 2025, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
___________________________
KATHY BAILOR,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2566
Exhibit “A”
Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map
Case No. GPA-2025-00002
Property Location – 95 Argonaut (see red-circled area below) Existing Land Use Designation – Business Park (“BP”)
Proposed Land Use Designation – High Density Residential (Max. 50 units/acre) (“HDR”)
2567
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-___
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO
VIEJO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM
BUSINESS PARK 2 TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 61-UNIT RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME
COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 95 ARGONAUT (623-091-01)
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2024, MLC Holdings, Inc. (“Applicant”) submitted a general plan amendment, zone change, vesting tentative tract map, site development permit, and a development agreement application to demolish an existing office building to accommodate the construction of a multi-family residential community at 95 Argonaut, which is comprised of 2.85 acres (“Project”);
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the proposed Project and has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2025100301) (“IS/MND”) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) for the Project;
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public review to receive and provide initial feedback on concept plans for the Project; WHEREAS, on November 5, 2025, the City Council held a study session to discuss development agreements and impact fees;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, discussed the parameters of the public benefit contributions of the Development Agreement, and continued the meeting to December 3, 2025, to allow the Applicant additional time to address easement encroachment issues with the Aliso Viejo Community Association;
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2025, the City gave public notice of the City Council public hearing for consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment GPA-2025-00002, Zone Change ZC-2025-00002, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340 and Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001, for the Project by advertising in a newspaper of general circulation; by posting notices at City Hall and the Project site; and by mailing notices to owners of property within 300 feet, to the project applicant, and to local agencies that provide water, sewage, electricity and schools; WHEREAS, on December 3, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law and considered written and verbal public testimony that was submitted prior to the hearing and during the hearing, and evidence and recommendations presented by staff in the agenda report and oral presentation and introduced the Ordinance; and
2568
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all of the recitals set forth above are true and correct. The above recitals are hereby incorporated as substantive findings of this Ordinance.
Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, § 15000 et seq.) (Collectively, “CEQA”), the City Council adopted Resolution No.___________, determining that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of the Project would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment, provided appropriate mitigation measures, as identified in the MMRP, are imposed on the Project;
Section 3. Findings for Zone Change ZC-2025-00002. Pursuant to AVMC
15.78.040 (Zone Change and Prezoning), the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and approves the Zone Change ZC-2025-00002 from Business Park 2 to High Density Residential, as set forth in Exhibit “A”, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
1. Public Welfare. Approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare. The Project site, located at a prominent entry corner within a larger business park, provides a natural transition between non-residential uses and surrounding residential neighborhoods, with established multi-family and single-family communities directly to the north. The area is further supported by existing infrastructure such as roads, utilities, and public services capable of accommodating residential development, and comprehensive environmental studies concluded that, with mitigation measures, the project would result in less-than-significant impacts.
Preliminary review by the Orange County Fire Authority confirmed compliance with emergency access and fire protection standards. Additionally, the provision of affordable housing within the project creates greater opportunities for homebuyers, while the park in-lieu fee will contribute to the well-being and quality of life in the community. Future construction on the site will be subject to plan check review and inspection processes to ensure full compliance with applicable building and safety standards.
2. General Plan Consistency. The zone change is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan and any applicable specific plan. With the approval of the General Plan land use amendment, the zone change is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies listed below in that it incorporates landscaping aligned with the City Council-approved plant palette, emphasizing low-water, drought-tolerant species; features building materials, 2569
colors, and architectural design that are compatible with the surrounding residential communities; includes a development impact fee that a portion of which is consistent the City’s parkland ordinance; proposes three affordable housing units restricted to very low-income households, thereby enhancing housing diversity and affordability; and introduces rezoning to facilitate residential development that includes affordable units in support of the City’s housing objectives. In the General Plan, 'COS' refers to Conservation and Open Space policies, 'H' for Housing policies and goals, and 'LU' for Land Use policies. Policy COS-1.2 Reduce the amount of water used for landscaping and increase use of native and low water plants. Maximize use of native, low-water plants for landscaping of areas adjacent to sidewalks or other impermeable surfaces. Policy COS-4.2 Encourage and maintain high-quality architectural and landscaping designs that enhance or complement the community’s visual character.
Policy COS-7.5 Ensure that new development provides park land and/or improvements at a fair share ratio, pursuant to the City’s Parkland Ordinance. Goal H-1: Encourage a diversity of housing types and provide affordability levels within Aliso Viejo to meet the needs of community residents. Policy H-1.1 Identify sites appropriate for the development of a variety of housing types and price ranges to meet the needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community through the disbursement of affordable units in projects.
Policy H-1.2 Encourage through the use of density bonuses and rezoning to allow for residential development, development of affordable housing opportunities throughout the community, as well as development of housing for elderly and low- and moderate-income households near public transportation services.
Policy H-1.4 Ensure that a portion of future residential development is affordable to low- and very-low-income households by designating certain sites as having the potential to be used for residential uses. Policy H-3.8 Review existing zoning policies and explore zoning changes to facilitate the development of affordable housing.
Policy LU-12.2 As a condition upon new development, require payment of park fees and/or dedication and provision of parkland, recreation facilities and/or multi-use trails that improve the public and private recreation system.
3. Land Use Compatibility. The zone change is compatible with the zoning and land use on nearby properties. The Project site is located at the edge of a larger business park and directly across from established multi-family and single-family residential neighborhoods. The adjacent multi-family development shares several characteristics with the Project, including large attached-unit buildings, stucco exteriors, tile roofing, wrought iron balconies, recessed entryways, and shared open space without private driveways. These similarities ensure architectural and functional continuity between the Project and existing residential uses.
Furthermore, the transition from non-residential uses within the business park to 2570
residential neighborhoods is reinforced by the Project site’s location at a corner entry, creating a natural buffer.
4. Property Suitability. The zone change is suitable for the location, access, visual character and topography of the subject property. The property is located along established roadways with adequate vehicular and pedestrian access and is supported by existing infrastructure, including utilities and public services, sufficient to accommodate future residential development. The Project site is generally level, with a slight descending slope from east to west, and sits several feet below the street elevations to the north and west. The Project site’s position at the entry corner of the business park further enhances its suitability, providing a natural transition between non-residential and residential uses.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Zone Change Ordinance shall not take effect unless and until General Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340, Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001 and the Development Agreement are each approved by the City Council and have become effective, and the associated Development Agreement is approved by the City Council and executed by both parties thereto.
Section 5. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity has no effect on the other provisions or applications of the Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this extent, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any portion thereof.
Section 6. Location of Documents. The administrative record for the Project is maintained at City Hall located at 12 Journey, Suite 100, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. The custodian of records is the City Clerk.
Section 7. City Clerk’s Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause a summary thereof to be published five days prior to the date of adoption of this Ordinance, and, within 15 days after adoption, the City Clerk shall cause to be published the aforementioned summary and shall post a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the vote for and against the same, in the Office of the City Clerk. 2571
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2026. __________________________
[Insert Name]
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________ Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Kathy Bailor, Interim City Clerk 2572
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO )
I, Kathy Bailor, Interim City Clerk of the City of Aliso Viejo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance No. 2025-__ duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo at their regular meeting held on the ___ day of _____ 2026, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
___________________________
KATHY BAILOR,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
I hereby certify that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance No. 2026-__ duly passed and adopted by the Aliso Viejo City Council at its regular meeting held __________, 2026, and that the Summary of the Ordinance was published on ______ and ______ in the Laguna Niguel News.
___________________________
KATHY BAILOR,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2573
Exhibit “A”
Zone Change Map
Case No. ZC-2025-00002
Property Location – 95 Argonaut (see red-circled area below) Existing Land Use Designation – Business Park (“BP”)
Proposed Land Use Designation – High Density Residential (Max. 50 units/acre) (“HDR”)
2574
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO
VIEJO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19340 FOR SUBDIVISION INTO CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (SDP-2024-00001) TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A 61-UNIT RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME
COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 95 ARGONAUT (623-091-01)
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2024, MLC Holdings, Inc. (“Applicant”) submitted a general plan amendment, zone change, vesting tentative tract map, site development permit, and a development agreement application to demolish an existing office building to accommodate the construction of a multi-family residential community at 95 Argonaut (“Project”);
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public review to receive and provide initial feedback on concept plans for the Project; WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the Public Resources Code, and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the proposed Project and has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#2025100301) (“IS/MND”) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) for the Project;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, discussed the parameters of the public benefit contributions of the Development Agreement, and continued the meeting to December 3, 2025, to allow the Applicant additional time to address easement encroachment issues with the Aliso Viejo Community Association;
WHEREAS, the public benefits include, among other things, park in-lieu fees, as authorized by law and the City’s ordinances, to rehabilitate and improve existing open space and recreational facilities in the City, including but not limited to, the Aquatic Center, Iglesia Community Center and Park, and the Ranch (“Facilities”) in order to maintain the City’s high standard of recreation and community services while accommodating a growing population, including future residents of the proposed subdivision; WHEREAS, residents throughout the City regularly use the Facilities due to the variety of programs and services offered. Although the Facilities are located outside of the subdivision, future residents of the subdivision will undoubtedly use and benefit from use of the Facilities as well;
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2025, the City gave public notice of the City Council public hearing for consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment GPA-2025-00002, Zone Change ZC-2025-00002, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340 and Site Developer Permit SDP-2024-00001, for the Project by advertising in a 2575
newspaper of general circulation; by posting notices at City Hall and the Project site; and by mailing notices to owners of property within 300 feet, to the project applicant, and to local agencies that provide water, sewage, electricity and schools; WHEREAS, on December 3, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing as prescribed by law and considered written and verbal public testimony that was submitted prior to the hearing and during the hearing and evidence and recommendations presented by staff in the agenda report and oral presentation; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all of the recitals set forth above are true and correct. The above recitals are hereby incorporated as substantive findings of this Resolution.
Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, § 15000 et seq.) (Collectively, “CEQA”), the City Council adopted Resolution No. ___________, determining that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of the Project would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment, provided appropriate mitigation measures, as identified in the MMRP, are imposed on the Project.
Section 3. Findings for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et. seq.) and AVMC Title 14 (Subdivisions), the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and approves the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (“VTTM”) 19340 as set forth in the Project plans as set forth in Exhibit “B”, Sheets C1 to C-3 and subject to the conditions of approval as set forth in Exhibit “A”, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
A. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General and Specific Plans. The Site has a General Plan land use designation of Business Park. The Applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the property for High Density Residential, which allows for residential development of 19 to 30 dwelling units per acre. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map proposes 61 multifamily homes on 2.85 acres, resulting in a density of 21.4 dwelling units per acre. As conditioned, the Vesting Tentative Tract Map will not take effect unless the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Permit, and Development Agreement take effect. Accordingly, the proposed map would be consistent with the applicable General Plan Land Use designation. There is no applicable Specific Plan for the Project site.
2576
B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General and Specific Plans. The Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Conservation and Open Space, Housing, and Land Use element in that the Project promotes orderly growth, provides a compatible transition between non-residential and residential uses, supports housing objectives by creating new residential opportunities, and utilizes existing infrastructure in a manner consistent with the community’s long-term vision and planning framework. The Project is also subject to mitigation measures and conditions of approval that address potential impacts related to traffic, noise, air quality, and emergency access. There is no applicable Specific Plan for the Project site.
C. The proposed subdivision conforms to all applicable zoning standards set forth in AVMC Title, as required by AVMC Section 14.08.050. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the permitted uses, development standards, and density provisions of the underlying zoning district, and the design and layout of lots, streets, and improvements comply with the requirements for subdivision and land development established in the AVMC.
D. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The Project site is generally level, has adequate access from existing public streets, and is served by established infrastructure systems including water, sewer, storm drainage, and utilities. The site’s size, configuration, and surrounding land use context are appropriate to accommodate the Project consistent with applicable zoning and General Plan designations. No unusual topographic, geologic, or environmental conditions have been identified that would render the site unsuitable for residential use.
E. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The Project includes a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the property to High Density Residential, which permits residential development at a range of 19 to 30 dwelling units per acre. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map proposes 61 multi-family homes on 2.85 acres, resulting in a density of approximately 21.4 dwelling units per acre. This proposed density falls within the allowable range for the High Density Residential designation.
F. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantial and avoidable injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat. The Project site is currently developed with an office building, surface parking lot, and landscaping. There is no fish, wildlife, or any habitat that would be affected by the Project.
G. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The Project will be served by existing off-site infrastructure, with new on-site water, sewer, and storm drain facilities designed to connect to and extend those systems. All facilities have adequate capacity 2577
to accommodate the proposed residential use. The subdivision design incorporates standard improvements, including paved streets, sidewalks, street lighting, and utility connections, that will be constructed in compliance with applicable building codes and City engineering standards. The Initial Study prepared for the Project did not identify any conditions that would result in significant public health impacts, and all potentially significant effects have been mitigated to less-than-significant levels.
H. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with existing easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the subdivision. The Project as conditioned requires the Applicant to obtain easement holders’ authorization for any improvements or encroachments prior to building permit issuance.
Section 4. Findings for Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001. Pursuant to AVMC 15.74.020 (Site Development Permits), the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact and approves the Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001, subject to the conditions of approval as set forth in Exhibit “A” and Project plans as set forth in Exhibit “B”, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
A. Consistency with General Plan. The project is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. The Project with the General Plan Amendment to High Density Residential is consistent with the General Plan in that it incorporates landscaping aligned with the City Council-approved plant palette, emphasizing low-water, drought-tolerant species; features building materials, colors, and architectural design that are compatible with the surrounding residential communities; includes a development impact fee that a portion of which is consistent the City’s parkland ordinance; proposes three affordable housing units restricted to very low-income households, thereby enhancing housing diversity and affordability; and introduces rezoning to facilitate residential development that includes affordable units in support of the City’s housing objectives.
B. Consistency with Zoning Code. The land use and associated development conform to the permitted use provisions
and development standards of this zoning code and is consistent with this code and any applicable specific plan. The proposed zone change to High Density Residential, together with the associated development, is compatible with surrounding land uses, providing a transition that complements the existing neighborhood character. The property is suitable for residential use based on its location, access, visual character, and topography, and existing infrastructure is adequate to support the proposed development. The Project incorporates reduced perimeter setbacks for buildings, landscaping, and mechanical equipment, which are expressly permitted as incentives under California’s State Density Bonus Law, which requires cities to grant certain concessions and waivers or relaxed development standards when a project 2578
includes a qualifying percentage of affordable housing units. Because the Project meets the threshold of 5% for very low-income households, it is eligible for the reduced building and landscape setbacks, and mechanical equipment placement in the front yard setback. In addition, the Project qualifies for a reduced parking ratio under the State Density Bonus Law. Based on this ratio, a total of 112 parking spaces is required for the Project. The law does not prescribe how these spaces must be allocated between private resident parking and guest parking; rather, the distribution is left to the Applicant. In this case, the Applicant is proposing 150 parking spaces, consisting of 122 private residential spaces and 28 guest spaces. Although the City does not permit tandem parking, and tandem stalls must therefore be counted as a single space, the Project would still provide a total of 117 spaces (89 private and 28 guest), which exceeds the required 112 spaces.
C. Compliance with CEQA. Processing and approval of the permit application are in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. An Initial Study (“IS”) was prepared for the project, which identified potentially significant environmental impacts. However, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels through revisions and implementation of mitigation measures. As such, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) was prepared and circulated for a 20-day public review period from October 2 to October 22, 2025, with distribution to the State Clearinghouse, public agencies, nearby property owners, and interested parties. One comment was received from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and its recommendations regarding imported fill material have been incorporated as conditions of approval. The IS determined that the project would not result in significant impacts to most resource areas, and identified mitigation measures for biological resources, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and geology and soils, which are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and Conditions of Approval.
D. Architectural Design. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, and roof style, is compatible with surrounding development. The adjacent multi-family development to the north shares several defining characteristics with the proposed project, including similarly scaled buildings composed of six attached units. The architectural style is complementary, featuring stucco exteriors, tile roofing, wrought iron balconies, recessed entryways, and communal open space without private driveways. The surrounding single-family tract homes also reflect a consistent architectural design, with comparable color palettes, exterior finishes, and material selections. The Project further enhances this compatibility through the inclusion of framed windows, some accented with faux shutters, as well as a mix of hip and gable roof forms, which reflects the roof styles found in nearby residences. Collectively, these design elements ensure compatibility with the surrounding development.
2579
E. Site Design. The site design of the project, including but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements, is compatible with surrounding development. The Project will retain the existing single-entry driveway at the southern end of the site along Argonaut. The internal private roadway system designed to provide two-way access to residential garages and guest parking spaces, emergency access, hydrant placement has been reviewed and conceptually approved by both the Building Division and the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Each unit will include an enclosed private garage with dedicated space for trash bin storage. Approximately 32% of the site will be dedicated to open space, including a private park, shared yards, pedestrian walkways, and perimeter landscaping. Perimeter fencing and exterior mechanical equipment will be screened with additional landscaping, and the site entrance will be enhanced with decorative paving, signage, and accent trees. Lighting throughout the site, including streetlights, bollards, and shade structures, will be designed with recessed, downward-facing fixtures to minimize light spill. These design elements are compatible with surrounding residential communities.
F. Landscape Design. Project landscaping, including but not limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed so as to provide visual relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. The Project incorporates a landscape plan that enhances the overall visual continuity of the site and complements the architectural character of the development.
Approximately 32% of the site is dedicated to open space, which includes a private park featuring a BBQ counter, shade structure, picnic tables, benches, and play equipment. In addition, approximately 35,000 square feet of shared yards, pedestrian walkways, and perimeter landscaping are distributed throughout the site to provide visual relief and promote connectivity.
Landscaping will be provided around the exterior mechanical equipment and perimeter fencing to screen undesirable views. The site entrance is designed to create a welcoming and visually prominent focal point, enhanced with decorative paving, signage, and accent trees. The plant palette aligns with the City Council-approved plant palette, emphasizing low-water, drought-tolerant species.
Section 5. Location of Documents. The administrative record for the Project is maintained at City Hall located at 12 Journey, Suite 100, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. The custodian of records is the City Clerk.
2580
Section 6. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 7. Effective Date. This Vesting Tentative Tract Map 19340, Site Development Permit SDP-2024-00001 shall not take effect unless and until General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and the Development Agreement are each approved by the City Council and have become effective, and the associated Development Agreement is approved by the City Council and executed by both parties thereto.
Section 8. Execution of Resolution. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3
rd day of December 2025.
__________________________
Tiffany Ackley
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Kathy Bailor, Interim City Clerk 2581
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO )
I, Kathy Bailor, City Clerk of the City of Aliso Viejo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2025-__ duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo at their regular meeting held on the 3 rd day of December
2025, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
___________________________
KATHY BAILOR,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2582
Exhibit “A”
Conditions of Approval
Case Nos. GPA-2025-00002, ZC 2025-00002, VTTM 19340, and SDP-2024-00001 General
1. Indemnification. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold the city, and/or any of its officials (appointed or elected), officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively 'Actions'), brought against the city, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the city and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the city) for or concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Environmental Quality Act, Planning and Zoning Law, Subdivision Map Act, Community Redevelopment Law, Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state, or local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed the city shall have the right to approve, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, legal counsel providing the city's defense, and that Applicant shall reimburse city for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the city in the course of the defense. The city shall promptly notify the Applicant of any action brought, and city shall cooperate with the Applicant in defense of the action.
2. Other Agency Approvals. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of outside agencies having jurisdiction, including but not limited to the local fire authority, water district, and any other local, regional, State, or Federal agencies.
3. Public Works. If applicable, the Applicant shall apply for and obtain encroachment permits or other permits from the Public Works Department for any work or placement within the public right-of-way.
Development Agreement and Vesting Tentative Tract Map
4. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the Applicant shall execute the Development Agreement with the City. The Applicant shall comply with all terms and conditions of the agreement.
2583
5. Payment of the full $213,850 City Fees and $824,802 Park in-lieu fee amounts shall be made to the City prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Project. No building permit shall be issued until the City has received the full payment and confirmed compliance with all applicable fee requirements. The City shall have no obligation to issue any building permit until and unless such payments and in-lieu fees are received in full, any delay resulting from nonpayment shall be solely the responsibility of the Applicant.
6. The Applicant shall provide a minimum of 3 dwelling units on-site as for-sale housing, which shall be deed restricted to very low-income households. Each unit shall be designed and located in full compliance with the plans reviewed by the City Council on December 3, 2025. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the Applicant shall execute the Density Bonus Housing Agreement as provided in the Development Agreement. The Applicant shall comply with all terms and conditions of the Density Bonus Housing Agreement and the Development Agreement.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7. A final tract map shall be filed for approval and recordation pursuant to AVMC Chapter 14.18.
8. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Applicant shall resolve any encroachments into the easements to the satisfaction of the City and all affected parties. No Final Map shall be approved for filing until documentation demonstrating resolution of the encroachment, whether by removal, relocation, or formal modification of the easement, has been reviewed and approved by the City.
The Final Map shall reflect the corrected easement boundaries and conditions as approved.
9. Prior to clearance of a Final Map or issuance of a permit, the Applicant shall submit a Fire Master Plan to Orange County Fire Authority for review.
10.Street lighting shall be provided along, and at the intersections of, all arterial highways and local streets in accordance with the illumination levels specified in the city standards, except as otherwise approved by the city engineer.
11.Utility lines, including, but not limited to, electric, communications, street lighting, and cable television, shall be placed underground. The Applicant is responsible for making the necessary arrangements with the utility companies for the installation of such facilities. Appurtenances and associated equipment such as, but not limited to, surface-mounted transformers, pedestal-mounted terminal boxes, meter cabinets, and concealed ducts in an underground system may be placed above ground within the street right-of-way where sufficient right-of-way width exists so as not to pose a serious hazard to pedestrian traffic.
12.All lots shall be connected to a sanitary sewer system. 2584
Construction
13.The approved project involves the demolition of an existing office building development and construction of a new 61-unit townhome complex with associated parking lot and open space amenities. The project shall be constructed and maintained in full compliance with the approved plans and specifications, including but not limited to all details regarding building height, setbacks, site layout, parking, circulation, architectural features, and other design elements, reviewed by the City Council on December 3, 2025. Any modifications or deviations from the approved plans shall require prior review and approval by the City pursuant to AVMC 15.74.110 (Modifications to discretionary permits).
14.The approved project shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Aliso Viejo Municipal Code, including but not limited to building codes and any conditions imposed as part of the approval process.
15.Prior to issuance of any permits, the Applicant shall submit and obtain City approval of a construction plan detailing the phasing and timing of demolition of the existing office building, site grading, infrastructure installation, landscape/open space installation and construction of the approved 61-unit townhome community.
All work shall proceed in accordance with the approved construction plan, and any substantive changes to phasing or timing shall require prior written authorization from the City.
16.Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a proposed haul route for the transport of earth, materials, and equipment to and from the site.
The haul route shall be reviewed and approved by the City to ensure public safety, minimize traffic impacts, and protect adjacent properties. No grading or excavation shall occur until the haul route has received written approval, and any subsequent modifications shall require prior authorization by the City.
17.Following completion of grading and prior to issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall submit a pad certification prepared and signed by a licensed civil engineer or geotechnical engineer, verifying that all building pads have been graded in accordance with the approved grading plans and are suitable for the intended construction. The certification shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to any construction.
18.Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sundays or on Federal holidays. Use of rock crusher on site is prohibited.
19.Prior to grading or building permit issuance, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for approval a Project Specific Final Water Quality Management Plan (FWQMP) for the subject project. The F-WQMP shall be consistent with the approved P-WQMP and in full conformance with the TGD.
2585
20.During all grading and construction activities, the construction contractor shall post a clearly visible sign at the project site boundary listing a contact name and telephone number.
21.Prior to building permit final of any unit, perimeter fencing shall be installed.
The use of chain link, barbed wire, razor wire or electrified fencing are prohibited.
22.Project identification sign is required. Prior to installation of this sign, the project name shall be approved by the City to ensure appropriateness, aid in identification for emergency services and to avoid duplication with other projects in the City.
Placement of any permanent and temporary signs may be permitted pursuant to AVMC Chapter 15.34.
23.Uless determined infeasible by the City, streetlights shall be placed off of sidewalks; and irrigation controllers, power transformers, telephone and cable TV junction boxes, and other similar facilities shall be placed underground.
24.Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan identifying the type, location and height of proposed lighting fixtures, with an associated photometric analysis showing lighting illumination levels and spillover.
The lighting plan shall conform to the provisions of AVMC Zoning Code Appendix A (Requirements for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) and AVMC
15.62.070 (Outdoor Lighting) and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Police Services Department prior to issuance of a building permit. The Police Services Department shall also review address numbers, certain landscaping, and door strikes and jambs as part of this same review and approval process.
25.Screening of Equipment and Facilities. Mechanical equipment, ground-mounted utility, mechanical, and other similar equipment shall be screened pursuant to AVMC 15.62.080 (Nonresidential Site Planning).
26.Landscaping shall comply with AVMC 15.62.060 (Landscaping and screening). All landscaping and common areas on site shall be maintained in perpetuity by the Applicant or an established homeowners’ association.
Temporary Use Permits
27.The temporary placement of a trailer, recreational vehicle or other relocatable building, or the temporary use of a permanent structure on an active construction or grading site to serve as a construction and/or guard office may be permitted subject to approval of a temporary use permit pursuant to AVMC 15.14.170 (Construction and Guard Offices).
2586
28.Temporary model home complexes and real estate sales offices may be established subject to approval of a temporary use permit pursuant to AVMC
15.14.180 (Model Home Offices).
Permit Validity
29.Expiration. This approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect if:
a. The permit is not established within two years of the permit’s effective date or such other time period designated by the permit approval, by state law, or by this code; or
b. After establishment, the use or activity for which the permit was approved is discontinued or abandoned for a period of one year.
30.Time Extensions. Upon application before expiration of the period of validity, the City Council may grant or conditionally grant an extension to the period of validity for up to one year per extension if it finds that such an extension is justified by the circumstances of the original findings for the project can still be made with, if necessary, the imposition of conditions not originally imposed on the project. The filing of an application for extension shall stay expiration of the permit until action is taken on the time extension by the decision-making authority. No more than two one-year extensions may be granted or conditionally granted.
31.Revocation of discretionary permits. Any discretionary permit may be revoked by the original decision-making authority pursuant to the provisions of AVMC
15.74.120 (Revocation of Discretionary Permits).
Orange County Fire Authority (“OCFA”)
32.Prior to building permit issuance, submit plans for review and approval of the following: underground piping for private hydrants and fire sprinkler systems, and fire sprinkler systems.
33.Prior to concealing interior construction, submit plan for review and approval of the fire alarm system.
Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”)
34.All imported soil/fill material shall be tested to ensure all COCs meet screening levels as outlined in DTSC's Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. Furthermore, DTSC advises referencing the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil/fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil/fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil/fill material are suitable for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the soil/fill and knowledge of prior land use.
2587
35.If in the event any COC results are above DTSC residential screening levels are found in soil or fill material, all contaminations within the Project area shall be addressed through DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Mitigation Measures
Biological Resources
36.MM BIO-1a: Nesting Bird Pre-construction Surveys If ground-disturbing or vegetation-removing construction activities or tree removal is proposed during the breeding/nesting season for migratory birds (February 1 through September 15), a qualified Biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for special-status birds and other migratory birds within the construction area, including a 300-foot survey buffer (where accessible), no more than 3 days prior to the start of grounddisturbing activities in the construction area
37.MM BIO-1b: Avoidance of Active Avian Nests If an active nest (i.e., occupied by eggs or fledglings) is located during pre-construction surveys or at any point during the construction phase of the proposed project, the City of Aliso Viejo shall be notified regarding the status of the nest. Furthermore, construction activities shall be restricted as necessary to avoid disturbance of the nest until the eggs or fledglings no longer are in the nest or a qualified Biologist deems disturbance potential to be minimal. Restrictions may include establishment of exclusion zones (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 300 feet around an active raptor nest and a 50-foot radius around an active migratory bird nest) or alteration of the construction schedule.
Cultural Resources
38.MM CUL-1: Prior to the initiation of construction activities, all construction personnel conducting ground disturbance at the site shall be provided a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) cultural resources “tailgate” training.
The training shall include visual aids, a discussion of applicable laws and statutes relating to archaeological resources, types of resources that may be found within the project site, and procedures to be followed in the event such resources are encountered. The training shall be conducted by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology. An Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall conduct an updated survey of the site following demolition and exposure of native soils and prior to any project-related trenching or grading to check for the inadvertent exposure of cultural materials. This shall be followed by archaeological monitoring during the grading and trenching phase of the proposed project. At the completion of these phases, archaeological monitoring shall be reduced to periodic “spot checks.” In the event exposed soils indicate cultural materials may be present, this may be followed by regular or full-time archaeological monitoring as determined by the Archaeologist 2588
39.MM CUL-2: In the event that buried archaeological resources are discovered during construction, operations shall stop within a 100- foot radius of the find and an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Archaeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria. If the resources are determined to be unique historic resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. The Lead Agency, along with other relevant or Tribal officials, shall be contacted upon the discovery of cultural resources to begin coordination on the disposition of the find(s). Treatment of any significant cultural resources shall be undertaken with the approval of the Lead Agency. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Upon coordination with the Lead Agency, any archaeological artifacts recovered shall be donated to an appropriate Tribal custodian or a qualified scientific institution where they would be afforded applicable cultural resources laws and guidelines.
40.MM CUL-3: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of project construction, there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken:
1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site where human remains are discovered and/or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine whether the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury 2589
the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the MLD or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
a. The NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • b. The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. c. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Geology and Soils
41.COA GEO-1: In accordance with Municipal Code 13.08.170, Soil Engineering and Engineering Geology Reports, a soil engineering and engineering geology report shall be required for grading projects unless otherwise waived by the building official. The reports shall include information appropriate for the site including any information required by the building official. Recommendations included in the reports and approved by the building official shall be incorporated in the grading plans or specifications. Accordingly, prior to issuance of grading permit, the project applicant shall provide grading plans or specifications that include all recommendations from the proposed project’s May 31, 2024, Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Due Diligence Study prepared by SA Geotechnical, Inc., or from the latest geotechnical study for the proposed project.
42.MM GEO-1: The project applicant shall enlist a qualified Paleontologist (meeting the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology [SVP]) to prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) presentation for construction personnel. It will include information on paleontological resources, laws protecting them, types of fossils that could occur at the project site, and protocol for unanticipated discoveries. In the event that fossils are discovered during construction, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted. The contractor shall notify the qualified Paleontologist to examine the discovery. The qualified Paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed in accordance with SVP standards, evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Based on the significance of the find, the qualified Paleontologist shall determine procedures to be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find. If, in consultation with the qualified Paleontologist, it is determined that avoidance is not feasible, the qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) to outline salvage and recovery procedures. If deemed necessary by the qualified Paleontologist, the PRIMP shall include construction monitoring requirements as well. The PRIMP shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and the approved plan shall be implemented.
2590
Tribal Cultural Resources
43.MM TCR-1 :Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities. The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by both the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation. The Monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development prior to the earlier date of either: (1) the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or (2) the issuance of any permit required to commence any ground disturbing activity. The Monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribes. Monitor logs shall identify and describe any discovered Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), including, but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, Tribal Cultural Resources, or TCRs), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of Monitor logs shall be provide to the project applicant and the Director of Community Development upon written request to the Tribe. On-site Tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following: (1) written confirmation to the Monitor and the Lead Agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Monitor to the Director of Community Development that no future planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact to TCRs.
44.MM TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource Objects (Nonfunerary/Non-ceremonial) Upon discovery of any Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) shall cease. The City shall consult with the project Archaeologist and initiate Native American consultation procedures with the project’s consulting Tribes (Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation). The consultation effort is intended to be a meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and considering carefully the views of others in a manner that is 2591
cognizant of all parties’ cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement on the appropriate treatment and disposition of TCRs discovered. A Cultural Resources and Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the Archaeologist in coordination with the consulting Tribes (Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation and the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation) and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this plan.
Project construction shall not resume within the immediate vicinity of the discovery (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) until a Cultural Resources and Monitoring Treatment Plan is prepared and implemented. The plan may include, but would not be limited to, reburying, relocating, recording, and/or another culturally appropriate treatment. If it is determined that mutual agreement cannot be reached within 30 days of the initial consultation meeting, the TCR(s) under review shall be reinterred on-site in a location free from future ground disturbing construction activities. This measure does not apply to the finding of human remains, which must comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.
45.MM TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects
a. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
b. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed. c. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
d. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. E. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
2592