11221022 Geotechnical Investigation 17617 Bellflower Boulevard — Bellflower City Council, April 27, 2026

UPDATED

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER
17617 BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD

BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT No.112-21022
MAY 26, 2021
Prepared for:

MR. ERIC SILVERMAN
SBH REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.
606 SOUTH OLIVE STREET, SUITE 2450
Los ANGELES, CA 90014
PREPARED BY:

KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
1100 OLYMPIC DRIVE, SUITE 103
CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92881
(951) 273-1011

& ASSOCIATES, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
May 26, 2021
Mr. Eric Silverman
SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.
606 South Olive Street, Suite 2450
Los Angeles, California 90014
RE: Updated Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Proposed Retail Shopping Center
17617 Bellflower Boulevard
Bellflower, California
Dear Mr. Silverman:

KA Project No. 112-21022
We have completed an Updated Geotechnical Engineering Investigation dated April 19, 2021 for the above -referenced site. The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report.

If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (951) 273-1011.

DRJ: ht
�--4�`
Respectfully submitted,
�ROFESS/n, `V
KRAZAN & ASS ES INC.

S� ti
2698
GAO \C IT
avid R. Jarosz, II
CF CAL�F
C
Managing Engin r
RGE No. 2698 CE No. 60185
With Offices Serving the Western United States
1100 Olympic Drive, Suite 103 • Corona, CA 92881 • (951) 273-1011 • Fax: (951) 273-1003 11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

-fl<XaZ;a1& ASSOCIATES, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSEAND SCOPE.......................................................................................................................... 1 PROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION............................................................................................................. 2 SITE LOCATION, SITE HISTORY AND SITE DESCRIPTION...................................................... 2 GEOLOGICSETTING........................................................................................................................... 3 SEISMICHAZARD ZONES................................................................................................................... 3 SEISMICITY AND LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL.......................................................................... 4 FAULT RUPTURE HAZARD ZONES.................................................................................................. 5 OTHERHAZARDS................................................................................................................................. 5 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS............................................................................. 5 SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................ 6 GROUNDWATER.................................................................................................................................... 7 SOILCORROSNITY............................................................................................................................. 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................. 7 AdministrativeSummary........................................................................................................................ 8 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction................................................................................ 9 SeismicConsiderations........................................................................................................................... 9 SitePreparation....................................................................................................................................... 9 EngineeredFill...................................................................................................................................... 11 Drainageand Landscaping.................................................................................................................... 11 UtilityTrench Backfill.......................................................................................................................... 12 Foundations........................................................................................................................................... 12 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork........................................................................................................ 13 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls........................................................................................ 13 R-Value Test Results and Pavement Design......................................................................................... 14 Seismic Parameters 2019 CBC........................................................................................................... 15 SoilCement Reactivity.......................................................................................................................... 16 Compacted Material Acceptance........................................................................................................... 16 Testingand Inspection.......................................................................................................................... 16 LIMITATIONS.......................................................................................................................................16 With Offices Serving the Western United States
1100 Olympic Drive, Suite 103 • Corona, CA 92881 • (951) 273-1011 • Fax: (951) 273-1003 11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

,,,dj<XaZan& ASSOCIATES, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION

FIGURES
FIGURE 1

VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 2

SITE PLAN
FIGURE 3

EARTHQUAKE ZONES OF REQUIRED INVESTIGATION MAP
FIGURE 4

HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER MAP
FIGURE 5

GEOLOGIC MAP

APPENDIX A

BORING LOGS

CONE PENETRATION TEST

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

PERCOLATION TEST DATA

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS

APPENDIX B

GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS

APPENDIX C

GENERAL PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS
With Offices Serving the Western United States
1100 Olympic Drive, Suite 103 • Corona, CA 92881 • (951) 273-1011 • Fax: (951) 273-1003 11221022 Updated Repot (Retail Shopping Center)

==Krazan & ASSOCIATES, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
May 26, 2021 Project No. 112-21022

UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER
17617 BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD

BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA
II►Y_Y:ZitT�II�M [I)�i
This updated report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed Retail Shopping Center, to be located at the southwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Ramona Street in Bellflower, California. This report supersedes the previous Geotechnical Engineering Investigation report issued on April 19, 2021. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, Engineered Fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork, retaining walls, excavation stability, soil cement reactivity, and pavement design.

A Vicinity Map showing the location of the site is presented on Figure 1. A Site Plan showing the approximate boring locations is presented on Figure 2. Descriptions of the field and laboratory investigations, boring log legend and boring logs are presented in Appendix A. Appendix A contains a description of the laboratory -testing phase of this study, along with the laboratory test results.

Appendices B and C contain specifications for earthwork and flexible pavements, respectively. If conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This investigation was conducted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and Engineered Fill construction.

Our scope of services was outlined in our proposal dated March 9, 2021 (KA Proposal No.

G21030CAC-R) and included the following:
• A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site.
• A field investigation consisting of drilling 10 borings to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 50 feet and conducting 4 percolation tests at depths of 5 to 8 feet for evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the project site.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
1100 Olympic Drive, Suite 103 • Corona, CA 92881 • (951) 273-1011 • Fax: (951) 273-1003 11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 2
• Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. • Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of construction specifications.

Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions, recommendations, and findings of our investigation.

Environmental services, such as a chemical analysis of soil and groundwater for possible environmental contaminates, were not in our scope of services.

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
We understand that design of the proposed development is currently underway; structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are unavailable. On a preliminary basis, it is understood the development will include the construction of a new retail shopping center consisting of four retail/commercial buildings and trash enclosures. It is anticipated the structures will utilize conventional shallow foundations and concrete slab -on -grade construction. Footing loads are anticipated to be light to moderate. On -site paved areas, adjacent street improvements, and landscaping are also associated with the development.

In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable.

SITE LOCATION, SITE HISTORY AND SITE DESCRIPTION
The property site is irregular in shape and encompasses approximately 3%2 acres. The project site is located on the southwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Ramona Street in Bellflower, California.

The site is surrounded by residential houses and vacant land.

Site history was obtained by reviewing historical aerial photographs taken in 1952, 1963, 1972, 1994, 2004, 2010, 2016, 2017, and 2020. Review of the 1952 aerial photograph indicates that the project site consisted of buildings, a warehouse, and parking lots. The site was bordered by Ramona Street to the north, Bellflower Boulevard to the east, Cedar Street to the south, and residential developments to the west.

Review of the 1963 aerial photograph indicates that the project site conditions appeared to be relatively similar to that noted in the 1952 aerial photograph. Additional buildings were located within the western region of the site.

Review of the 1972 aerial photograph indicates that the project site conditions appeared to be relatively similar to that noted in the 1963 aerial photograph. A few of the buildings in the northern region of the site were replaced with new buildings.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 3
Review of the 1994 through 2016 aerial photographs indicate that the project site conditions appeared to be relatively similar to that noted in the 1972 aerial photograph.

Review of the 2017 and 2020 aerial photographs indicate that the developments at the project site had been demolished and the site had been cleared. Power poles were located within the site.

Presently, the site is predominately vacant. The site is surrounded by commercial buildings to the north and east, a mobile home park and commercial buildings to the south, and a residential development and auto service center to the west. The site is bordered by metal fencing along northern, eastern, and southern edges. The western edge of the site is bordered by a combination of metal and chain link fencing, a masonry wall, and a building. Power poles and overhead electrical lines trend north -south through the middle of the site, along the eastern and southern edges of the site, and along a portion of the western edge of the site. Buried utility lines associated with the existing, previous, and surrounding developments may be located within or along the edges of the site. The surface soils have a loose consistency. The site is relatively level with no major changes in grade.

GEOLOGIC SETTING
The subject site is located within the southwest portion of the Central Basin of the Los Angeles Coastal Plain, within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The Los Angeles Coastal Plain is situated between the Santa Monica Mountains to the northwest, the San Gabriel Mountains to the northeast, the Santa Ana Mountains to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the west and south. The Los Angeles Basin is dominated by northwest -trending faults and adjacent anticlinal uplifts. The intervening deep synclinal troughs are filled with poorly consolidated Upper Pleistocene and unconsolidated Holocene sediments. Tectonism of the region is dominated by the interaction of the East Pacific Plate and the North American Plate along a transform boundary.

The near -surface deposits in the vicinity of the subject site are indicated to be comprised of Holocene alluvial soft sand, silt, silty sand, and clay of distal fan deposits associated with active local alluvial systems.

The site is located in a seismically active area of Southern California. The nearest significant active fault is the Puente Hills Fault Zone, which is approximately 7.4 mile from the site. The Anaheim Fault Zone is located approximately 7.6 miles from the site. The Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone is located approximately 8.6 miles from the site. The area in consideration shows no mapped faults on -site according to maps prepared by the California Geologic Survey and published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). No evidence of surface faulting was observed on the property during our reconnaissance.

SEISMIC HAZARDS ZONES
In 1990, the California State Legislature passed the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act to protect public safety from the effects of strong shaking, liquefaction, landslides, or other ground failure, and other hazards caused by earthquakes. The Act requires that the State Geologist delineate various seismic hazards zones on Seismic Hazards Zones Maps. Specifically, the maps identify areas where soil liquefaction and Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 4
earthquake -induced landslides are most likely to occur. A site -specific geotechnical evaluation is required prior to permitting most urban developments within the mapped zones. The Act also requires sellers of real property within the zones to disclose this fact to potential buyers. The subject site is located on the State of California, Seismic Hazard Zones Map, Los Alamitos Quadrangle, dated March 25, 1999. The subject site is located in an area designated by the State of California as a Liquefaction Hazard Zone.

SEISMICITY AND LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
Seismicity is a general term relating to the abrupt release of accumulated strain energy in the rock materials of the earth's crust in a given geographical area. The recurrence of accumulation and subsequent release of strain have resulted in faults and fault systems. Fault patterns and density reflect relative degrees of regional stress through time, but do not necessarily indicate recent seismic activity; therefore, the degree of seismic risk must be determined or estimated by the seismic record in any given region. The Puente Hills, Anaheim, and Newport -Inglewood Faults are located approximately 7.4, 7.6, and 8.6 miles from the subject site, respectively.

Soil liquefaction is a state of soil particle suspension caused by a complete loss of strength when the effective stress drops to zero. Liquefaction normally occurs under saturated conditions in soils such as sand in which the strength is purely frictional. However, liquefaction has occurred in soils other than clean sand. Liquefaction usually occurs under vibratory conditions such as those induced by seismic events. To evaluate the liquefaction potential of the site, the following items were evaluated:
1) Soil type
2) Groundwater depth
3) Relative density
4) Initial confining pressure
5) Intensity and duration of ground shaking
The predominant soils within the project site consist of silty sand, sand, silty sand/sandy silt, clayey sand, sandy clay and sandy silt. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 35 feet below site grades at Boring No. 1 during our site investigation. Historic groundwater information indicates groundwater exists at depths on the order of 25 to 30 feet below site grades.

The potential for soil liquefaction during a seismic event was evaluated using the LIQUEFYPRO computer program (version 5.9d) developed by CivilTech Software. For the analysis, a maximum earthquake magnitude of 7.46 was used. A peak horizontal ground surface acceleration of 0.74g was considered conservative and appropriate for the liquefaction analysis. An estimated high groundwater depth of 25 feet was used for our analysis. The computer analysis indicates that soils above a depth of 25 feet are non -liquefiable due to the absence of groundwater. The soils below a depth of 25 feet have a slight to moderate potential for liquefaction under seismic shaking.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 5
The analysis indicates that the estimated total seismic induced settlement is less than 13/ inches.

Differential settlement caused by a seismic event is estimated to be less than 1 inch. The anticipated differential settlement is estimated over a horizontal distance of 100 feet.

FAULT RUPTURE HAZARD ZONES
The Alquist-Priolo Geologic Hazards Zones Act went into effect in March, 1973. Since that time, the Act has been amended 11 times (Hart, 2007). The purpose of the Act, as provided in California Geologic Survey (CGS) Special Publication 42 (SP 42), is to prohibit the location of most structures for human occupancy across the traces of active faults and to mitigate thereby the hazard of fault -rupture".

The Act was renamed the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1994, and at that time, the originally designated "Special Studies Zones" was renamed the "Earthquake Fault Zones." The subject site is located on the State of California, Seismic Hazard Zones Map, Los Alamitos Quadrangle. The site is not within a Fault -Rupture Hazard Zone. The Puente Hills, Anaheim, and Newport -Inglewood Faults are located approximately 7.4, 7.6, and 8.6 miles from the subject site, respectively.

OTHER HAZARDS
Rockfall, Landslide, Slope Instability, Debris Flow: The subject site is relatively flat and level. It is our understanding that there are no significant slopes proposed as part of the proposed development.

Provided the recommendations presented in this report are implemented into the design and construction of the anticipated development, rockfalls, landslides, slope instability, and debris flows are not anticipated to pose a hazard to the subject site.

Seiches: Seiches are large waves generated within enclosed bodies of water. The site is not located in close proximity to any lakes or reservoirs. As such, seiches are not anticipated to pose a hazard to the subject site.

Hydroconsolidation: The near surface soils encountered at the subject site were found to be medium dense to very dense. Provided remedial grading recommendations presented in this report are incorporated in the design and construction, hydroconsolidation is not anticipated to be a significant concern for the subject site.

FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
Subsurface soil conditions were explored by drilling 10 borings and 1 cone penetration test to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 50 feet below existing site grade, using a truck -mounted drill rig. A bulk subgrade sample was obtained from the site for laboratory R-value testing. In addition, 4 percolation tests were performed within the site at depths of 5 to 8 feet to evaluate the soils absorption characteristics. The approximate boring, bulk sample, and percolation locations are shown on the site plan. During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency and to obtain information regarding the engineering properties of the subsoils. Soil samples Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
1 ] 221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Centa)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 6
were retained for laboratory testing. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A.

Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation potential, R-value, and moisture - density relationships of the materials encountered. In addition, chemical tests were performed to evaluate the soil -cement reactivity. Details of the laboratory test program and results of the laboratory tests are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A.

SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in the geologic region of the site. In general, the upper soils predominately consisted of approximately 6 to 12 inches of loose silty sand. These soils are disturbed, have moderate strength characteristics, and are slightly compressible when saturated.

Below the loose surface soils, loose to dense silty sand, clayey sand, sand, silty sand/sandy silt, or sandy silt, and firm sandy clay were encountered. These soils contained varying amounts of gravel. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Penetration resistance ranged from 9 to 56 blows per foot. Dry densities ranged from 91 to 103 pcf. Representative soil samples consolidated approximately 1 and 1 %2 percent under a 2 ksf load when saturated.

Representative soil samples had angles of internal friction of 28 and 29 degrees. These soils extended to the depths of the borings.

For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A.

PERCOLATION TESTING
As requested, four percolation tests were performed within the site to evaluate the soils absorption characteristics. The percolation tests were performed at a depth of 5 to 8 feet below existing site grade.

The borings drilled at the site indicated the subsurface soil conditions consisted of loose to medium dense silty sand, sand, and silty sand/sandy silt.

Infiltration rates were determined using the results of open borehole infiltration testing performed at the subject site. The infiltration test results are shown in the following table. Detailed results of the percolation test and resulting infiltration rates are attached in tabular format.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 7
Test No.

Depth (feet)
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Soil Type
1 5

1.29 Silty Sand (SM)
2 8

4.08 Silty Sand (SM)
3 5

1.65 Silty Sand (SM)
4 8
1 5.61
Silty Sand (SM)
The soil infiltration rates are based on tests conducted with clean water. A factor of safety should be incorporated into the design of the infiltration system to compensate for these factors as determined appropriate by the designer. In addition, routine maintenance consisting of clearing the system of clogged soils and debris should be expected.

I" tDIOUI IWATKV I Do V
Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately following the drilling operations. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 35 feet below site grades during the site visit to the subject site. Based on a review of the Seismic Hazard Evaluation Report for the Los Alamitos Quadrangle, historic high groundwater depths for the vicinity of the subject site are estimated to be at depths on the order of 25 to 30 feet below ground surface.

It should be recognized that water table elevations may fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions, as well as other factors. Therefore, water level observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report.

SOIL CORROSIVITY
Corrosion tests were performed to evaluate the soil corrosivity to the buried structures. The tests consisted of minimum resistivity, sulfate content and chloride content, and the results of the tests are included as follows:

Parameter
Results
Test Method
Sulfate
246 ppm
CA 417
Min
Resistivity
1,100 ohm -cm
CA 643
Chloride
52 ppm
CA 422
pH Value

9.2 EPA 9045C
K�7►[�111.yI=1]if,Y�l_17� �[K�]�J�� 1 �1�1111 � ��]►f.� Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions, and recommendations.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Cuter)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 8
Administrative Summary
In brief, the subject site and soil conditions, with the exception of the loose surface soils, previous, existing, and surrounding developments, appear to be conducive to the development of the project. The surface soils have a loose consistency. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics and are highly compressible when saturated. Accordingly, it is recommended that the surface soils be recompacted. This compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation.

It is the fading of this firm that the proposed project will be safe from geotechnical hazards (i.e. landslide, settlement or slippage) and will not adversely affect adjacent properties, in compliance with Section 111 of the Los Angeles County Building Code, provided our recommendations are incorporated into the design and properly implemented during construction.

Fill material was not encountered in our borings. However, fill may be located between or beyond our borings. It is anticipated fill soils will consist of silty sands. The thickness and extent of fill material was determined based on limited test borings and visual observation. Verification of the extent of fill should be determined during site grading. It is recommended that fill soils that have not been properly compacted and certified be excavated and recompacted. Prior to backfilling, the bottom of the excavation should be observed by Krazan & Associates, Inc. to verify no additional removal is required.

Presently, the site is predominately vacant. Power poles and overhead electrical lines trend north -south through the middle of the site. The site was previously developed with several buildings. Associated with these developments may be buried structures, such as utility lines and irrigation lines that may extend into the project site. Demolition activities should include proper removal of any buried structures or loosely backfilled excavations encountered. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill. It is suspected that demolition activities of the existing structures will disturb the upper soils. After demolition activities, it is recommended that these disturbed soils be removed and/or recompacted. This compaction effort should stabilize the upper soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation.

Following stripping, fill removal operations and demolition activities, the exposed subgrade in building, exterior flatwork and pavement areas should be excavated to a depth of at least 24 inches from existing site grade or 12 inches below planned footing elevation, whichever is deeper, worked until uniform and free from large clods, moisture -conditioned as necessary and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Limits of recompaction should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond building areas and 2 feet beyond the edge of pavements or sidewalks. Prior to backfilling, the exposed subgrade should be proof -rolled and observed by Krazan & Associates, Inc. to verify stability. This compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation.

Sandy and gravelly soil conditions were encountered at the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavation. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy and gravelly soils.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Repon (Retail Shopping Ceata)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 9
After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. The proposed structure footings may be designed utilizing an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf for dead -plus -live loads. Footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches.

Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction
Based on our findings and historical records, it is not anticipated that groundwater will rise within the zone of structural influence or affect the construction of foundations and pavements for the project.

Information obtained from the California Seismic Hazard Report for the Los Alamitos Quadrangle indicates that historic groundwater has existed at depths of 25 to 30 feet below site grades.

If earthwork is performed during or soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade soils may become saturated, "pump," or not respond to densification techniques. Typical remedial measures include:
discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer materials; removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material; or mixing the soil with an approved lime or cement product. Our firm should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe the unstable subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations.

Seismic Considerations
Ground Shaking
Although ground rupture is not considered to be a major concern at the subject site, the site will likely be subject to at least one moderate to severe earthquake and associated seismic shaking during its lifetime, as well as periodic slight to moderate earthquakes. Some degree of structural damage due to stronger seismic shaking should be expected at the site, but the risk can be reduced through adherence to seismic design codes.

Seismic Induced Settlement
One of the most common phenomena during seismic shaking accompanying any earthquake is the induced settlement of loose unconsolidated soils. Based on site subsurface conditions and the moderate to high seismicity of the region, any loose fill materials at the site could be vulnerable to this potential hazard. However, this hazard can be mitigated by following the design and construction recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report.

Site Preparation
General site clearing should include removal of concrete; vegetation and existing utilities; and structures; including foundations; basement walls and floors; existing stockpiled soil; trees and associated root systems; rubble; rubbish; and any loose and/or saturated materials. Site stripping should extend to a minimum depth of 2 to 4 inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed.

Deeper stripping may be required in localized areas. These materials will not be suitable for reuse as Engineered Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-structural areas.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 10
Fill material was not encountered in our borings. However, fill may be located between or beyond our borings. It is anticipated fill soils will consist of silty sands. The thickness and extent of fill material was determined based on limited test borings and visual observation. Verification of the extent of fill should be determined during site grading. It is recommended that fill soils that have not been properly compacted and certified be excavated and recompacted. Prior to backfilling, the bottom of the excavation should be observed by Krazan & Associates, Inc. to verify no additional removal is required.

Presently, the site is predominately vacant. Power poles and overhead electrical lines trend north -south through the middle of the site. The site was previously developed with several buildings. Associated with these developments may be buried structures, such as utility lines, irrigation lines, septic systems, and water wells. Demolition activities should include proper removal of any buried structures. Any buried structures or loosely backfilled excavations encountered during construction should be properly removed and the resulting excavations backfilled. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below planned finish subgrade level should be cleaned to firm undisturbed soil, and backfilled with Engineered Fill. In general, any septic tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Soils Engineer. Water wells should be abandoned in accordance with county standards. Any other buried structures should be removed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer. Resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill.

Following stripping, fill removal, tree or root removal, and demolition activities, the exposed subgrade within proposed building, exterior flatwork, and pavement areas should be excavated to a depth of at least 24 inches from existing site grade or 12 inches below planned footing elevation, whichever is deeper, worked until uniform and free from large clods, moisture -conditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557.

Limits of recompaction should extend 5 feet beyond structural elements and 2 feet beyond flatwork and pavements. Prior to backfilling, the bottom of the excavation should be proof -rolled and observed by Krazan & Associates, Inc. to verify stability. Soft or pliant areas should be excavated to firm native ground.

It is recommended that any uncertified fill material encountered within pavement areas be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be moisture -conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. As an alternative, the Owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the Owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil be moisture -conditioned to a minimum of 2 percent above optimum moisture content and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 11
The upper soils, during wet winter months, become very moist due to the absorptive characteristics of the soil. Earthwork operations performed during winter months may encounter very moist unstable soils, which may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site winterization consisting of placement of aggregate base and protecting exposed soils during the construction phase should be performed.

A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Soils Engineer may reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork construction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Engineered Fill section.

Engineered Fill
The on -site, native soils are predominately silty sands, sands, silty sand/sandy silts, and sandy silts.

These soils contained varying amounts of gravel. These soils will be suitable for reuse as Engineered Fill, provided they are cleansed of excessive organics, debris, and fragments larger than 4 inches in maximum dimension.

The preferred materials specified for Engineered Fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of exposure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the construction phase should be the sole responsibility of the Contractor, since he has complete control of the project site at that time.

Imported Fill material should be predominately non -expansive granular material with a plasticity index less than 10 and an expansion index less than 15. Imported Fill should be free from rocks and clods greater than 4 inches in diameter. All Imported Fill material should be submitted to the Soils Engineer for approval at least 48 hours prior to delivery at the site.

Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture -conditioned as necessary, and compacted to achieve at least 90 percent maximum density as based on ASTM Test Method D1557.

Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable.

Drainage and Landscaping
The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. In accordance with Section 1804 of the 2019 California Building Code, it is recommended that the ground surface adjacent to foundations be sloped a minimum of 5 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet away from structures, or to an approved alternative means of drainage conveyance. Swales used for conveyance of drainage and located within 10 feet of foundations should be sloped a minimum of 2 percent. Impervious surfaces, such as pavement and Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 12
exterior concrete flatwork, within 10 feet of building foundations should be sloped a minimum of 1 percent away from the structure. Drainage gradients should be maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off -site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project.

Utility Trench Backfill
Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practices following OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a Contractor experienced in such work.

The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the Contractor. Traffic and vibration adjacent to trench walls should be reduced and cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of precipitation.

Utility trench backfill placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Pipe bedding should be in accordance with pipe manufacturer's recommendations.

The Contractor is responsible for removing all water sensitive soil from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The Contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction.

Foundations
After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. The proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on a minimum of 12 inches of Engineered Fill. Spread and continuous footings can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures:

Load
Allowable Loading
Dead Load Only
1,875 psf
Dead -Plus -Live Load
2,500 psf
Total Load, including wind or seismic loads
3,200 psf
The footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches, regardless of load.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 13
The total settlement associated with static loads is not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlement should be less than %2 inch across 30 feet. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction as the loads are applied. However, additional post -construction soil movement may occur if the foundation soils are flooded or saturated. Based on the soil liquefaction analysis performed within the site, the estimated total seismic -induced settlement is less than 1'/2 inches. Differential settlement caused by a seismic event is estimated to be less than 1 inch. The anticipated differential settlement is estimated over a horizontal distance of 100 feet.

Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.35 acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 325 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A 1/3 increase in the above value may be used for short duration, wind, or seismic loads.

Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork
In areas where moisture -sensitive floor coverings will be included or where moisture -sensitive materials will be stored, concrete slab -on -grade floors should be underlain by a water vapor retarder. The water vapor retarder should be installed in accordance with accepted engineering practice.

The exterior floors should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. All fills required to bring the building pads to grade should be Engineered Fills.

Moisture within the structure may be derived from water vapors, which were transformed from the moisture within the soils. This moisture vapor can travel through the vapor membrane and penetrate the slab -on -grade. This moisture vapor penetration can affect floor coverings and produce mold and mildew in the structure. To reduce moisture vapor intrusion, it is recommended that a vapor retarder be installed. It is recommended that the utility trenches within the structure be compacted, as specified in our report, to reduce the transmission of moisture through the utility trench backfill. Special attention to the immediate drainage and irrigation around the building is recommended. Positive drainage should be established away from the structure and should be maintained throughout the life of the structure.

Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to the structure. Over -irrigation within landscaped areas adjacent to the structure should not be performed. In addition, ventilation of the structure (i.e. ventilation fans) is recommended to reduce the accumulation of interior moisture.

Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls
Walls retaining horizontal backfill and capable of deflecting a minimum of 0.1 percent of its height at the top may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 40 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls that are incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at -rest pressure of 60 pounds per square foot per foot of depth.

Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non -expansive backfill material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1 Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 14
(horizontal to vertical) or flatter. The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of hydrostatic water pressures generated by infiltrating surface water that may accumulate behind the retaining walls; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations, or roadways.

During grading and backfill operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height, whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand -operated equipment ("whackers," vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill soils.

R-Value Test Results and Pavement Design
One R-value sample was obtained from the project site at the location shown on the attached site plan.

The sample was tested in accordance with the State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 301. The results of the test are as follows:

The test results are moderate and indicate fair subgrade support characteristics under dynamic traffic loads. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for various traffic indices.

Traffic Index
Asphaltic Concrete
Class II Aggregate Base*
Compacted Subgrade"

4.0 2.0"

5.011

12.0"

4.5 2.511

5.0"

12.0"

5.0 251

6.011

12.0"

5.5 3.011

6.0"

12.0"

6.0 3.0"

8.011

12.0"

6.5 3.5"

8.011

12.0"

7.0 4.0"

8.5"

12.0"

7.5 4.0"

10.0"

12.0"
* 95% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 or CAL 216 ** 90% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 or CAL 216 If traffic indices are not available, an estimated (typical value) index of 4.5 may be used for light automobile traffic, and an index of 7.0 may be used for light truck traffic.

The following recommendations are for light -duty and heavy-duty Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Wester United States
11221022 Updated Repon (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 15

PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT

LIGHT DUTY
Traffic Index
Portland Cement Concrete***
Class II Aggregate Base*
Compacted Subgrade"

4.5 5.0"

6.0"

12.0"

HEAVY DUTY
Traffic Index
Portland Cement Concrete***
Class H Aggregate Base*
Compacted Subgrade"

7.0 6.511

6.0" d

12.0"
* 95% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 or CAL 216 ** 90% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 or CAL 216 ***Minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi
It is recommended that any uncertified fill material encountered within pavement areas be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be moisture -conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. As an alternative, the Owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the Owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil be moisture -conditioned as necessary and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557.

Seismic Parameters — 2019 California Building Code
The Site Class per Section 1613 of the 2019 California Building Code (2019 CBC) and ASCE 7-16, Chapter 20 is based upon the site soil conditions. It is our opinion that a Site Class D is most consistent with the subject site soil conditions. For seismic design of the structures based on the seismic provisions of the 2019 CBC, we recommend the following parameters:

Seismic Item
Value
CBC Reference
Site Class
D
Section 1613.2.2
Site Coefficient Fa

1.000
Table 1613.2.3 (1)
S,

1.576
Section 1613.2.1
SMs

1.576
Section 1613.2.3
SDs

1.050
Section 1613.2.4
Site Coefficient F,,

1.736
Table 1613.2.3 (2)
S1

0.564
Section 1613.2.1
SMi

0.979
Section 1613.2.3
SD1

0.653
Section 1613.2.4
Ts

0.622
Section 1613.2
* Based on Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) Design Procedure being used.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 16
Soil Cement Reactivity
Excessive sulfate in either the soil or native water may result in an adverse reaction between the cement in concrete (or stucco) and the soil. HUD/FHA and CBC have developed criteria for evaluation of sulfate levels and how they relate to cement reactivity with soil and/or water.

Soil samples were obtained from the site and tested in accordance with State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 417. The sulfate concentrations detected in these soil samples were greater than 150 ppm (246 ppm) and exceed the maximum allowable values established by HUD/FHA and CBC. It is recommended that a Type lI cement be used within the concrete to compensate for sulfate reactivity with the cement.

Compacted Material Acceptance
Compaction specifications are not the only criteria for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. However, the compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. The numerical test results from the compaction test cannot be used to predict the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the stability of that material. The Soils Engineer has the option of rejecting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the required percent compaction is a fill which has been compacted with an in situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. This type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded.

Testing and Inspection
A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory fieldwork.

This activity is an integral part of our service, as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc. will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor.

LIMITATIONS
Soils Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences advance. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate and most current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to advancements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site, either due to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations, or possible changes in the proposed structure after the soils report is completed may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Centa)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 17
Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that 2 years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report.

Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations may be made.

The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Soils Engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations may be reviewed and re-evaluated.

This report is a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any Environmental Site Assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater, or atmosphere; or the presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed, are strictly for descriptive purposes and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment.

The geotechnical engineering information presented herein is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such information and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical engineering developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for the project outlined above and should not be used for any other sites.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Report (Retail Shopping Center-)

KA No. 112-21022
Page No. 18
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (951) 273-1011.

MKW/DRJ:ht
Respectfully submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Madison K. Weber, P.E.

Project Engineer
RCE No. 81935
a
2696 1
David P�v�� ManagingR.
�F OF CA�\�® RGE No
Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Updated Repon (Retail Shopping Center)

tl
Iran Wood Cor© os
Nine Gott College
Courses
0 .
eArtesia
Lit '..i H
•

SUBJECT SITE
aC.'ItSt G'
Mloytah Polk
N
W E
0 Scale: Date:

VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale April 2021
_- —
PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING Drawn by: Approved by: Marml. Am CENTER MW DJ m m�
BELLFLOWER BLVD AND Project No. Figure No.

Kmzan
RAMONA STREET 112-21022 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
1 BELLFLOWER,CALIFORNIA

--
P, G O O Q • t�.

IT2 B6 B5 IT3 B7 r■
� O
R I �.

B8 `
a
ITI O s
B3 B4 4 1
YYY 1 r ,
•1
�6
FB9 B2
I
• e t
B10 IT4
a ,� � CPT ❑

APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION

APPROXIMATE PERCOLATION/INFILTRATION TEST LOCATION
0 APPROXIMATE BULK SAMPLE LOCATION
❑ APPROXIMATE CPT LOCATION
N
W E
S

SITE MAP
Scale:

Date:

Not to Scale
May 2021
_-
.. m
1�mzm

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING
Drawn
Approved by:

CENTER
Im �
�.�
Project No.
112-21022
Figure No.
2 BELLFLOWER BLVD AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

RAMONA STREET

BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA

MAP EXPLANATION
ALOMT.FRIOLO EARTHQUAKE. FAULT ZONES
E.dhq-Re Fain! Zones
Z, Wundanes ire ddlrem dtf StigKNI-Sapmenle; the
+wuntlarres dc7M me mne erxdrepmzrg acave trans soar.
crratkWr a poxma tasand of sW etu+es trots wlaee tnutrep ar TA
Lota4ep SUM loaf MXUna as del&M1 d t, P10ac Reau—
Cane 8ecddn :E: f S:a? xnua cK rr0carrd.

Aot" Finn TmS
ieee FTAah omsldeted In nave 0e_n WNe Mim Holocme 1" and }D nave poaenpal 1. ue'tce ruvMc Saad We a: Batt ar'
___ T _ Rrd xRerc A2cursKyLocaletl;Lrrg Da9n tt 41acs o: ,4alla l:lne �n __ � Putple xt'ere Meralr4!�S'>ta LOcaGed: 8lwrt Dnsn ti @eck 6!8dra - ''- LM M orange xnzre Inteirrd;'il054ed Lts r, r%ast or zaud ape m .••�"•••... '{ Rose Ynerc r�craree; QLGr)'f?j MdkaAls eao3ticrr:HMrriahtr'.

E?earrl Cr & nlSlrodL U3rtindiCaEM rYYrar otear4i Watr
as^&IM eV for C ft d"13mmt timed Sl IS=aft!F

SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES
` Liq—M.6-Zones
AM3S worm n—"�anxcrn�r�oy�ccwrmre of fwr W%on. or local oea+a0e:a1.

J qea 1.2wal and yam«"" condIRMS In O.W a pnttnaHW

1. pennenMI aNuad dISM—A suS41 tbW rralgwon of d ftnea Fs •... FsrIXk Resau:ed Wd6IIeCNan 7Fa31ci stoup Mrr@+ttd
Ar Nste-andluoed LaMnede Zon
Mas es
aS canes pr_vkaa ocamrtce ut ta14:sli7e mow�n7, or#pcal e9acytaPNC, 2n"ca1. ae9tecMka! arrd sursudace waer cwnilMns Intlltabea pat;•ntla�'�or pem.anert arourN elsgxemena: sucn� nYtlaauct as dctnrn M Punk �ssasrcrs Coal 3ecdrn 2633�c4 would Oe r".fto.

Source: State of California Seismic Hazards Map, Los Alamitos Quadrangle

EARTHQUAKE ZONES OF

REQUIRED INVESTIGATION
MAP

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING
CENTER

BELLFLOWER BLVD AND

RAMONA STREET

BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA
Scale: Date:

Not to Scale April 2021
Drawn by:

Approved by:

MW
DJ
Project No.

Figure No.
112-21022
3 N
w E
IS
11110.11L. )ohm
MM—Kmzan

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

•
10 • SUBJECT SITE Q • •
• • l
i
•
1 l
30 •
f
• •
•
f
10 f
• Borehole Site r- - Jp ___f- Depth to ground water in feet Source: State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Report, Bellflower Quadrangle

HISTORICAL
Scale:

Date:

GROUNDWATER
Not to Scale
April 2021

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING
Drawn by:

Approved by:

CENTER
MW
DJ

BELLFLOWER BLVD AND
Project No.

Figure No.
112-21022
4 RAMONA STREET

BELLFLOWER,CALIFORNIA
N
W E
s
.� K=an

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

U(
+,w •i •yO� , f • ic�.

Q yyq ups
• ' Qoa FAUL1
QQa f: SUBJECT SITE 1
•�; ''.' Q; Qoa
:Jt O
noa '••
r M Q N• �� .,�, —Qoa

DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS
_ QUATERNARYOEPOSITS
83 Extensive marine and norimmine sand deposits,
generally near the coast or desert playas
O Alluvium, lake, playa, and terra:e deposits;
unconsolidated and semi-cvrosdt,daled
Sefecled large landslides
Qq � Glacial fill and moraines. Found at high elevations mostly '"— in thk Sierra Nevada and K.lamalh Mounlam3
9oF� Older alluv rr,, lake. playa .and terrace deposits OPc] Pleistocene andor Pliocene sandstone, shale, and
?)favet3 tlepeSlC& It+oSIIy Ia4scly �4nY61idatCU

QUATERNARY VOLCANIC ROCKS
Recent+ Holocene) volcanic 71uw rocks, minor pyroc asvr deposes
_. Recent (Holocene) pyroclastic and volcanic mucifAnv
tl,:pos,ls
1 Qualeu,aty w lcanic Pr v rocks, rriwx py4o0ast,c
depasds
i r�. 1 Quate=nary ppraclastic and volranIc mudflove deposits

SYMBOL EXPLANATION
Contact betvaen gaalog a units - approK;mately located
Faun 1rac*s - solid where well Willed tfashila wh@t4-,
oppioximetely l oosled or inferreddolled where concealed. and Guened where continuation or existence a uncelain flail did liar on dovinthrown 6100 (relAtive 01 epeY/renl) Anowti Yndicale direction of lateral movement Ireiatve orappa*entj
Trrost 14,)x lbarbs on upprl pliffep
Regrinaslake and d!n df stratbeo rocks
Reg�ona3 str ye and dip of stratified rocks {overturaedl Antichrist told
syrs clinal told
Manocw* roll
Source: Department of Conservation: Geologic Map of California, 2010

GEOLOGIC MAP

PROPOSED RETAIL SHOPPING
CENTER

BELLFLOWER BLVD AND

RAMONA STREET

BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA
Scale:

Date:

Not to Scale
April 2021
Drawn by:

Approved by:

MW
No.

DJ
Project
Figure No.
112-21022
5 a�

GEOTE HNICAL ENGINEERING
N -

APPENDIX A

FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
Field Investigation
Appendix A
Page A.1
The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Ten 5%2-inch diameter exploratory borings and one cone penetration test (CPT) were advanced. The boring and CPT locations are shown on the site plan.

The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

Modified standard penetration tests and standard penetration tests were performed at selected depths.

These tests represent the resistance to driving a 2'/s-inch and 1 %2-inch diameter split barrel sampler, respectively. The driving energy was provided by a hammer weighing 140 pounds falling 30 inches.

Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained while performing this test. Bag samples of the disturbed soil were obtained from the auger cuttings. The modified standard penetration tests are identified in the sample type on the boring logs with a full shaded in block. The standard penetration tests are identified in the sample type on the boring logs with half of the block shaded. All samples were returned to our Corona laboratory for evaluation.

Laboratory Investigation
The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered.

In -situ moisture content, dry density, consolidation, direct shear, and sieve analysis tests were completed for the undisturbed samples representative of the subsurface material. R-value tests were completed for select bag samples obtained from the auger cuttings. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material.

The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL CHART

COARSE -GRAINED SOILS
(more than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size.) Clean Gravels (Less than 5% fines)
GW
Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand
mixtures, little or no fines

GRAVELS
GP
Poorly -graded gravels, gravel -sand
mixtures, little or no fines
More than 50% ,o
of coarse •o
fraction larger
than No. 4
Gravels with fines (More than 12% fines)
sieve size
GM
Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures
GC
Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay
mixtures
Clean Sands Less than 5% fines
SW
Well -graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines
SANDS
Sp
Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines
50% or more
of coarse
fraction smaller
than No. 4
Sands with fines More than 12% fines
sieve size
SM
Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures
SC
Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures

FINE-GRAINED SOILS
(50% or more of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size.) Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock
SILTS
AND
ML
flour, silty of clayey fine sands or clayey
silts with slight plasticity
Inorganic clays of low to medium
CLAYS
Liquid limit
less than
CL
plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays,
silty clays, lean clays
50%
OL
Organic silts and organic silty clays of
low plasticity
Inorganic silts, micaceous or
SILTS
MH
diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils,
elastic silts
AND
CLAYS
Liquid limit
CH
Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat
clays
50%
OH
Organic clays of medium to high
plasticity, organic silts
or greater
HIGHLY

ORGANIC
'','
o PT
Peat and other highly organic soils
SOILS

CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION
Description Blows per Foot
Granular Soils
Very Loose
65 Cohesive Soils
Very Soft
40 GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION
Grain Type
Standard Sieve Size
Grain Size in
Millimeters
Boulders
Above 12 inches
Above 305
Cobbles
12 to 13 inches
305 to 76.2
Gravel
3 inches to No. 4

76.2 to 4.76
Coarse -grained
3 to 3/ inches

76.2 to 19.1
Fine-grained
% inches to No. 4

19.1 to 4.76
Sand
No. 4 to No. 200

4.76 to 0.074
Coarse -grained
No. 4 to No. 10

4.76 to 2.00
Medium -grained
No. 10 to No. 40

2.00 to 0.042
Fine-grained
No. 40 to No. 200

0.042 to 0.074
Silt and Clay
Below No. 200
Below 0.074

PLASTICITY CHART
60 MENEEMENNS
50 40
w
a

EMEMENNAF
?
30 NOMMEMMEN
t�
20 FmoopmApipmpAmoomm
g10
a
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
LIQUID LIMIT (LL) (%}

Log of Boring B1
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> 35 Feet Initial: 35 Feet
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-1
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: 35 Feet
o
cn

SUBSURFACE PROFILE
Description
g
C
o
SAMPLE
2 m
Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60
Water Content (%)
10 20 30 40
0 Ground Surface
2 4
6 8
10 _
12 14
16 18
20 SILTY SAND (SM)
Loose, coarse- to fine-grained with
GRAVEL; brown, dry
Medium dense below 12 inches
Medium dense, fine- to coarse -grained;
brown, damp

SILTY SAND/SANDY SILT (SM/ML)
Medium dense, fine- to coarse -grained;
brown, moist

SILTY SAND (SM)
Medium dense, fine- to coarse -grained;
brown, moist
r

92.2 2.9
16 ■

99.2 21.8

14.9 14
■
14 ■
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75 Krazan and Associates
Driller: One Way Drilling
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/ Inches
Elevation: 50 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 3

Log of Boring B1
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> 35 Feet Initial: 35 Feet
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Krazan and Associates
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-1
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: 35 Feet
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/2 Inches
Driller: One Way Drilling
Elevation: 50 Feet
Sheet: 2 of 3

Log of Boring B1
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Log of Boring B2
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-2
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
o

SUBSURFACE PROFILE
Description
Ground Surface

SILTY SAND (SAI)
Loose, fine-grained; brown, moist
Medium dense below 10 feet
Water not encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
SAMPLE
CL
m
Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60
Water Content (%)
10 20 30 40
o
2 4
6 8
10 12
14 16 -
18 20 -
g
4 c
Q)
o
o
o
P
U)

92.1 8.4
15 ■

96.5 8.8
23 5.8
23 ■

33.9 14
■
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Driller: One Way Drilling
Krazan and Associates
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/2 Inches
Elevation: 20 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B3
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75 Krazan and Associates
Driller: One Way Drilling
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-3
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 51/2 Inches
Elevation: 10 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B4
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Krazan and Associates
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-4
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/2 Inches
Driller: One Way Drilling
Elevation: 10 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B5
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center Project No: 112-21022 Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc. Figure No.: A-5
Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Logged By: Angel Menchaca Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A At Completion: N/A

SUBSURFACE PROFILE
Description
Ground Surface

SILTY SAND (SM)
Loose, fine-grained; brown, moist
Medium dense below 10 feet
Water not encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
SAMPLE
$
m
Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60
Water Content (%)
10 20 30 40
O
a
a
z
c
N
Z
3 °
T
2 4
6 8
10 12
14 16
18 20
102.1

16.0 11
■
100.2

6.4 23
■

6.2 12
■

33.9 15
■
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Krazan and Associates
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/2 Inches
Driller: One Way Drilling
Elevation: 20 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B6
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75 Krazan and Associates
Driller: One Way Drilling
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-6
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/z Inches
Elevation: 10 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B7
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Krazan and Associates
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-7
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5'/2 Inches
Driller: One Way Drilling
Elevation: 10 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B8
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center Project No: 112-21022 Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc. Figure No.: A-8
Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Logged By: Angel Menchaca Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A At Completion: N/A

SUBSURFACE PROFILE
SAMPLE
m
Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60
Water Content (%)
10 20 30 40
o
Description
�-
c
o
�
�°
2 4
6 8
10 12
14 -
16 18
20-
G
Ground Surface

SILTY SAND (SM)
Loose, fine-grained; brown, moist
Medium dense below 10 feet
Water not encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
103.3

12.5 15
■

93.6 7.2
20 ■

4.4 18
■

34.3 11
■
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Driller: One Way Drilling
Krazan and Associates
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5% Inches
Elevation: 20 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B9
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75
Krazan and Associates
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-9
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5% Inches
Driller: One Way Drilling
Elevation: 20 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

Log of Boring B1O
Project: Bellflower Boulevard Shopping Center
Client: SBH Real Estate Group, Inc.

Location: 17617 Bellflower Boulevard, Bellflower, California Depth to Water> Not Encountered Initial: N/A
Drill Method: Hollow Stem
Drill Rig: CME 75 Krazan and Associates
Driller: One Way Drilling
Project No: 112-21022
Figure No.: A-10
Logged By: Angel Menchaca
At Completion: N/A
Drill Date: 3-17-21
Hole Size: 5% Inches
Elevation: 10 Feet
Sheet: 1 of 1

OS
C
W
d
C
+
Im
C
Eo
C
O
u
W
v O
C � �
OS
C
05 c
G1
c v
o
�a
t
0 d
O ON Y
O 3
t >
Y V 33
_
d
00 V1
m
.v
H a
N V
a i
3 c
C �
N �
W
Y m
x
�o
CL
L d'
Z3 6C55 C555;g.. �._ In rn��n �sc�c� ES U5i �c� in in 6 u c��0 a&W in in rn Urim �5 �c3sin 6 in L o0co
t QU)
N
O
O N Q 10 CO O N Q 40 00 O N Q �G (O O N Q t0 0o O N Q l0 f0 O N Q �O ti rl rl r1 'i N N N N N M M M M M -It Q Q 13.
m Ln m m
(74) 41daa
Lq
00 rl
Q
0 M
N
0 O N Q 10 DJ O N Q tp OO O N Q 0 w O N Q 0 w O N Q w m O N Q 0 N N N N N M M M m M Q Q Q Q Q 0 0 M Uf
(11) 43dad
N
a
Gl
O L
7 in
v
o L
a
4 N
O N Q t0 0] O N Q tp w O N Q 0 w O N Q 0 w O N Q 0 w O N Q �o � N m M M M m Q Q Q Q Q l m m 111
(�) yadaa
Ln
a
M
c
O
N u
li
0 O N Q �G GO O N Q tp W O N Q t0 GG O N Q W O N Q b ro O N Q N N N N N M M M m M Q Q Q Q Q Ln VI Ln W
Vf
(43) 4ada4
0 Ln
0 O N Q tD W O N Q t0 00 O N Q t0 00 O N Q �O 00 O N Q N GP O N Q tD

Consolidation Test
Project No Boring No. & Depth Date Soil Classification 1 11221022 B-1 @ 5' 3/29l20211 SP

0.1 0.00

2.00 3,00

4.00 6.00

7.00 8.00

9.00 10.00
Load in Kips per Square Foot
1 10 100
Krazan Testing Laboratory

Consolidation Test
Project No
Boring No. & Depth
Date
Soil Classification
11221022
B-1 @ 10'
3/29/2021
SM/ML

0.1 0.00
I 1.00
f
i 2.00

3.00 7.00
Load in Kips per Square Foot
1 10
% Consolidation @ 21(sf: 1.3
i
\
\
\ I i
_ I
i
' I
it
4 1
k
j
I
I I
I
I�
I
100
Kraza n Testing Laboratory

Shear. Strength Diagram (Direct Shear)
ASTM D - 30801 AASHTO T - 236
Project Number
Boring No. & Depth
Soil Type
Date
11221022
B-1 5'
S P
3/26/2021

2.00 Y
t
a+
C
41 2.0
Norma! Load, Ksi

3.0 I
Krazan Testing Laboratory

Shear Strength Diagram (Direct Shear)
ASTM D - 3080 I AASHTO T - 236
Project Number
Boring No. & Depth
Soil Type
Date
11221022
B-8 5'
SM
3/26/2021

3.00 w. 2.00

1.00 0.00

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
Normal Load, Ksf
Krazan Testing Laboratory
N

JNISSVd
1N3083d
o
�
o a
rn �
o
�
o
m
O
'�
O
v
o
M
0 �
0 �
0 or
o I
Cl
a.

U
O
cu
e
-
---
0 a
T
O
ik
m
d
co
N
E
fm
o �
cu
t
�p1
t
a
'
c
Q L
E E � =
cc'y 7
z Z N N
O O M
aa_cnCl)
3 ONiSSW tRt3�213d
� O O O O O O O O O p
O rn co N. cOD MCD 0
N O
O
t --
M
�
I
N_
i
jj
I A
t
t�
U
�
f
o
j
to
o
f
0 i
O
_
t3
=
�
R
U
c
N
in
a
!
W
O
e
�0
IV)d
'C
�
!
C
1 0
a
121
V
ff
I
1 V
C
U
0 0
i
N N O
0 N V
N
00�(nC0
C
` p L
! 0-0
C
i C E
cu
zZ cnZ
N U o.

E
�acnco
{4

JNISSVd 1N30N3d
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Off] N (c't M N 0
w o O 0-
0 0
d
0 V
e
LL
I)
U
rn
c
�
N
'
R
�
C
� �
I
N
O
f
_
a
N
LO
6 r
� N
m
N 22 r
C '
IL
cn r (n cn
A
!;
EE�E
C
Z z U)
avi a�i V E
Idliin(n
7A

0 N
N
m
.E
a)
O
y
m
m
JNISSbd
1N33M3d
o
0 0
m
0 co r-
0 0
co LO
0 'w
0 0
m
0 N
0 6
0 b �
C.
i
i A
is
i
1 0
ti
0 �
tl1 IL
._
fA
�
U
7 1./
G
0 V
U-
0 V
0 11'
C
L Q L
M
E E 0 E
m = •(A

Z Z N Z
.5 u c6 N
N U CL
E
0 M
an u)co
q

JNISSW lNR3a3d
0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 C. 0
0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0
.- m 0 n (O m -It m N O
o
0 o j
A
l
U
o
I
'rn
,
j
0 a
a)N
C--o N
m U) m
C
N -0
E E a«V- E
pzz tnz
! . y m v
�(Ur
O ° o m
a. m cn cn

nAlIccda I Na')MMA
0 0
O
0 �
0 �
0 � Cab
0 �
0 0
�f
0 M
0 N
0 �
0 �
OCD
O
v
0 - o
0 A
S
#
p
of
E
g
C
-- -
N
A
o
d
Z
{
-
y -�
r`
d
j
I
m
�
�
!
k
M �
f � j
d [h
.G
V
s-=
_C
y N
0 c
'c
a
O
d
d
4p
O
o
a
21 C
N -0
E E w
[6 7 3
ZZ tpz
.� m 0

N N U E
O .

C a- co co
A

JNISSVd IN33213d
a
O O O O Cl O O O O C
12 0 co h CO LO V m N C
16 e
0 0
0 0
co
N
Gl
E
Z
k N
P
Y �
v
c
jj C6
S =
N
QL1
C7
rC
C
w
m
G
"c
a
O
t �
m
Trig
o
I I
i 'u'
e
w
E
LL
cc
�
U
N
�O
(0
�;
CO)
10 D
0 V
o
N N 4-'
O C,,
CO — m
T
(D
C
�j
E 4
m w
U CL
0 a) aD
I=
oU=E
aCLcncn

ONISM
IN33113d
a
0 0
0 0
o
a
o
0 0
0 07
W
r- c0
LO
-e
CO
N
O
O
O
L
0 i
o
I
T
0 O
0 04
4b
_
O
12 -
d
E
I
�
V
-
c
v�
---
V3
it
--
e
tC �
6 Lm
tiJ as
V
� N
3 �
�
6 a
1 �
cc
s
cn
N
t
C
N
I
N
�
C
1 I + O
O
(D
C
` O
N S� m 17
E E w
m cn
Z Z cA z
U E
O O 'O c6
aacncn
3 T
O
O
4b
M
Lo
d
a
E
m
z
v
v
c
Q
N
N
U
c-C
C
c
Q
Q
QY
Fi
i
JNISSVd 1N33H3d
o
^ O O O 4 O O O O O y
VTOOi OON � Nw�CO M O
O "
O
O
o
j 0
Ic
o
C
a, a
E E
zz v,z
as as U

O O O M
O.QL(n(n
F;y

DNISSVd 1N30HEld
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ci 0 oro o CD o le m cm o cir
0 o
o
s�
V
O
o
0 6
0 m
.o
E
Z
a
a>
V3
c
m
N
N
La)
U
CP
c
m
n
O
(D
a
�
O Ln
O
N
CV
m — (n m
G
O
CD_Q m -0
E E
Z '7 N
a) mU o
o'oom
CLa`cnto
F
I�

Project Number
Project Name
Date
Sample Number
Sample Location/Depth
Atterbera Limits Determination
ASTM D - 4318
11221022
Bellflower Shopping Center
5/21 /2021
20'
B-1 @ 20'
Run Number
Plastic Limit
Li uid Limit
1 2
3 1
2 3
Weight of Wet Soil & Tare

35.40 38.41

41.30 33.14

36.84 39.41
Weight of Dry Soil & Tare

31.12 32.54

34.51 28.41

30.51 32.14
Weight of water

4.28 5.87

6.79 4.73

6.33 7.27
Weight of Tare

11.13 11.18

11.21 11.18

11.20 11.13
Weight of Dry Soil

19.99 21.36

23.30 17.23

19.31 21.01
Water Content

21.4 27.5
1 29.1

27.5 32.8

34.6 Number of Blows
13 15
18 t,iaSIIC Limit : Zb.U7 Liquid Limit : 44.81
Plasticity Index 18.80
Classification of . 30
0001
U
F
Q
a OH
20 - or
MH
10 OL or

CL-M L M L
ML I X
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
LIQUID LIMIT, %
Krazan Testing Laboratory

Project Number
Project Name
Date
Sample Number
Sample Location/Depth
Atterbera Limits Determination
ASTM D - 4318
11221022
Bellflower Shopping Center
5/21 /2021
30'
B-1 @ 30'
Run Number
Plastic Limit
Li uid Limit
1 2
3 1
2 3
Weight of Wet Soil & Tare

26.14 29.41

33.41 27.41

30.12 34.74
Weight of Dry Soil & Tare

24.12 26.11

28.57 23.84

25.21 28.11
Weight of water

2.02 3.30

4.84 3.57

4.91 6.63
Weight of Tare

11.20 11.20

11.34 11.20

11.26 11.24
Weight of Dry Soil

12.92 14.91
1 17.23

12.64 13.95

16.87 Water Content

15.6 22.1 1

28.1 28.2

35.2 39.3
Number of Blows
23 29
30 Plastic Limit : 21.95 Liquid Limit : 30.90
Plasticity Index 8.95
Classification of .30 -- --
F-
c�
y
a
IL OH
20 - or
MH
10 OL or

CL-M L M L
ML
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
LIQUID LIMIT, %
Krazan Testing Laboratory

Project Number
Project Name
Date
Sample Number
Sample Location/Depth
Atterberg Limits Determination
ASTM D - 4318
11221022
Bellflower Shopping Center
5/21 /2021
40'
B-1 @ 40'
Run Number
Plastic Limit
Liquid Limit
1 2
3 1
2 3
Weight of Wet Soil & Tare

37.41 31.12

33.44 27.74

31.62 27.86
Weight of Dry Soil & Tare

33.50 28.62

30.55 24.52

28.60 25.10
Weight of water

3.91 2.50

2.89 3.22

3.02 2.76
Weight of Tare

11.13 11.24

15.30 11.20

13.96 10.97
Weight of Dry Soil

22.37 1 17.38
1 15.25

13.32 14.64

14.13 Water Content

17.5 14.4
1 19.0

24.2 20.6

19.5 Number of Blows
16 22
27 Plastic Limit : 16.94 Liquid Limit : 20.02
Plasticity Index 3.08
Classification of < #40 ML
Unified Soil Classification ML
60 50
CH
Krazan Testing Laboratory

R - VALUE TEST
ASTM D - 28441 CAL 301
Project Number 11221022
Project Name Proposed Retail Bellflower
Date 4/8/2021
Sample Location/Curve Number B-2 @ 0-3'
Soil Classification SM
TEST
A
B
C
Percent Moisture @ Compaction, %

15.7 16.5

16.2 Dry Density, Ibm/cu.ft.
115.3
116.8
115.8
Exudation Pressure, psi
210
350
740
Expansion Pressure, (Dial Reading.)
0 0
0 Ex anion Pressure, psf
0 0
0 Resistance Value R
25 35
40 I
NIEMEN
EMONN�':EMMOMMMEME
IMEN
eu
Krazan Testing Laboratory

APPENDIX B

EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS

GENERAL
Appendix B
Page B.1
When the text of the report conflicts with the general specifications in this appendix, the recommendations in the report have precedence.

SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans, and disposal of excess materials.

PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative of Krazan and Associates, Inc., hereinafter known as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified by the project Civil Engineer.

Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer or project Architect.

No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least 2 working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork.

The Contractor agrees that he shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the sole negligence of the Owner or the Engineers.

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to a density not less than 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 or CAL-216, as specified in the technical portion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
1 ] 221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

Appendix B
Page B.2
SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report.

The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the Contract documents for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work.

DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or off -site if caused by the Contractor's operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work.

SITE PREPARATION
Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill.

CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious or otherwise unsuitable. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site.

Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet and to such an extent which would permit removal of all roots larger than 1 inch. Tree roots removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper 11/2 feet of the ground surface. Backfill of tree root excavations should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials shall not be permitted.

SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads shall be prepared as outlined above, excavated/scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture -conditioned as necessary, and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction.

Loose soil areas, areas of uncertified fill, and/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture -conditioned as necessary and recompacted to 90 percent relative compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill materials. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material.

EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. All over -excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

Appendix B
Page B.3
FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetation or other deleterious matter as determined by the Soils Engineer.

PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer.

Both cut and fill areas shall be surface -compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance.

SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

Appendix C
Page C.1

APPENDIX C

PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS

1. DEFINITIONS - The term "pavement" shall include asphaltic concrete surfacing, untreated aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed.

The term "Standard Specifications": hereinafter referred to is the 2018 Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and the "Materials Manual" is the Materials Manual of Testing and Control Procedures, State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways. The term "relative compaction" refers to the field density expressed as a percentage of the maximum laboratory density as defined in the applicable tests outlined in the Materials Manual.

2. SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools, and equipment necessary for, and reasonably incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically noted as "Work Not Included."

3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the plans. The upper 12 inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses.

4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base material shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate base material shall conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material, 1'V2 inches maximum size. The aggregate base material shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 26 of the Standard Specifications. The aggregate base material shall be spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of aggregate material course shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. The aggregate base material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent.

5. AGGREGATE SUBBASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate subbase material shall conform to the requirements of Section 25 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material. The aggregate subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent, and it shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 25 of the Standard Specifications. Each layer of aggregate subbase shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

Appendix B
Page B.3

6. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and compacted on a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades and dimensions shown on the plans.

The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be PG 64-10. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, %2 inch maximum size, medium grading and shall conform to the requirements set forth in Section 39 of the Standard Specifications. The drying, proportioning and mixing of the materials shall conform to Section

39. The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment and spreading and compacting mixture shall conform to the applicable chapters of Section 39, with the exception that no surface course shall be placed when the atmospheric temperature is below 50' F. The surfacing shall be rolled with a combination of steel wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in Section 39-6. The surface course shall be placed with an approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine.

7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall conform to and be applied in accordance with the requirements of Section 37.

Krazan & Associates, Inc.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
11221022 Revised Report (Retail Shopping Center)

Bellflower City CouncilApril 27, 2026

Bellflower City Council
April 27, 2026