Industry City Council
June 10, 2025

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA 2018 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
SYSCO  LOS  ANGELES  INC 20701 CURRIER RD
CULINARY  RESOURCE  CTR 20701 CURRIER RD
P  I  MFG  CORP 20732 CURRIER RD
TEKCOM 20732 CURRIER RD
MOOSE  CREEK  INC 20801 CURRIER RD
GEORGE  RAIDER  PALLET  &  TRNSPRT 20809 CURRIER RD
SO-CAL  PALLETS  CO 20809 CURRIER RD
ISLAND  PACIFIC  ENTERPRISES  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 100
KOLAY  FLOORING  INTL  LLC 20819 CURRIER RD
MCURE  HEALTH  SOLUTIONS 20819 CURRIER RD 200
CTS  GLOBAL  SUPL  CHAIN  SLTN 20819 CURRIER RD
ISLAND  PACIFIC  SUPERMARKET 20819 CURRIER RD 100
TIEN  NHIEU 20819 CURRIER RD
RHINO  LININGS 20819 CURRIER RD
SODERBERG  MANUFACTURING  CO  INC 20821 CURRIER RD
2015 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
SYSCO  LOS  ANGELES  INC 20701 CURRIER RD
CLEMSON  DISTRIBUTION 20722 CURRIER RD
TEKCOM 20732 CURRIER RD
P  I  MFG  CORP 20732 CURRIER RD
MOSE  CREEK  INC 20801 CURRIER RD
GEORGE  RAIDER  PALLET  &  TRNSPRT 20809 CURRIER RD
SO-CAL  PALLETS  CO 20809 CURRIER RD
TIEN  NHIEU 20819 CURRIER RD
TRADENET  ENTERPRISE  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 500
SOL  &  FELIZ  INC 20819 CURRIER RD
CTS  GLOBAL  SUPL  CHAIN  SLTN 20819 CURRIER RD
FUN  CREATION  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 300
ISLAND  PACIFIC  ENTERPRISES  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 100
VANTAGE  LED 20819 CURRIER RD 500
CURRIER  ROAD  DEVELOPMENT  INC 20819 CURRIER RD
TRADENET  ENTERPRISE  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 500
OCEAN  INTERFACE  CO 20819 CURRIER RD 400
TRICO  SOURCES  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 200
FUN  CREATION  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 300
J  J  B  UNLIMITED  INC 20819 CURRIER RD
SODERBERG  MANUFACTURING  CO  INC 20821 CURRIER RD
2010 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
DANIEL  HAAG 20701 CURRIER RD
BILL  CHANG 20732 CURRIER RD
CHRIS  LI 20801 CURRIER RD
ROOFING  SUPPLY  GROUP 20805 CURRIER RD
GEORGE  RAIDER 20809 CURRIER RD
CURRIER  ROAD  DEVELOPMENT  INC 20819 CURRIER RD
CHRIS  MA 20819 CURRIER RD 500
FUN  CREATION  INC 20819 CURRIER RD 300

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA CHUCK  CHEN 20819 CURRIER RD 400
VANTAGE  SIGNS 20819 CURRIER RD 500
KATHLEEN  SODERBERG 20821 CURRIER RD
RICK  SODERBERG 20821 CURRIER RD
2006 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
Daniel  Haag 20701 CURRIER RD
Bill  Chang 20732 CURRIER RD
Chris  Li 20801 CURRIER RD
Scott  DE  Line 20805 CURRIER RD
INSPIRE  ELECTRONICS 20819 CURRIER RD
Chuck  Chen 20819 CURRIER RD STE 400
CURRIER  ROAD  DEVELOPMENT  INC 20819 CURRIER RD
2002 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
Sysco  Food  Svc  of  Los  Angeles 20701 Currier Rd
Tekcom 20732 Currier Rd
P  I  Mfg  Corp 20732 Currier Rd
Eagle  Accessories 20809 Currier Rd
So-Cal  Pallets  CO 20809 Currier Rd
Ramirez  Construction 20815 Currier Rd
Mario  Cardenas  Logistics 20815 Currier Rd
1998 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
Sysco  Continental 20701 Currier Rd
Soderberg  Mfg  CO  Inc 20821 Currier Rd

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: East San Gabriel Valley Criss-Cross Directory
STREET: 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1991
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1982

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1977

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1967

Subject Street Findings 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: 20701-20821 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1963

Adjoining Street Findings S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
2018: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
DEL  PASO  HIGH  SCHOOL 476 S LEMON AVE
CONFUCIUS  CHINESE  LANGUAGE 476 S LEMON AVE
2015: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
DEL  PASO  HIGH  SCHOOL 476 S LEMON AVE
CONFUCIUS  CHINESE  LANGUAGE 476 S LEMON AVE
2010: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
DEL  PASO  HIGH  SCHOOL 476 S LEMON AVE
2006: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
DEL  PASO  HIGH  SCHOOL 476 S LEMON AVE
2002: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
Del  Paso  High  School 476 S Lemon Ave
Walnut  Valley  Educators  Assn 476 S Lemon Ave
Funshine  Preschool-Walnut  Vly 476 S Lemon Ave
1998: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
Del  Paso  High  School  Independent  Study 476 S Lemon Ave Del  Paso  High  School  Child  Care 476 S Lemon Ave
Funshine  Preschool  Walnut  Valley  Recreation 476 S Lemon Ave Walnut  Valley  Recreation  Program  Castle
Rock  Fun  Club
476 S Lemon Ave
Del  Paso  High  School 476 S Lemon Ave
Walnut  Valley  Educators  Assn 476 S Lemon Ave
Walnut  Valley  Recreation  Program  Maple  Hill
Fun  Club
476 S Lemon Ave

Adjoining Street Findings S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: East San Gabriel Valley Criss-Cross Directory
STREET: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1991
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1982
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory

Adjoining Street Findings S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
STREET: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1977
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1967
IMAGE: 1 of 1
SOURCE: Pomona Street Address Directory
STREET: S Lemon Ave, Walnut, CA
YEAR: 1963

This page intentionally left blank

Historical Aerial
Photo Report |2022
Order Number: 70959
Report Generated: 04/28/2022
Project Name: 20701 Currier Road
Project Number: D202200358
Currier Road Phase I
20701 Currier Rd
Walnut, CA, 91789
2 Corporate Dr
Suite 450
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 866-211-2028
www.envirositecorp.com

Historical Aerial Photo Report 2022
Envirosite’s Historical Aerial Photo Report is designed to assist in evaluating a subject property resulting from past activities. Envirosite’s Historical Aerial Photo Report includes a search of available historical aerial photographs, dating back to the 1930s, or earliest available photographs.

ENVIROSITE SEARCHED SOURCES
SUBJECT PROPERTY:

Currier Road Phase I
20701 Currier Rd
Walnut, CA, 91789
YEAR:
1928
1938
1946
1947
1949
1952
1960
1964
1966
1968
1971
1972
1974
1976
1977
1979
1980
1982
1983
1985
1988
1989
1994
1995
2002
2007
2009
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
SCALE:
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 500'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 500'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 1,000'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
1" = 500'
SOURCE:

U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
U.S.G.S
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
U.S.G.S
U.S.G.S
U.S.D.A
U.S.G.S
U.S.G.S
U.S.G.S
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
U.S.G.S
U.S.G.S
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
NHAP
NHAP
U.S.D.A
U.S.D.A
DOQ
DOQ
U.S.D.A
NAIP
NAIP
NAIP
NAIP
NAIP
NAIP
NAIP
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
All information contained in this report are based on data available from various public, government and other sources and are based upon the best data available from those sources. The information available in this report may be available from other sources and is not exclusive or the exclusive property of Envirosite Corporation.

NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY USER AND Envirosite assumes no liability for faulty or inaccurate information. The Reports may utilize a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Envirosite. Envirosite cannot, and does not assure, warrant, guarantee or assume any liability for the correctness, comprehensiveness, timeliness or completeness of any of such information, nor is the information in any Report to be construed as legal advice with respect to environmental risks associated with any property. Envirosite shall not be liable to anyone for any claims, causes of action, suits, damages, losses, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and costs) arising out of or caused by this report regardless of the acts, errors or omissions, or negligence of Envirosite. Any damages shall be limited to the purchase price of the report.

Purchaser of the report accepts the report “As Is”. The report is intended only to provide information only and should not be considered as providing any legal advice, prediction, forecast, or fact as to the environmental risk for any specific property. Reports are proprietary to Envirosite, and contain copyrighted material and trademarks of Envirosite. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. All rights of Envirosite as to the Reports are reserved.

Subject Cannot Be Centered FLIGHT YEAR:
1928
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1938
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1946
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1947
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1949
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1952
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1960
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1964
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1966
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1968
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1971
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1972
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1974
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1976
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1977
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1979
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1980
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1982
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1983
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1985
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1988
Scale:
1" = 1,000'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1989
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1994
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
1995
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2002
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2007
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2009
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2010
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2012
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2014
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2016
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2018
Scale:
1" = 500'

FLIGHT YEAR:
2020
Scale:
1" = 500'

This page intentionally left blank

Historical Topographic
Map Report | 2022
Order Number: 70959
Report Generated: 04/22/2022
Project Name: 20701 Currier Road
Project Number: D202200358
Currier Road Phase I
20701 Currier Rd
Walnut, CA 91789
2 Corporate Drive
Suite 450
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 866-211-2028
www.envirositecorp.com

Envirosite Historical Topographic Map Report 2022
Envirosite’s Historical Topographic Map Report is designed to assist in evaluating a subject property resulting from past activities. Envirosite’s Historical Topographic Map Report includes a search of USGS historical topographic maps, dating back to the early 1900s.

TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS FOUND:

Map Name: Year: Revision Year: Scale:

1. Pomona 1894 N/R 1 : 62500

2. Pomona 1897 N/R 1 : 62500

3. Pomona 1898 N/R 1 : 62500

4. Pomona 1904 N/R 1 : 62500

5. Covina 1927 N/R 1 : 24000

6. San Dimas 1954 N/R 1 : 24000

7. San Dimas 1966 N/R 1 : 24000

8. San Dimas 1966 1972 1 : 24000

9. San Dimas 1966 1981 1 : 24000

10. San_Dimas 2012 N/R 1 : 24000

11. San_Dimas 2015 N/R 1 : 24000

12. San_Dimas 2018 N/R 1 : 24000

13. San_Dimas 2021 N/R 1 : 24000
The USGS 7.5 minute series includes scales 1:24,000 / 1:25,000 / 1:31,680. The USGS 15 minute series includes scales 1:48,000 / 1:62,500 / 1:63,360. The USGS 30x60 minute series scale is 1:100,000.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
All information contained in this report are based on data available from various public, government and other sources and are based upon the best data available from those sources. The information available in this report may be available from other sources and is not exclusive or the exclusive property of Envirosite Corporation.

NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY USER AND Envirosite assumes no liability for faulty or inaccurate information. The Reports may utilize a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Envirosite. Envirosite cannot, and does not assure, warrant, guarantee or assume any liability for the correctness, comprehensiveness, timeliness or completeness of any of such information, nor is the information in any Report to be construed as legal advice with respect to environmental risks associated with any property. Envirosite shall not be liable to anyone for any claims, causes of action, suits, damages, losses, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and costs) arising out of or caused by this report regardless of the acts, errors or omissions, or negligence of Envirosite. Any damages shall be limited to the purchase price of the report.

Purchaser of the report accepts the report “As Is”. The report is intended only to provide information only and should not be considered as providing any legal advice, prediction, forecast, or fact as to the environmental risk for any specific property. Reports are proprietary to Envirosite, and contain copyrighted material and trademarks of Envirosite. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. All rights of Envirosite as to the Reports are reserved.

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: Pomona MAP YEAR: 1894 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 62500 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: Pomona MAP YEAR: 1897 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 62500 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: Pomona MAP YEAR: 1898 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 62500 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: Pomona MAP YEAR: 1904 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 62500 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: Covina MAP YEAR: 1927 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San Dimas MAP YEAR: 1954 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San Dimas MAP YEAR: 1966 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San Dimas MAP YEAR: 1966 REVISION YEAR: 1972
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San Dimas MAP YEAR: 1966 REVISION YEAR: 1981
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San_Dimas MAP YEAR: 2012 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San_Dimas MAP YEAR: 2015 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San_Dimas MAP YEAR: 2018 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Historical Topographic Map 2022
SUBJECT NAME: Currier Road Phase I
ADDRESS: 20701 Currier Rd, Walnut, CA, 91789
LAT/LONG: 34.009585 / -117.854079
PREPARED FOR: Environmental Science Associates
ORDER #: 70959
REPORT DATE: 04/22/2022
SUBJECT QUAD:

MAP NAME: San_Dimas MAP YEAR: 2021 REVISION YEAR: N/R
SCALE: 1 : 24000 Part 1

Circulation Draft
City of Industry
Sysco Los Angeles Facility Expansion
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
October 15, 2024

APPENDIX F
Low Impact Development (LID) Plan

Low Impact Development Plan
(LID Plan)
Project Name:

Sysco Los Angeles
20701 Currier Road
Walnut, California 91789
Prepared for:

Sysco Corporation
1390 Enclave Parkway
Houston, TX 77077
Contact: Arlo Eby
Prepared by:

Colby J. Nennig, P.E.
8911 Research Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 242-8043
P.E Stamp and Signature
EXP. 3/31/23
3/31/25
Date: 6/18/24 Page 1978 of 2309
This Low Impact Development (LID) has been prepared for Sysco Corporation by R.A. Smith, Inc.

The LID is intended to comply with the requirements of the City of Industry Code section 13.16.070 (LID Ordinance), and the “Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board-Los Angeles Region,” (Order No. R4-2021-0105) which also serves as an NPDES Permit under the Federal Clean Water Act (NPDES No. CAS004004) The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan, including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Los Angeles County Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP) and the intent of the non-point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements.

Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors-in-interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the LID. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity.

Owner’s
Name:

Arlo Eby
Owner’s Title: Director of Design and Construction
Company: Sysco Corporation
Address: 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, TX 77077
Email: [email protected]
Telephone
No:
267.517.1156
Signature: Date:

Owner’s Certification
Planning Application No. (If
applicable) JN-9393 Grading Permit No. TBD
Tract/Parcel Map and
Lot(s) No.

Por of Lots 12 and
13 Swab Sub and
Por of Lot 1 M R 42-
31 Building Permit No. TBD
Address of Project Site and APN
(If no address, specify Tract/Parcel Map and Lot Numbers) 20701 Currier Road
APN: 8760-023-030

Preparer (Engineer) certification
Engineer’s
Name:

Colby J. Nennig, P.E.

Engineer’s Title: Senior Project Engineer
Company: R.A. Smith, Inc.

Address: 8911 Research Drive, Irvine, CA 92618
Email: [email protected]
Telephone No: 949.242.8043
I hereby certify that this Low Impact Development Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R4-2021-0105, of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Engineer’s
Signature
Date
Place
Stamp
Here
6/18/24 EXP. 3/31/23
3/31/25

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................1 I.I PROJECT CATEGORY ...........................................................................................................................1 I.II PROJECT INFORMATION .....................................................................................................................3 III. POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN BY LAND USE .....................................................6 IV. POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS .......................................................7 IV.I HYDROMODIFICATION ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................7 IV.II SITE DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................................8 V. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS)..................................................................10 V.I SITE DESIGN..................................................................................................................................10 V.I.1 BMP LIST ............................................................................................................ 10 V.II LID BMP SELECTION AND PROJECT CONFORMANCE ANALYSIS................................................................11 V.II.1 RETENTION-BASED (INFILTRATION BMPS) ............................................................... 11 V.II.2 RETENTION BASED (RAINWATER HARVEST).............................................................. 11 V.II.3 RETENTION BASED BIOINFILTRATION ....................................................................... 12 V.II.4 VEGETATION BASED BMPS.................................................................................... 12 V.II.5 TREATMENT BASED BMPS .................................................................................... 13 V.II.6 HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL BMPS ................................................................... 14 V.III NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS......................................................................................15 V.IV STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS.............................................................................................16 VII. OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND FUNDING .............................................................18 Attachments
Attachment A ......... ....................................................................................................................................Calculations Attachment B.......... .............................................................................................................Geotechnical Investigation Attachment C.......... ........................................................................................Master Covenant and Agreement (MCA) Attachment D ......... ..................................................................................... Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Attachment E.......... .....................................................................................................................LID and Grading Plans Attachment F.......... .....................................................................................................................Educational materials Attachment G ......... ............................................................................................................................. Watershed Map Attachment H ......... ................................................................................................................................ 50% Rule Map

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
Sysco LA

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I.I PROJECT CATEGORY
Category YES NO

1. Development a of a new project equal to 1 acre or greater of disturbed area and adding more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area b

2. Development a of a new industrial parks with 10,000 square feet or more of surface area c

3. Development a of a new commercial mall with 10,000 square feet or more surface area c

4. Development a of a new retail gasoline outlet with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area c

5. Development a of a new restaurant (SIC 5812) with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area c

6. Development a of a new parking lot with either 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious area b or with 25 or more parking spaces

7. Development a of a new automotive service facility (SIC 5013, 5014, 5511, 5541, 7532-7534 and 7536-7539) with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area c

8. Projects located in or directly adjacent to, or discharging directly to a Significant Ecological Area (SEA),d where the development will:
a. Discharge stormwater runoff that is likely to impact a sensitive biological species or habitat; and
b. Create 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface area b

9. a. Redevelopment e of 5,000 square feet or more in one of the categories listed above or b. Redevelopment e of 10,000 square feet or more to a Single Family Home, without change in landuse.
• Where 50 percent or more of the impervious surface of a previously developed site is proposed to be altered and the previous development project was not subject to post construction storm water quality control measures, the entire development site (both the existing development and the proposed alteration) must meet the requirements of the LID standards manual.
• Where less than 50 percent of the impervious surface of a previously developed site is proposed to be altered and previously development project was not subject to post construction storm water quality control measures, only the proposed alteration must meet the requirements of the LID Standards Manual. • Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities that are conducted to maintain original line and grade, hydraulics capacity, original purpose of facility or emergency redevelopment activity required to protect public health and safety.

Impervious surface replacement, such as the reconstruction of parking lots and roadways, which does not disturb additional area and maintains the original grade and alignment, is considered routine maintenance activity. Redevelopment does not include repaving of the existing roads to maintain original line and grade.

If yes, list redevelopment category here: A

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
Sysco LA

a Development includes any construction or demolition activity, clearing, grading, grubbing, or excavation or any other activity that results in land disturbance.
b Surfaces that do not allow stormwater runoff to percolate into the ground. Typical impervious surfaces include:
concrete, asphalt, roofing materials, etc.
c The surface area is the total footprint of an area. Not to include the cumulative area above or below the ground surface.
d An area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and would be disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments. Also, an area designated by the City as approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. e Land-disturbing activities that result in the creation, addition, or replacement of a certain amount of impervious surface area on an already developed site. If the activity results in an alteration to more than 50% of the impervious surface area on the already developed site and the existing site was not subject to post-construction storm water quality control requirements, then the entire site must be mitigated.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

I.II PROJECT INFORMATION
Total Project Area (ft2): 517,525
Total Project Area (Ac): 11.88
Land Use: Industrial
I.II.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Condition Area (ft2) Percentage (%)
Pervious Area: 10,500 2.0%
Impervious Area: 507,025 98.0%
I.II.2 PROPOSED CONDITIONS
Condition Area (ft2) Percentage (%)
Pervious Area: 179,750 34.7%
Impervious Area: 337,775 65.3%
Proposed Land Use or SIC 1541
I.II.3 PROJECT LOCATION
Latitude & Longitude: 34° 00’ 33” N 117° 54’23” W
Project Watershed and Subwatershed: San Gabriel River San Jose Creek

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

I.II.4 PROJECT WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

DRAINAGE

PATTERNS/CONNECTIONS
Existing:

The existing site generally drains from south to north via an existing valley gutter. This valley gutter drains to an existing inlet, which discharges into the San Jose Creek.

Proposed:

DMA #1 follows the existing drainage patterns, with a new valley gutter draining the site from south to north. There is a proposed biofiltration basin located at the existing low point of the site for treatment. The treated flows will discharge via underdrain to the existing pipe discharging into San Jose Creek. Overflows from the basin will discharge into the existing inlet and storm drain discharging off-site to San Jose Creek.

DMA #2 consists solely of the proposed dry dock and associated biofiltration basin. As the dock is recessed, it will drain towards the trench drain near the building, to the proposed pump, and discharge at-grade to the proposed biofiltration basin. From here the treated runoff will discharge to the public storm drain line within Currier Road.

NARRATIVE PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
.]
The proposed redevelopment is including the addition of a new Dry Warehouse, Dry Dock, Battery Charging Area, Freezer Expansion, Cold Dock and proposed Offices. There are also new Concrete Truck Docks proposed for the Cold Dock and Dry Dock Buildings. New AC paving is proposed for truck access, and the remainder of the site is proposed landscaping, with the new biofiltration basins included within the new landscape areas.

There is also a remote Building Addition (Covered Vehicle Maintenance Facility) south of the redevelopment. This building addition accounts for 2,125sf of the disturbed area (0.4% of redevelopment) and is included within the calculations.

However, as the area is remote and negligible to the overall area, it is successfully mitigated by treating the remainder of the redevelopment.

OFFSITE RUNON
There is no offsite run-on to the redevelopment.

SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS
(SEAS)
The site is not located within an SEA per Figure 9.3 – Significant Ecological Areas and Coastal Resource Areas Policy Map.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

II. RECEIVING WATERS
In order of upstream to downstream, the receiving waters that the project site is tributary to are as follows. A map of the receiving waters is included in Appendix G.

Table 2.1 Identification of Receiving Waters
Receiving
Waters
Hydrologic
Unit
EPA Approved
303(d) List
Impairments
Designated
Beneficial Uses
Proximity to
RARE /
Beneficial Use
TMDL
San Jose Creek
Reach 2 18070106 Indicator Bacteria MUN (P), GWR (I), WARM (I), WILD (E) Indicator Bacteria
San Jose Creek
Reach 1 18070105
Indicator Bacteria,
Toxicity, pH,
Ammonia, Total
Dissolved Solids

MUN (P), GWR (I), WARM
(I), WILD (E)
Indicator Bacteria,
Ammonia
San Gabriel
River Reach 3 18070104 Indicator Bacteria MUN (P), GWR (I), WARM (I), WILD (E) Indicator Bacteria
San Gabriel
River Reach 2 18070104
Lead, Cyanide,
Temperature,
Water

MUN (P), IND (P), PROC
(P), GWR (I), WARM (I),

WILD (E), RARE (E)
Lead
San Gabriel
River Reach 1 18070104 pH, Temperature, Water

MUN (P), WARM (P), WILD
(P)
N/A
San Gabriel
River Estuary 18070104
pH, Temperature,
Water, Indicator
Bacteria

IND (E), NAV (E), COMM
(E), EST (E), MAR (E), WILD
(E), RARE (Ee), MIGR (Ef),
SPWN (Ef), SHELL (P)
>10 mi
N/A

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

III. POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN BY LAND USE
Pollutants of Concern
Pollutant
Check One for each:

E=Expected to be of
concern
N=Not Expected to
be of concern
Additional Information and Comments
Suspended-Solid/ Sediment E N
Nutrients E N
Heavy Metals E N
Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E N
Pesticides E N
Oil and Grease E N
Toxic Organic Compounds E N
Trash and Debris E N

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

IV. POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS
IV.I HYDROMODIFICATION ANALYSIS
DOES THE PROPOSED PROJECT FALL INTO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES? CHECK YES/NO. YES NO

1. Project is a redevelopment that decreases the effective impervious area compared to the pre-project conditions.

Describe:

The existing site (disturbed area) contains approximately 10,500sf of landscaping, whereas the proposed redevelopment (disturbed area) contains approximately 179,750sf of landscaping.

2. Project is a redevelopment that increases the infiltration capacity of pervious areas compared to the pre-project conditions.

Describe:

Based on the Geotechnical Report the site is underlain by stiff sandy soil or silty sand to depths 2 to 10 feet below ground surface. Below these soils there was a silty clay to a depth of 11.5’ below ground surface. Based on the clay layer, and the industrial use, it was deemed that infiltration is infeasible for the project and that the existing site soils are not conducive to an infiltration BMP.

However, with the addition of approximately 169,250sf of landscaping it can be assumed that the redevelopment will increase the natural infiltration capacity of the project site when compared to pre-project conditions.

3. Project discharges directly or via a storm drain to a sump, lake, area under tidal influence, into a waterway that has a 100-year peak flow (Q100) of 25,000 cfs or more.

Describe:

Unknown

4. Project discharges directly or via a storm drain into concrete or otherwise engineered (not natural) channels (e.g., channelized or armored with rip rap, shotcrete, etc.), which, in turn, discharge into receiving water that is not susceptible to hydromodification impacts.

Describe:

Site proposed redevelopment discharges to the existing storm drain pipe, which discharges into San Jose Creek. San Jose creek is a concrete lined channel.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

IV.II SITE DESCRIPTION
Site Characteristics
Precipitation Zone

1.05” for LID (85th percentile)

6.50” for 50 year
Topography Site Drains from south to north via a valley gutter at 0.5% slope. This is in the existing and proposed condition.

Drainage
Patterns/Connections
The existing site drains to an inlet which discharges into the San Jose Creek.

Proposed DMA #1 to a biofiltration basin for treatment, with overflows and underdrain discharging via the existing storm drain pipe connection to San Jose Creek.

Proposed DMA #2 drains to a biofiltration basin for treatment, with overflows and underdrain discharging to the public storm drain within Currier Road.

Soil Type, Geology, and
Infiltration Properties
Soil Types 002 & 003.

See Attachment B for Geotechnical Report and Infiltration Testing.

Geotechnical Report shows a material description primarily consisting of silty clay from ground surface to depths of 36’ below ground surface.

Four (4) infiltration tests were performed using the falling head test method.

Infiltration Tests P1 and P2 were taken within the Biofiltration Footprint for DMA #1. Tests P3 and P4 were taken near the Biofiltration Footprint for DMA #2. The tests yielded the following results:

Infiltration Test
Location
Unfactored Field Measured
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
P1 0
P2 0.5
P3 0
P4 0
The Geotechnical Engineer recommends an additional Factor of Safety of 2.

With the Safety Factor applied the infiltration rates are:

Infiltration Test
Location
Infiltration Rate w/ Safety
Factor (in/hr)
P1 0
P2 0.25
P3 0
P4 0
Hydrogeologic (Groundwater)
Conditions
Per the Geotechnical Report, groundwater was encountered at a depth of 26.5 to 28 feet bgs. Historical high groundwater is reported at approximately 20 feet bgs.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

Geotechnical Conditions
(relevant to infiltration)
As noted above, the corrected in-situ infiltration rates are all less than 0.3 inches per hour. As such it is not feasible to propose infiltration on this project.

See Geotechnical Report in Appendix B.

Off-Site Drainage N/A
Utility and Infrastructure
Information San Jose Creek, and LACDPW RDD 0363

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS)
V.I SITE DESIGN
85TH PERCENTILE, 24-

HOUR STORM DEPTH

1.05-inch
SITE DESIGN Site Planning – Substantial landscape areas were created in order to provide a potential area for a biofiltration basin, which is used to comply with the LID Requirements. The two proposed basins will provide filtration (2.5in/hr) within the soil media and treatment for 1.5 times the SWQDV. Overflows from the basin within DMA #1 will following existing drainage patterns to San Jose Creek via the existing 36” RCP storm drain pipe. Overflows from the basin within DMA #2 will drain to the existing public storm drain within Currier Road. The two new basins account for approximately 6% of the total disturbed area.

Protect and Restore Natural Areas – This is not applicable to the project as the existing site is an industrial development that is approximately 2% pervious landscaping.

Minimize Land Disturbance – the redevelopment minimizes land disturbance to the extent feasible as approximately 35% of the redevelopment is new landscaping. The existing drainage patterns are also maintained with the redevelopment.

Minimize Impervious Area – As stated previously the redevelopment is approximately 35% pervious, whereas the existing site is approximately 2% pervious. The new impervious areas are strictly for functionality and landscaping has been added wherever it is feasible to do so.

V.I.1 BMP LIST
DMA

DESIGNATION
SQUARE

FOOTAGE
(SF)

ACREAGE
(AC)

STORM WATER

QUALITY
DESIGN
VOLUME
(SWQDV, CF)

BMP TYPE

MINIMUM

BMP SIZE
SF

BMP SIZE

PROVIDED
SF
DMA 1 508,375 11.67
41,835
(1.5x)
BIO-1
Biofiltration Basin
27,890 30,601
DMA 2 10,635 0.24
794
(1.5x)
BIO-1
Biofiltration Basin
529 580

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V.II LID BMP SELECTION AND PROJECT CONFORMANCE ANALYSIS V.II.1 RETENTION-BASED (INFILTRATION BMPS)

NAME INCLUDED
Bioretention (RET-1)
Infiltration Basin (RET-2)
Infiltration Trench (RET-3)
Drywell (RET-4)
Permeable Pavement without an underdrain (concrete, asphalt, pavers)-(RET-5)
Other:

Other:

DESCRIPTION Because of Site Soils & Industrial Use, infiltration is deemed infeasible for the project.

CALCULATIONS N/A
V.II.2 RETENTION BASED (RAINWATER HARVEST)

NAME INCLUDED
Above-ground cisterns/Rain barrel (RET-6)
Green Roof (RET-7)
DESCRIPTION Not Applicable
CALCULATIONS Not Applicable

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V.II.3 RETENTION BASED BIOINFILTRATION

NAME INCLUDED
Bioinfiltration with underdrains (i.e. planter box, rain garden, etc.) (RET-1) Other:

Other:

V.II.4 VEGETATION BASED BMPS

NAME INCLUDED
Stormwater Planter (VEG-1)
Tree-Well Filter (VEG-2)
Vegetated Filter (VEG-3)
Vegetated Swale (VEG-4)
Other: Biofiltration Basin with Underdrain (BIO-1)
Other:

DESCRIPTION Two Biofiltration Basins (BIO-1) are proposed with cross-sectional elements and soil media consistent with County of Los Angeles LID Manual and the MS4 Permit. The Site has sufficient biofiltration area to treat 1.5 times the Storm Water Quality Design Volume (SWQDv), and drawdown within 96 hours of initial rainfall.

CALCULATIONS DMA #1
SWQDv (HydroCalc) = 27,890cf

1.5. * SWQDv = 41,835cf
Filtration Rate = ((5in/hr)/2(FS)) = 2.5in/hr
Dmax = ((2.5in/hr)/(12in/ft)) * 96hr = 20ft max. ponding Ponding Depth = 1.5’
Required Biofiltration Area = 41,835cf / 1.5ft (ponding) = 27,890cf Biofiltration Area provided = 30,601sf
Biofiltration Volume provided = 30,601sf * 1.5’ ponding = 45,902cf

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

DMA #2
SWQDv (HydroCalc) = 529cf

1.5. * SWQDv = 794cf
Filtration Rate = ((5in/hr)/2(FS)) = 2.5in/hr
Dmax = ((2.5in/hr)/(12in/ft)) * 96hr = 20ft max. ponding Ponding Depth = 1.5’
Required Biofiltration Area = 794cf / 1.5ft (ponding) = 529cf Biofiltration Area provided = 580sf
Biofiltration Volume provided = 580sf * 1.5’ ponding = 870cf V.II.5 TREATMENT BASED BMPS

NAME INCLUDED
SAND FILTERS (T-1)
CONSTRUCTED WETLAND (T-2)
EXTENDED DETENTION BASIN (T-3)
WET POND (T-4)
PERMEABLE PAVEMENT WITH UNDERDRAIN (T-5)
Media Filter Catch Basin Inlet Filter Screen
Filter Insert (Bio Clean/Flogard or approved equal from Trash Full Capture Certified List)
CDS Unit (Pre-treatment)
Other:

Other:

DESCRIPTION Trash Full Capture filters will be installed at the inlets within the biofiltration basin footprints, as well as within the proposed trench drain. The filters will provide pretreatment.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V.II.6 HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL BMPS

NAME INCLUDED
Infiltration System
Above-ground Cistern
Above-ground Basin
Underground Detention
Other:

Other:

DESCRIPTION
Not Applicable – see section IV.I of this Report.

CALCULATIONS
Not Applicable - see section IV.I of this Report.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V.III NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS
Non-Structural Source Control BMPs
Identifier Name
Check One
If not applicable, state brief
reason Included Not
Applicable
N1
Education for Property Owners,
Tenants and Occupants
N2 Activity Restrictions
N3
Common Area Landscape
Management
N4 BMP Maintenance
N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance
N7 Spill Contingency Plan
N8
Underground Storage Tank
Compliance
No Underground Storage Tank
on-site.

N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure
Compliance
No Hazardous materials to be
stored on-site.

N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation
N11 Common Area Litter Control
N12 Employee Training
N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks
N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection
N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and
Parking Lots
N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets No retail gas

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

V.IV STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS
Structural Source Control BMPs
Identifier Name
Check One
If not applicable, state brief
reason Included Not
Applicable
S1
Provide storm drain stenciling message
and signage
S2
Design and construct outdoor material
storage areas to reduce pollution
introduction
No materials will be stored
outdoors
S3
Design and construct trash and waste
storage areas to reduce pollution
introduction
S4 Outdoor loading/unloading dock area
S5
Outdoor vehicle/equipment repair &
maintenance area Not proposed/No Activities
S6
Outdoor/vehicle/equipment accessory
washing area Not proposed/No Activities
S7 Fuel Maintenance bays Not proposed/No Activities
S8 Landscape Irrigation Practice
S9 Building materials selection Not proposed/No Activities S10 Animal Care and Handling facilities Not proposed/No Activities S11 Outdoor horticulture Area Not proposed/No Activities

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

VI. INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR BMPS
BMP Inspection/Maintenance
TYPE of BMPs
Reponsible
Party(s)
Inspection/ Maintenance
Activities Required
Minimum
Frequency of
Activities
Biofiltration
Basin
Owner Trash Weekly
Biofiltration
Basin
Owner Active Drainage Monthly, or
after rain event
Trash Full
Capture Filters
Owner Sediment Level Bi-Annually, or
after rain event
Parking Lot
Sweeping
Owner Trash, Sedimentation Monthly

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road

VII. OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND FUNDING
A means to finance and implement facility maintenance in perpetuity, including replacement cost.

1. Acceptance of responsibility for maintenance from the time the BMPs are constructed until responsibility for operation and maintenance is legally transferred.

2. An outline of general maintenance requirements for the Stormwater BMPs selected.

3. Figures delineating and designating pervious and impervious areas, location, and type of Stormwater BMP, and tables of pervious and impervious areas served by each facility.

4. A separate list and location of self-retaining areas or areas addressed by LID Principles that do not require specialized O&M or inspections but will require typical landscape maintenance as noted in Chapter 5, pages 85-86, in the WQMP Guidance.

Maintenance Mechanism: Owner/Covenant
Will the proposed BMPs be maintained by a Home Owners’ Association (HOA) or Property Owners Association (POA)?
Y N

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road
Attachment A
Calculations

Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: Q:/3220076/Eng Data/LID/Attachments/Attachment A - Calculations/Hydrocalc - 85th 24 Hr - DMA #1.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name Sysco LA
Subarea ID DMA #1
Area (ac) 11.67
Flow Path Length (ft) 1450.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.005
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 1.05
Percent Impervious 0.655
Soil Type 2
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 1.05 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1933
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.2775
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6852
Time of Concentration (min) 61.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.546
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.546
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.6403
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 27890.367

Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: Q:/3220076/Eng Data/LID/Attachments/Attachment A - Calculations/Hydrocalc - 85th 24 Hr - DMA #2.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name Sysco LA
Subarea ID DMA #2
Area (ac) 0.244
Flow Path Length (ft) 50.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.045
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 1.05
Percent Impervious 0.571
Soil Type 2
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 1.05 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.6265
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6163
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7783
Time of Concentration (min) 5.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.119
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.119
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.0122
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 529.9117

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road
Attachment B
Geotechnical Investigation

www.intertek.com/building
June 14, 2024
Sysco Corporation
1390 Enclave Parkway
Houston, Texas 77077
Attn: Arlo Eby
Senior Project Manager
[email protected]
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report of Percolation Testing

PROPOSED FACILITY EXPANSION
20701 CURRIER ROAD
WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789
PSI PROJECT NO. 0066-1854
Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI), an Intertek Company, is pleased to submit this Geotechnical Engineering Report of percolation testing for the referenced project. This report includes the results from PSI’s field exploration, field testing, and laboratory testing for use in preparation of the appropriate design and construction documents for the proposed infiltration basin areas. This work was performed in general accordance with PSI’s proposal (0066-368587) signed 5/19/22 and PSI’s Change Order #1 (dated 5/22/24) authorized by Sysco’s Purchase Order #0451617861 (dated 5/24/24).

PREVIOUS GEOTECHNICAL REPORTING
Previously, PSI performed a geotechnical investigation for this site; published July 8, 2022. This report did not include percolation testing. The results of recent percolation testing have been included herein.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND SCOPE
Based on email discussions with Colby Nennig (raSmith) and the Conceptual LID Plan (raSmith, Sheet LID01, 5/26/22), the proposed scope of work included investigating two (2) areas proposed for construction of biofiltration basins. Depths of testing were at approximately 8 feet below existing ground surface.

Should any of the above information be inconsistent with your objectives, it is requested that you contact PSI immediately to allow us to make any necessary modifications to this report.

FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
Prior to initiation of field drilling activities, PSI outlined the site and marked the proposed boring and testing locations with white paint and stakes and contacted DigAlert a minimum of 48 hours prior to beginning work to locate any potential buried utilities. The DigAlert inquiry identification number for the utility locate request was #B241490973. A private utility location service was also performed.

For proposed basin areas, our previous geotechnical report information was referenced in addition to performing two (2) additional borings extending to depths of 35 feet below ground surface (bgs); one boring was conducted in each of the proposed biofiltration basins. PSI additionally advanced four (4)

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
June 14, 2024

percolation test holes to approximate depths of 8 feet bgs (2 per basin). The boring and test holes were drilled using a truck-mounted CME-75 rig using auger drilling methods. The approximate location of the boring and test locations are shown on Figure 1.

Soil samples obtained from the borings were initially classified visually in the field. Consistency, color, relative moisture, degree of plasticity, and other distinguishing characteristics of the soil sample were noted. The terminology used in the soil classifications and other modifiers are depicted in the General Notes and Soil Classification Chart. Information gathered from the boring is described below. At the completion of drilling and percolation testing, the soil borings were backfilled with cement grout and test holes were backfilled with soil cuttings.

During field activities, the encountered subsurface conditions were observed, logged, and visually classified (in general accordance with ASTM D2488/D2487). Field notes were maintained to summarize soil types and descriptions, water levels, changes in subsurface conditions, and drilling conditions.

PSI supplemented the field exploration with a laboratory testing program to determine additional engineering characteristics of the subsurface soils encountered. The laboratory testing program was conducted in general accordance with applicable ASTM Test Methods, and is included in Appendix A.

Portions of samples not altered or consumed by laboratory testing will be discarded 30 days from the date shown on this report.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The results of the recent field and laboratory testing have been used to generalize a subsurface profile at the project site. The following subsurface descriptions provide a highlighted generalization of the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics encountered in the soil borings below grade.

The subsurface soils encountered beneath the ground surface generally consisted medium stiff to very stiff silty clay to maximum depths of 36½ feet below ground surface (bgs). At boring location B12, we also encountered medium dense silty sand at 33 feet bgs to termination of the boring. At boring location B13, we also encountered interbedded layers of medium dense clayey sand, very stiff sandy silt, and dense well-graded sand.

The boring logs included in Attachment A should be reviewed for specific information at the boring location. The boring log includes soil descriptions, stratifications, locations of the samples, and field and laboratory test data. The descriptions provided on the log only represent the conditions at that actual boring location; the stratifications represent the approximate boundaries between subsurface materials.

The actual transitions between strata may be more gradual and less distinct. Variations will occur and should be expected across the site.

GROUNDWATER INFORMATION
Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 26½ to 28 feet bgs in our borings following a 15 minute equilibrium period. In our previous investigation (July 2022), we generally encountered groundwater at depths of 15.8 (perched) to 28.4 feet bgs in our explorations extending to maximum depths of 60 feet bgs.

According to the California Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the San Dimas Quadrangle (SHZR-032), historical high groundwater depths are reported at approximately 20 feet bgs.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
June 14, 2024

The groundwater levels presented in this report were measured at the time of PSI’s field activities. Based on our findings, groundwater is not expected to impact the proposed construction. It is possible, however, that transient, saturated ground conditions at shallower depths could develop at a later time during periods of heavy precipitation, landscape watering, leaking water lines, or other unforeseen causes.

Variations in groundwater levels should be expected seasonally, annually, and from location to location.

PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PSI performed four (4) percolation tests at the site: 2 on the northeast corner of the facility and 2 on the southeast side of the facility as shown on Figure 2 [P1 through P4]. Testing was performed to determine the infiltration rate at each location in general accordance with the Los Angeles County Public Works Guidelines for Geotechnical Investigation and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration (GS200.1, dated 6/30/21) using small diameter boring infiltration test methods (falling head). Tests were performed at depths of approximately 8 feet bgs. In the percolation borings, at the test depth, subsurface materials consisted of stiff silty clay with sand (P1), stiff elastic silt with sand (P2), and stiff sandy silt (P3 and P4) at a depth of roughly 7½ bgs. Boring logs are attached as well as laboratory test results.

The borehole tests consisted of installing a 3-inch-diameter PVC pipe with an end cap in the bottom of each of the borings. Gravel was then placed in the annulus surrounding the PVC. The test borings were presoaked by filling with water overnight to apply approximately 4 feet of water head above the test depth. Prior to testing, a water head of approximately 1.8 feet was applied above the test depth for approximately 1 hour.

Measured infiltration rates are provided below. Measurements and estimates are provided in Attachment B.

Table 1: Infiltration Testing Results
Infiltration Test
Location
Average Head
During Test (ft)
Unfactored Field Measured
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
P1 1.8 0
P2 1.4 0.5
P3 1.7 0
P4 1.6 0

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
June 14, 2024

CONCLUSIONS
The results of our percolation testing indicate that unfactored infiltration rates range from approximately

0.02 to 0.47 inches per hour. These rates appear to be typical for silt and clay materials while applying approximately 1.8 feet of water head.

Infiltration rates vary depending on locations, depths, and water head applied during the test. For future designs, appropriate reduction factors should be applied, which depend on system design and maintenance. Time to empty estimates should include an additional factor of safety of at least 2.

The above geotechnical design recommendations have been developed based on the previously described project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered. The proposed construction should be performed in accordance with these recommendations and the applicable building code, and local governmental standards which have jurisdiction over this project. If there are changes in the project criteria, PSI should be retained to determine if modifications in the recommendations will be required. The findings of such a review would be presented in a supplemental report. Once final design plans and specifications are available, a general review by PSI is recommended to confirm that the conditions anticipated in preparing this geotechnical report are consistent with the construction documents.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide this update and look forward to continued participation during the construction phase of this project. If you have any questions pertaining to this letter, or if we may be of further service, please contact our office.

Respectfully submitted for,
Professional Service Industries, Inc.

Douglas T. Abernathy, PE, GE Nicholas Barba
Senior Project Engineer Staff Engineer
[email protected] [email protected] Britton W. Gentry, PE
Chief Engineer
[email protected]
CC: Cooper Crawford (National Client Group)
Environmental Science Associates (Katie Carroz)
raSmith (Colby Nennig)
ESI Design Services (Scott Strutz)

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
June 14, 2024

Attachments:

Figure 1 – Boring Location Plan
Attachment A – Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program Attachment B – Percolation Test Results
References:

1. Los Angeles County, “Guidelines for Geotechnical Investigation and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration”, GS200.1, dated June 30, 2021.

2. Professional Service Industries (PSI), “Proposed Sysco Facility Expansion, 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, California 91789”, PN# 0066-1854, dated July 8, 2022.

3. raSmith, “21 Facility Expansion & Site Modifications for Sysco Los Angeles, 20701 Currier Rd., Walnut, CA 91789”, Sheet LID-01, dated May 26, 2024.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
(714) 484-8600

BORING LOCATION PLAN
PSI Project No. 0066-1854
Sysco
20701 Currier Road
Walnut, CA 91789
FIGURE 1 Reference – Conceptual LID Plan, LID-01, raSmith, 5/26/24 B12
P1
P2
Legend
B13 Approximate Boring Location
P4 Approximate Percolation Test Location
B13
P3
P4

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
Attachment A
Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854

FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM
On June 3, 2024, the subsurface conditions at the proposed infiltration area were explored by drilling two (2) soil borings to a maximum depth of approximately 36½ feet below ground surface (bgs). The boring location is shown on Figure 1. Drilling was performed by 2R Drilling of Chino, California using a hollowstem auger method of drilling with a truck-mounted CME-75 drilling rig. The soil types encountered at the boring location are presented on the attached boring logs below.

During the boring sampling procedure, Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed in accordance with ASTM D1586 and relatively undisturbed samples were obtained in general accordance with ASTM D3550. The SPT for soil borings is performed by driving a split-spoon sampler, with an outside diameter (O.D.) of 2 inches, into the undisturbed formation located at the bottom of the advanced borehole with repeated blows of a 140-pound hammer falling a vertical distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches of an 18-inch penetration depth is a measure of the soil consistency (blow count). For ASTM D3550 (California Modified Sampler) the split barrel sampler possesses a 3-inch O.D. and is driven in the same manner as the SPT. The field blow counts obtained from the California Modified sampler should be adjusted to obtain a rough correlation to SPT blow counts (SPTN value). SPT blow counts in gravel tend to over-estimate density. Samples were identified in the field, placed in sealed containers, and transported to the laboratory for further classification and testing. At the completion of drilling, the soil boring and percolation test borings were backfilled with soil cuttings to match the ground surface.

GENERAL NOTES

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION

The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), AASHTO 1988 and ASTM designations D2487 and D-2488 are used to identify the encountered materials unless otherwise noted. Coarse-grained soils are defined as having more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve (0.075mm); they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine-grained soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are defined as silts or clay depending on their Atterberg Limit attributes. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size.

Description
Flat:

Elongated:

Flat & Elongated:

Description
Angular:

Subangular:

Subrounded:

Rounded:

Criteria
Particles with width/thickness ratio > 3
Particles with length/width ratio > 3
Particles meet criteria for both flat and
elongated
Descriptive Term
Trace:

With:

Modifier:

Size Range
Over 300 mm (>12 in.)
75 mm to 300 mm (3 in. to 12 in.)
19 mm to 75 mm (¾ in. to 3 in.)

4.75 mm to 19 mm (No.4 to ¾ in.)
2 mm to 4.75 mm (No.10 to No.4)

0.42 mm to 2 mm (No.40 to No.10)

0.075 mm to 0.42 mm (No. 200 to No.40)

0.005 mm to 0.075 mm
<0.005 mm
Component
Boulders:

Cobbles:

Coarse-Grained Gravel:

Fine-Grained Gravel:

Coarse-Grained Sand:

Medium-Grained Sand:

Fine-Grained Sand:

Silt:

Clay:

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS ANGULARITY OF COARSE-GRAINED PARTICLES N - Blows/foot
0 - 4
4 - 10
10 - 30
30 - 50
50 - 80
80+
Relative Density
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
Extremely Dense

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
% Dry Weight
< 5%
5% to 12%
>12%
Standard "N" penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D.

Split-Spoon.

A "N" penetration value corrected to an equivalent 60% hammer energy transfer efficiency (ETR) Unconfined compressive strength, TSF
Pocket penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, TSF Moisture/water content, %
Liquid Limit, %
Plastic Limit, %
Plasticity Index = (LL-PL),%
Dry unit weight, pcf
Apparent groundwater level at time noted
Criteria
Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane
sides with unpolished surfaces
Particles are similar to angular description, but have
rounded edges
Particles have nearly plane sides, but have
well-rounded corners and edges
Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges
N:

N60:

Qu:

Qp:
w%:

LL:

PL:

PI:

DD:
, ,

GRAIN-SIZE TERMINOLOGY PARTICLE SHAPE

SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS
Shelby Tube - 3" O.D., except where noted.

Rock Core
Texas Cone
Bulk Sample
Pressuremeter
Cone Penetrometer Testing with
Pore-Pressure Readings

DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS
Solid Flight Auger - typically 4" diameter
flights, except where noted.

Hollow Stem Auger - typically 3¼" or 4¼ I.D.
openings, except where noted.

Mud Rotary - Uses a rotary head with
Bentonite or Polymer Slurry
Diamond Bit Core Sampler
Hand Auger
Power Auger - Handheld motorized auger
Split-Spoon - 1 3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., except
where noted.

SFA:

HSA:

M.R.:

R.C.:

H.A.:

P.A.:

SS:

ST:

RC:

TC:

BS:

PM:

CPT-U:

GENERAL NOTES
QU - TSF N - Blows/foot Consistency
0 - 2
2 - 4
4 - 8
8 - 15
15 - 30
30 - 50
50+
Criteria
Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch
Damp but no visible water
Visible free water, usually soil is below water table

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL
% Dry Weight
< 15%
15% to 30%
>30%
Descriptive Term
Trace:

With:

Modifier:
0 - 0.25

0.25 - 0.50

0.50 - 1.00

1.00 - 2.00

2.00 - 4.00

4.00 - 8.00

8.00+

MOISTURE CONDITION DESCRIPTION

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Description
Blocky:

Lensed:

Layer:

Seam:

Parting:

Description
Stratified:

Laminated:

Fissured:

Slickensided:

STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION

QU - TSF
Extremely Soft
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Hard
Moderately Hard
Hard
Very Hard

SCALE OF RELATIVE ROCK HARDNESS ROCK BEDDING THICKNESSES Consistency
Criteria
Alternating layers of varying material or color with
layers at least ¼-inch (6 mm) thick
Alternating layers of varying material or color with
layers less than ¼-inch (6 mm) thick
Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little
resistance to fracturing
Fracture planes appear polished or glossy,
sometimes striated
Criteria
Greater than 3-foot (>1.0 m)
1-foot to 3-foot (0.3 m to 1.0 m)
4-inch to 1-foot (0.1 m to 0.3 m)
1¼-inch to 4-inch (30 mm to 100 mm)
½-inch to 1¼-inch (10 mm to 30 mm)
1/8-inch to ½-inch (3 mm to 10 mm)
1/8-inch or less "paper thin" (<3 mm)
Description
Dry:

Moist:

Wet:

Description
Very Thick Bedded
Thick Bedded
Medium Bedded
Thin Bedded
Very Thin Bedded
Thickly Laminated
Thinly Laminated

2.5 - 10
10 - 50
50 - 250
250 - 525
525 - 1,050
1,050 - 2,600
>2,600
(Continued)
Component
Very Coarse Grained
Coarse Grained
Medium Grained
Fine Grained
Very Fine Grained

GRAIN-SIZED TERMINOLOGY
(Typically Sedimentary Rock)

ROCK VOIDS
Voids
Pit
Vug
Cavity
Cave
Void Diameter
<6 mm (<0.25 in)
6 mm to 50 mm (0.25 in to 2 in)
50 mm to 600 mm (2 in to 24 in)
>600 mm (>24 in)

ROCK QUALITY DESCRIPTION
RQD Value
90 -100
75 - 90
50 - 75
25 -50
Less than 25
Size Range
>4.76 mm

2.0 mm - 4.76 mm

0.42 mm - 2.0 mm

0.075 mm - 0.42 mm
<0.075 mm
Rock generally fresh, joints stained and discoloration
extends into rock up to 25 mm (1 in), open joints may
contain clay, core rings under hammer impact.

Rock mass is decomposed 50% or less, significant
portions of the rock show discoloration and
weathering effects, cores cannot be broken by hand
or scraped by knife.

Rock mass is more than 50% decomposed, complete
discoloration of rock fabric, core may be extremely
broken and gives clunk sound when struck by
hammer, may be shaved with a knife.

Rock Mass Description
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor

DEGREE OF WEATHERING
Slightly Weathered:

Weathered:

Highly Weathered:

Criteria
Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small
angular lumps which resist further breakdown
Inclusion of small pockets of different soils
Inclusion greater than 3 inches thick (75 mm)
Inclusion 1/8-inch to 3 inches (3 to 75 mm) thick
extending through the sample
Inclusion less than 1/8-inch (3 mm) thick
Very Soft
Soft
Firm (Medium Stiff)
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
Very Hard

OH
CH
MH
OL
CL
ML
SC
SM
SP
COARSE

GRAINED
SOILS
SW

TYPICAL

DESCRIPTIONS

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -

SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL
- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

SILT MIXTURES

GRAPH LETTER

SYMBOLS MAJOR DIVISIONS

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
PT
GC
GM
GP
GW

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY

MIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE

SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY

SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,

LEAN CLAYS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY

CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY
SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH

PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH

HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
CLEAN

GRAVELS

GRAVELS WITH
FINES

CLEAN SANDS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

SANDS WITH
FINES

LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50

LIQUID LIMIT
GREATER THAN 50

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
GRAVEL
AND

GRAVELLY
SOILS
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT

OF FINES)
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT

OF FINES)
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
FINE

GRAINED
SOILS
SAND
AND
SANDY
SOILS
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS
LARGER THAN NO.
200 SIEVE SIZE
MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

SMALLER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION
PASSING ON NO. 4
SIEVE
MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

10 18
18 18
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML
25 28
21 24
16 22
DD = 94 pcf
DD = 103 pcf
DD = 102 pcf
4 inches Asphalt.
4 inches Aggregate Base.

Silty CLAY, dark gray, medium stiff, trace sand,
moist. [Possible Fill]
Silty CLAY, gray and brown, very stiff, moist.
...with sand.
...with caliche stringers, no sand.

Silty CLAY, brown, stiff, with sand, moist.
...no sand, becomes very stiff.
...becomes stiff.
1-2-4
N=6
9-12-16
6-10-13
7-13-19
5-5-8
N=13
5-8-10
N=18
4-4-7
N=11
PROJECT NO.: 00661854-9
PROJECT: Sysco Corporation
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks
USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0
Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
Continued Next Page
LATITUDE: 34.0118°
LONGITUDE: -117.853°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
28 feet
29 feet
Water
DRILLER: Eddie
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA 91789 SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 6/3/24
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: D. Abernathy See Boring Location Plan
EFFICIENCY N/A Northeast Biofiltration Basin
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 25
DATE COMPLETED: 6/3/24 BORING B12
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 36.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>
>>
>>

18 18
10 CL-ML
SM
...becomes light brown, very stiff, wet.
...becomes medium stiff.

Silty SAND, light brown, medium dense, wet.

Boring terminated at 36-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

Borehole backfilled with cement grout and
toppped with asphalt cold patch.
4-6-9
N=15
3-3-4
N=7
7-10-14
N=24
PROJECT NO.: 00661854-9
PROJECT: Sysco Corporation
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks
USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0
Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
LATITUDE: 34.0118°
LONGITUDE: -117.853°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
28 feet
29 feet
Water
DRILLER: Eddie
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA 91789 SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 6/3/24
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: D. Abernathy See Boring Location Plan
EFFICIENCY N/A Northeast Biofiltration Basin
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
25 30
35 DATE COMPLETED: 6/3/24 BORING B12
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 36.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

18 18
18 18
CL-ML
SC
CL-ML
CL-ML
ML
SW
22 14
31 28
27 20
DD = 121 pcf
DD = 92 pcf
DD = 94 pcf
Silty CLAY, dark gray, stiff, with sand, moist.
[Possible Fill]
Clayey SAND, dark brown, medium dense,
moist.

Silty CLAY, gray-brown, stiff, with caliche
stringers, moist.

Silty CLAY, light brown, stiff, moist.

Sandy SILT, with clay, reddish-brown, very
stiff, moist.
3-5-8
N=13
11-19-20
5-7-10
4-7-7
3-4-5
N=9
3-5-7
N=12
4-7-9
N=16
PROJECT NO.: 00661854-9
PROJECT: Sysco Corporation
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks
USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0
Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
Continued Next Page
LATITUDE: 34.0092°
LONGITUDE: -117.8526°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

26.5 feet
27 feet
Water
DRILLER: Eddie
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA 91789 SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 6/3/24
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: D. Abernathy See Boring Location Plan
EFFICIENCY N/A Southeast Biofiltration Basin
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 25
DATE COMPLETED: 6/3/24 BORING B13
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 36.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>

6 18
18 SW
CL-ML
Well-Graded SAND, tan-brown, dense, with
gravel, wet.

Silty CLAY, orange-brown, stiff, wet.

Boring terminated at 36-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

Borehole backfilled with cement grout.
15-17-19
N=36
2-4-5
N=9
3-4-5
N=9
PROJECT NO.: 00661854-9
PROJECT: Sysco Corporation
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks
USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0
Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
LATITUDE: 34.0092°
LONGITUDE: -117.8526°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

26.5 feet
27 feet
Water
DRILLER: Eddie
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA 91789 SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 6/3/24
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: D. Abernathy See Boring Location Plan
EFFICIENCY N/A Southeast Biofiltration Basin
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
25 30
35 DATE COMPLETED: 6/3/24 BORING B13
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 36.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES
The soil samples obtained during the field exploration were transported to soil laboratories and selected soil samples were tested to determine the material properties for evaluation. Laboratory testing on selected samples included moisture content (ASTM D2216), density (ASTM D2937), sieve analysis (ASTM D6913), and Atterberg (ASTM D4318). Laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM and Caltrans procedures. Unless otherwise informed, the soil samples will be discarded 30 days from the issuance of this report. Laboratory test results are provided below.

Visual-Manual Classification
The soil samples were classified in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D2487. Certain terminology incorporating current local engineering practice, as provided in the Soil Classification Chart, is included with, or in lieu of, ASTM terminology. The term which best described the major portion of the sample was used in determining the soil type (i.e., gravel, sand, silt or clay).

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Boring Depth (ft.) USCS Soil Type Test Result
P1 7½ Silty CLAY w/Sand (CL)
[Possible Fill]
Liquid Limit
Plastic Limit
%<#200
36%
16%

64.3%
P2 7½ Elastic Silt w/Sand (MH)
Liquid Limit
Plastic Limit
%<#200
54%
30%

84.2%
P3 7½ Sandy SILT w/tr. Clay (ML) Sieve See Plot
P4 7½ Sandy SILT (ML) Sieve See Plot

Material Finer than 75-µm
(No. 200 Sieve) in Soils by Washing
(ASTM D1140)
Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut Project Number 00661854-9
Date Tested 06/06/24
P1 P2

7.5 7.5
623.8 631.1
1109.5 1165.0
1033.5 1044.3
76 120.7
409.7 413.2

18.6% 29.2%
769.9 696.3
263.6 348

64.3% 84.2%
Passing No. 200 Sieve
Passing No. 200 Sieve
Boring Number
Sample Depth (ft)
Tare Weight (g)
Wet Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Dry Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Weight of Water (g)
Weight of Dry Sample (g)
Moisture Content
Dry Weight + Tare after Wash (g)
Weight of Sample Washed Through Sieve (g)
Weight of Sample Washed Through Sieve (g)
Weight of Sample Washed Through Sieve (g)
Passing No. 200 Sieve
Boring Number
Sample Depth (ft)
Tare Weight (g)
Wet Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Dry Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Weight of Water (g)
Weight of Dry Sample (g)
Moisture Content
Dry Weight + Tare after Wash (g)
Dry Weight + Tare after Wash (g)
Project Name
Date Drilled 06/03/24
Boring Number
Sample Depth (ft)
Tare Weight (g)
Wet Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Dry Weight + Tare before Wash (g)
Weight of Water (g)
Weight of Dry Sample (g)
Moisture Content
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714-484-8600

(ASTM D4318-10
AASHTO T89/90)
Project Name Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut Project Number 00661854-9 Date Drilled Date Tested 6/7/2024
Boring & Sample Depth P1 @ 7.5 feet
Sample Description Sandy Silty CLAY (CL)
6/3/2024
Atterberg Limits
LIQUID LIMIT (%) 36
PLASTIC LIMIT (%) 16
PLASTICITY INDEX (%) 20
Classification CL

TEST RESULTS
y = -6.783ln(x) + 57.795
R² = 1

34.00 35.00

36.00 37.00

38.00 10 100 Moisture
Number of Blows
Liquid Limit
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714-484-8600

(ASTM D4318-10
AASHTO T89/90)
Project Name Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut Project Number 00661854-9 Date Drilled Date Tested 6/7/2024
Boring & Sample Depth P2 @ 7.5 feet
Sample Description Elastic SILT (MH) with Sand
Atterberg Limits
6/3/2024
LIQUID LIMIT (%) 54
PLASTIC LIMIT (%) 30
PLASTICITY INDEX (%) 24
Classification MH

TEST RESULTS
y = -4.353ln(x) + 67.926
R² = 0.9777

53.00 53.50

54.00 54.50

55.00 55.50
10 100 Moisture
Number of Blows
Liquid Limit
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714-484-8600

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) SYMBOL Wn (%) LL PI % Clay Description and Classification D 60 D 30 D 10 C u C c P3 7.5 l 21.3
P4 7.5 u 21.2
n
m
o
PROJECT NAME: Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES PROJECT NUMBER: 00661854-9 ASTM D6913
Sandy SILT (ML)
Sandy SILT (ML)

0.0 10.0

20.0 30.0

40.0 50.0

60.0 70.0

80.0 90.0
100.0 PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
3" 2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200
100 50 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.001 U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
CO
B
B
LE

S GRAVEL SAND

SILT AND CLAY COARSE FINE COARSE FINE MEDIUM

HYDROMETER

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066-1854
Attachment B
Percolation Test Results

Boring Percolation Test Datasheet
Date:

Work Order No.:

Technician:

Weather:

Test Hole Number and Location: P1 (West End of Proposed North Biofiltration Basin) Depth of Test Hole bottom below ground surface: 101 inches Test hole cross-section: 8 inches inches
The land surface at the top of the test hole is:

Soil Data from Test Hole P1:

Perforated PVC Pipe Diameter = 3 in.

Pipe Underlayment = Solid End Cap
Pipe Length = 10ft.

Stick up above ground = 19 in.

Hole depth = 8 ft., 5in.

Test Hole Presoaking:

Run
#
Start
Date
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Start
Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End
Time
(H:M)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Applied
Head (ft.)
1 Soak hole overnight with approximately 4 feet of water head on 6/3/24 2 6/4/24 8.21 7:50 8.22 8:50 0.01 0.12 60 1.8
Test Hole Percolation:

Run
#
Start
Time
(H:M)
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
WL Drop
% Change
Average
Head
(ft.)
Volume of H20
Discharged (in.3)
Percolation
Rate (in/hr)
1 8:50 8.22 9:20 8.23 30 0.01 0.1 1.8 6.0 0.02
2 9:20 8.23 9:50 8.24 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.8 6.0 0.02
3 9:50 8.24 10:20 8.25 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.8 6.0 0.02
4 10:20 8.25 10:50 8.26 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.7 6.0 0.02
5 10:50 8.26 11:20 8.27 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.7 6.0 0.02
6 11:20 8.27 11:50 8.28 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.7 6.0 0.02
Average = 1.8 ft.

Final Stabilized Percolation Rate: 0 in/hour
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
Atterberg CL
Qp = 4.5 tsf
[Possible Fill - Concrete Pieces]
Asphalt Pavement
Depth (ft)

7.5 Silty CLAY w/ Sand (CL), dark gray, stiff, moist.

Soil Texture
Address: 20701 Currier Road Nicholas Barba
Walnut, CA 91789 Partly Cloudy, 72°
Client: Sysco Corporation 6/4/2024
Project: Proposed Infiltration Basin 00661854-9
Square:

Undisturbed Native Soil Cut Surface Fill Surface
Other (describe):

Diameter:

0.02085

0.02086

0.02087

0.02088

0.02089

0.02090
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Percolation Rate (in/hr)
Run#
Percolation Rates for P1

0.00 0.02

0.04 0.06

0.08 0.10

0.12 0.14

0.16 0.18
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Total Accumulated Volume (Gallons) Total Time (minutes)
Time-Discharge Curve for P1

Boring Percolation Test Datasheet
Date:

Work Order No.:

Technician:

Weather:

Test Hole Number and Location: P2 (East End of Proposed North Biofiltration Basin) Depth of Test Hole bottom below ground surface: 100 inches Test hole cross-section: 8 inches inches
The land surface at the top of the test hole is:

Soil Data from Test Hole P1:

Perforated PVC Pipe Diameter = 3 in.

Pipe Underlayment = Solid End Cap
Pipe Length = 10ft.

Stick up above ground = 20 in.

Hole depth = 8 ft., 4in.

Test Hole Presoaking:

Run
#
Start
Date
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Start
Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End
Time
(H:M)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Applied
Head (ft.)
1 Soak hole overnight with approximately 4 feet of water head on 6/3/24 2 6/4/24 8.43 7:55 8.82 8:55 0.39 4.68 60 1.6
Test Hole Percolation:

Run
#
Start
Time
(H:M)
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
WL Drop
% Change
Average
Head
(ft.)
Volume of H20
Discharged (in.3)
Percolation
Rate (in/hr)
1 8:55 8.44 9:25 8.65 30 0.21 2.5 1.5 126.7 0.52
2 9:25 8.44 9:55 8.64 30 0.20 2.4 5% 1.5 120.6 0.50
3 9:55 8.49 10:25 8.69 30 0.20 2.4 0% 1.4 120.6 0.50
4 10:25 8.46 10:55 8.65 30 0.19 2.3 5% 1.4 114.6 0.47
5 10:55 8.45 11:25 8.64 30 0.19 2.3 0% 1.5 114.6 0.47
6 11:25 8.46 11:55 8.65 30 0.19 2.3 0% 1.4 114.6 0.47
Average = 1.4 ft.

Final Stabilized Percolation Rate: 0.5 in/hour
Asphalt Pavement
Client: Sysco Corporation 6/4/2024
Project: Proposed Infiltration Basin 00661854-9
Address: 20701 Currier Road Nicholas Barba
Walnut, CA 91789 Partly Cloudy, 72°
Depth (ft) Soil Texture

7.5 Elastic SILT (MH) with Sand, dark gray, stiff, moist.

Qp = 4.0 tsf
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
**percent change between the highest and lowest readings for three consecutive readings
Atterberg MH
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
Square:

Undisturbed Native Soil Cut Surface Fill Surface
Other (describe):

Diameter:

0.46 0.47

0.48 0.49

0.50 0.51

0.52 0.53
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Percolation Rate (in/hr)
Run#
Percolation Rates for P2

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

3.0 3.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Total Accumulated Volume (Gallons) Total Time (minutes)
Time-Discharge Curve for P2

Boring Percolation Test Datasheet
Date:

Work Order No.:

Technician:

Weather:

Test Hole Number and Location: P3 (East End of Proposed South Biofiltration Basin) Depth of Test Hole bottom below ground surface: 101 inches Test hole cross-section: 8 inches inches
The land surface at the top of the test hole is:

Soil Data from Test Hole P1:

Perforated PVC Pipe Diameter = 3 in.

Pipe Underlayment = Solid End Cap
Pipe Length = 10ft., 3in.

Stick up above ground = 22 in.

Hole depth = 8 ft., 5in.

Test Hole Presoaking:

Run
#
Start
Date
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Start
Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End
Time
(H:M)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Applied
Head (ft.)
1 Soak hole overnight with approximately 4 feet of water head on 6/3/24 2 6/4/24 8.45 7:40 8.49 8:40 0.04 0.48 60 1.8
Test Hole Percolation:

Run
#
Start
Time
(H:M)
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
WL Drop
% Change
Average
Head
(ft.)
Volume of H20
Discharged (in.3)
Percolation
Rate (in/hr)
1 8:40 8.49 9:10 8.51 30 0.02 0.2 1.8 12.1 0.04
2 9:10 8.51 9:40 8.53 30 0.02 0.2 0% 1.7 12.1 0.04
3 9:40 8.53 10:10 8.55 30 0.02 0.2 0% 1.7 12.1 0.04
4 10:10 8.55 10:40 8.56 30 0.01 0.1 100% 1.7 6.0 0.02
5 10:40 8.56 11:10 8.57 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.7 6.0 0.02
6 11:10 8.57 11:40 8.58 30 0.01 0.1 0% 1.7 6.0 0.02
Average = 1.7 ft.

Final Stabilized Percolation Rate: 0 in/hour
Gravel Surface
Client: Sysco Corporation 6/4/2024
Project: Proposed Infiltration Basin 00661854-9
Address: 20701 Currier Road Nicholas Barba
Walnut, CA 91789 Partly Cloudy, 72°
Depth (ft) Soil Texture

7.5 Sandy SILT (ML), light gray-brown, stiff, trace clay. *measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
**percent change between the highest and lowest readings for three consecutive readings
See Sieve Analysis
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
Square:

Undisturbed Native Soil Cut Surface Fill Surface
Other (describe):

Diameter:

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Percolation Rate (in/hr)
Run#
Percolation Rates for P3

0.00 0.05

0.10 0.15

0.20 0.25
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Total Accumulated Volume (Gallons) Total Time (minutes)
Time-Discharge Curve for P3

Boring Percolation Test Datasheet
Date:

Work Order No.:

Technician:

Weather:

Test Hole Number and Location: P4 (West End of Proposed South Biofiltration Basin) Depth of Test Hole bottom below ground surface: 101 inches Test hole cross-section: 8 inches inches
The land surface at the top of the test hole is:

Soil Data from Test Hole P1:

Perforated PVC Pipe Diameter = 3 in.

Pipe Underlayment = Solid End Cap
Pipe Length = 10ft., 3in.

Stick up above ground = 22 in.

Hole depth = 8 ft., 5in.

Test Hole Presoaking:

Run
#
Start
Date
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Start
Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End
Time
(H:M)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Applied
Head (ft.)
1 Soak hole overnight with approximately 4 feet of water head on 6/3/24 2 6/4/24 8.42 7:42 8.50 8:42 0.08 0.96 60 1.8
Test Hole Percolation:

Run
#
Start
Time
(H:M)
Start
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
End Time
(H:M)
End
Depth to
WL* (ft.)
Elapsed
Time
(min.)
Measured
Water Drop
(ft.)
Measured
Water Drop
(in.)
WL Drop
% Change
Average
Head
(ft.)
Volume of H20
Discharged (in.3)
Percolation
Rate (in/hr)
1 8:42 8.50 9:12 8.55 30 0.05 0.6 1.7 30.2 0.11
2 9:12 8.55 9:42 8.60 30 0.05 0.6 0% 1.7 30.2 0.11
3 9:42 8.60 10:12 8.65 30 0.05 0.6 0% 1.6 30.2 0.11
4 10:12 8.65 10:42 8.69 30 0.04 0.5 25% 1.6 24.1 0.09
5 10:42 8.69 11:12 8.73 30 0.04 0.5 0% 1.5 24.1 0.09
6 11:12 8.77 11:42 8.81 30 0.04 0.5 0% 1.5 24.1 0.09
Average = 1.6 ft.

Final Stabilized Percolation Rate: 0 in/hour
Gravel Surface
Client: Sysco Corporation 6/4/2024
Project: Proposed Infiltration Basin 00661854-9
Address: 20701 Currier Road Nicholas Barba
Walnut, CA 91789 Partly Cloudy, 72°
Depth (ft) Soil Texture

7.5 Sandy SILT (ML), light gray-brown, stiff.
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
**percent change between the highest and lowest readings for three consecutive readings
See Sieve Analysis
*measured from top of PVC pipe stick-up
Square:

Undisturbed Native Soil Cut Surface Fill Surface
Other (describe):

Diameter:

0.00 0.02

0.04 0.06

0.08 0.10

0.12 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Percolation Rate (in/hr)
Run#
Percolation Rates for P4

0.0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Total Accumulated Volume (Gallons) Total Time (minutes)
Time-Discharge Curve for P4

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
Proposed Sysco Facility Expansion
20701 Currier Road
Walnut, California 91789
PSI Project No. 0066‐1854
PREPARED FOR:

Sysco Corporation
1390 Enclave Parkway
Houston, Texas 77077
July 8, 2022
BY:

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Phone: (714) 484–8600

Professional Services Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Office – (714) 484‐8600
www.intertek.com/bulding
July 8, 2022
Sysco Corporation
1390 Enclave Parkway
Houston, Texas 77077
Attn:   Michael McLean
[email protected]
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report

PROPOSED SYSCO FACILITY EXPANSION
20701 CURRIER ROAD
WALNUT, CA 91789
PSI Project No. 0066‐1854
Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI), an Intertek company, is pleased to submit this Geotechnical Engineering Report for the above referenced project.   This report includes the results from the field exploration and laboratory testing along with recommendations for use in preparation of the appropriate design and construction documents for this project.

PSI appreciates the opportunity to provide this Geotechnical Engineering Report and looks forward to continuing participation during the design and construction phases of this project.  PSI also has great interest in providing materials testing and inspection services during the construction of this project and will be glad to meet with you to further discuss how we can be of assistance as the project advances.

If there are questions pertaining to this report, or if PSI may be of further service, please contact us at your convenience.

Respectfully submitted,
Professional ServicesIndustries, Inc.

Douglas T. Abernathy, PE, GE   Britton W. Gentry
Senior Project Engineer   Principal Consultant
[email protected]    [email protected] CC:  Cooper Crawford (PSI – NCG)

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.

1.0 Project Information.....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Project Authorization..............................................................................................................................1

1.2 Site Location............................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Project Description..................................................................................................................................1

1.4 Previous Geotechnical Studies...............................................................................................................1

2.0 Regional and Site Geology ..........................................................................................................................3

2.1 Regional Geology ....................................................................................................................................3

2.2 Site Geology.............................................................................................................................................3

2.3 Soil Survey ...............................................................................................................................................3

2.4 Regional Seismicity..................................................................................................................................3

3.0 Site and Subsurface Conditions..................................................................................................................4

3.1 Site Description .......................................................................................................................................4

3.2 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program...............................................................................6

3.3 Subsurface Conditions............................................................................................................................7

3.4 Groundwater Information......................................................................................................................8

4.0 Geotechnical Engineering Analysis.............................................................................................................9

4.1 Liquefaction Estimates............................................................................................................................9

4.2 Expansive Soils ........................................................................................................................................9

4.3 Corrosion Potential .................................................................................................................................9

5.0 Geotechnical Conclusions and Recommendations................................................................................ 11

5.1 Geotechnical Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 11

5.2 Site Preparation.................................................................................................................................... 11

5.3 Earthwork ............................................................................................................................................. 11

5.4 Foundations.......................................................................................................................................... 14

5.5 Floor Slabs ............................................................................................................................................ 15

5.6 Retaining walls ..................................................................................................................................... 16

5.7 Drainage Considerations...................................................................................................................... 17

5.8 Landscaping Considerations................................................................................................................ 18

5.9 Pavement Design ................................................................................................................................. 18

5.10 Plan Review and Construction Observation....................................................................................... 20

6.0 Geotechnical Risk and Report Limitations.............................................................................................. 21

7.0 References................................................................................................................................................ 22

FIGURES 1.  Site Vicinity Map

2.  Approximate Exploration Location Plan
APPENDIX A Field Exploration & Laboratory Testing Program APPENDIX B Liquefaction Evaluation

ii

INDEX OF TABLES
Page No.

Table 3.1: Ground Motion Values...........................................................................................................................5 Table 3.2: Field Exploration Summary ....................................................................................................................6 Table 4.1: Subsoil Corrosivity Characteristics.........................................................................................................9 Table 4.2: Requirements for Concrete Exposed to Sulfate................................................................................. 10 Table 5.1:  Compaction Criteria and Testing Frequency ..................................................................................... 13 Table 5.2:  Pavement Design Parameters............................................................................................................ 19

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION
Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI), an Intertek company, has completed a field exploration and geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Sysco Facility Expansion in Walnut, California at the address referenced above.  This work was performed in general accordance with PSI’s proposal (0066‐368587)signed March 19, 2022.

1.2 SITE LOCATION
Currently the site consists of an existing Sysco food processing facility located north of Currier Road and east of South Lemon Avenue in Walnut, California at the addressreferenced above.  The site is bounded by South San Jose Creek to the north, Currier Road to the south, South Lemon Avenue to the west, and other light industrial and commercial developments to the east.

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Based on the provided site plan (CP‐01, 12/17/21), the proposed development consists of adding single‐story buildings in various areas, mostly east of the main warehouse.   These proposed buildings consist of a proposed cold dock (24,535 square feet), proposed offices(1,389 sf), proposed freezer expansion (41,207 sf), proposed battery charging building (4,145 sf), proposed dry dock (6,987 sf), and proposed dry warehouse (26,422 sf).  Minor buildings will consist of a guard‐shack toward the southeast corner and a service bay toward the west end of the property.  Pavements are proposed to be replaced toward the northern and eastern sides of the main warehouse.  Bio‐retention areas may be added to the northeast corner of the property.

Grading plans were not provided; PSI has anticipated that ±2 feet of cut/fill may be required.  Proposed loadings are anticipated to include column loadings up to 120 kips, wall loadings up to 6 kips/ft, and floorslab loadings to include 12 kip point column loads and 400 psf general loads.

The geotechnical recommendations presented below are based on the available project information, proposed structure locations, and the subsurface materials encountered during the field investigation.

Should any of the above information or design assumptions be inconsistent with the planned construction, it is requested that you contact us immediately to allow us to make any necessary modifications to this report.

PSI will not be held responsible for changes to the project if not provided the opportunity to review the information and provide modifications to our recommendations.

1.4 PREVIOUSGEOTECHNICAL STUDIES

1.4.1 PSI(11/30/2016)
Previously, PSI performed a pavement study in 2016 at this site, west of the main warehouse and toward Lemon Avenue (PSI Project No. 0559‐1932, 11/30/16).  Seven borings were advanced to depths of 6 to 11½ feet below ground surface (bgs).  These borings encountered mainly stiff sandy silt near the ground surface.

Medium stiff to very stiff silty clay was encountered below this surficial silt layer at depths ranging from approximately 1 to 9½ feet bgs.  The clay had an expansion indices of 17 and 66 (very low to medium).  R‐ values were tested at two locations resulting in values of 11 and 24.  Groundwater was not encountered in these seven borings which extended to depths of about 11½ feet bgs.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

1.4.2 SCG(4/18/2008)
Southern California Geotechnical (SCG) investigated the site for a cooler expansion as documented in their report dated April 18, 2008.  This cooler expansion is located in the northeast corner of the main facility and anticipated maximum column loadings of 50 kips with wall loadings of 2 to 4 kips per linear foot.  Their investigation included drilling five soil borings to depths of 15 to 46 feet bgs.  They report encountering undocumented fillsoilsto depths of about 2½ to 3 feet bgs with possible fillsoils extending to depths of about 2½ to 5 ½ feet bgs.   Soils were described as alluvial silts, sands, and clays extending down to depths of approximately 12 to 42 feet bgs.  Below this alluvium theirinvestigation encountered sandstone and siltstone bedrock of the Monterey Formation.  Groundwater was measured at a depth of approximately 19 to 20 feet bgs.  A sample of near‐surface soils was tested for expansion and resulted in very low expansion potential (EI=18).

A liquefaction evaluation was performed using a PGA of 0.50g and a magnitude of 6.8 along with a historic high groundwater depth of 19 feet bgs.  This evaluation was based on the 2007 California Building Code.  Their evaluation included use of “Chinese Criteria” which has since become outdated.  Based on their evaluation, no liquefaction of the site soils was estimated.

1.4.3 SCG(7/16/2009)
Southern California Geotechnical (SCG) investigated the site for a meeting center expansion as documented in their report dated July 16, 2009.  This meeting center expansion is located in the southside of the main facility and anticipated maximum column loads of up to 50 kips with wall loadings up to 2 to 4 kips per linear foot.  Their investigation included drilling three soil borings to depths of 20 to 50 feet bgs.  They report encountering undocumented fill soils in all borings to depths of approximately 3 to 6½ feet bgs.  Below this fill they encountered alluvial soils to the termination of their investigation at 50 feet bgs.  Groundwater was located at a depth of approximately 30 feet bgs.  A near‐surface soilsample wastested for expansion potential and indicated an expansion index of 77 (medium).

A liquefaction evaluation was performed using a PGA of 0.50g and a magnitude of 6.8 along with a historic high groundwater depth of 19 feet bgs.  This evaluation was based on the 2007 California Building Code.  Their evaluation included use of “Chinese Criteria” which hassince become outdated.  Based on their evaluation, a liquefaction potential was estimated to exist at depths of 22 to 27 feet bgs resulting in approximately 1 inch of seismic settlement.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

2.0 REGIONAL AND SITE GEOLOGY

2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The site is located within the Peninsular Range physiographic province of California which contains the Los Angeles Basin.  This province consists of a series of rangesseparated by northwest trending valley subparallel to faults branching from the San Andreas Fault (CGS, 2002).

2.2 SITE GEOLOGY
Based on geologic mapping of the area by Dibblee and Minch (2002), the site geology consists of alluvial deposits consisting mostly of gravel and sand of valley areas.  Borings at the site encountered sandstone and siltstone/claystone of the Monterey formation below alluvium.

2.3 SOIL SURVEY
Based on a USDA Soil Survey Report of the area, the site is generally underlain by urban land (Ballona‐Typic Xerorthents Complex) consisting of clay loam and clay.  This soil unit is reported to have a low potential for concrete corrosion and is not rated for potential of steel corrosion.

2.4 REGIONAL SEISMICITY
The project site is located in Southern California, which has undergone a complex multiphase structural history and remains an active tectonic region with documented historic earthquakes.   Generally, the seismicity within California can be attributed to faulting due to regional tectonic movement.  This includes the San Andreas Fault and othersub‐parallelstrike‐slip faults, as well as normal and thrust faulting within the State. The area of the subject site is considered seismically active.  Seismic hazards within the site can be attributed to potential ground shaking resulting from earthquake events along nearby or more distant faulting.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

3.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 SITEDESCRIPTION
Based on our site visits and fieldwork, the property consists of an existing Sysco food processing facility.  This development consists of large warehouse in the center of the property surrounded by asphalt parking lots and drive aisles with concrete dolly pads.  Several one‐story buildings are located throughout the property.

A solar panel area exists in the southeast corner.  A site vicinity map is on Figure 1.

3.1.1 TOPOGRAPHY
Based on the San Dimas Quadrangle (2021), the site has an elevation of approximately EL 530 feet above Mean Sea Level.   Surface water drainage appears to flow to the west toward San Jose Creek Diversion Channel.

3.1.2 FAULTING
According to the Alquist‐Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 (revised 1994) faults have been classified as active faults which show apparent movement during the last 11,000 years (i.e., Holocene time).  Based on California Geologic Survey (CGS) information the site is not located within an Alquist‐Priolo faultzone, and no faults are known to traverse the site.  Based on the CGS Fault Activity Map, active faults that may affect the project include the Whittier Fault (located approximately 4.8 miles southwest of the site) and the potentially active San Jose Fault (located approximately 2.2 miles northwest of the site).

3.1.3 LURCHING AND SHALLOW GROUND RUPTURE
Evidence of active fault rupture was not observed within the explored areas of the site at the time of our subsurface exploration.  PSI did not observe mapped faults crossing the site in readily available resources.  As such, the potential for ground rupture from faulting at the site is considered to be low.

3.1.4 LIQUEFACTION
Soil liquefaction and seismically‐induced settlement typically occur in saturated loose to medium dense cohesionlesssoils; and in clays and silts with low plasticity indexes and with moistures near their liquid limits, due to cyclic softening where the groundwater is relatively shallow (within 50 feet of the ground surface).

During an earthquake, ground shaking causes a rapid increase in the porewater pressure within the soil mass under undrained conditions.  The generation of excess porewater pressures causes a corresponding decrease in the soil’s effective stress, which can result in a sudden loss of soil bearing strength and ground surface settlement within the liquefied (and softened) soil layers.  Soil liquefaction potential is generally affected by soil types, mineral contents, ground acceleration, duration of shaking, and frequency content of the earthquake ground motion, among other factors.

According to the California Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the San Dimas Quadrangle (SHZR‐032), historical high groundwater depths are reported at about 20 feet bgs.  Based on the CGS Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation for the San Dimas Quadrangle (1999), the site is delineated as having potential for liquefaction.

Due to this delineation, a liquefaction evaluation was performed for the proposed habitable buildings and is included in the scope of this report.

3.1.5 LATERAL SPREADING
Due to the anticipated liquefaction potential at this site, the potential for lateral spreading or surficial disturbance (sand boils, grabens, etc.) was also estimated.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

3.1.6 TSUNAMIS AND SEICHES
Inundation by tsunamis (seismic or "tidal waves") are not likely to be considered a significant threat to the subjectsite due the site elevation and distance to the ocean.  Based on there being no large, confined bodies of water near the site, the site is also not considered subject to seiches.

3.1.7 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY
Seismically induced landsliding is not considered a hazard on or adjacentto the projectsite due to the absence of significant, natural steep slopes in or around the project area.  We do not anticipate that the proposed structures will add loadings to the walls supporting the sides of the San Jose Creek Diversion Channel to the north.

3.1.8 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
PSI has employed the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), the locally adopted version of the International Building Code, 2018 edition.  We anticipate that the project is governed by the International Building Code (IBC), 2018 edition.  As part of this code, the design ofstructures must consider dynamic forcesresulting from seismic events.  These forces are dependent upon the magnitude of the earthquake event as well as the properties of the soils that underlie the site.

As part of the procedure to evaluate seismic forces, the code requiresthe evaluation of the Seismic Site Class, which categorizes the site based upon the characteristics of the subsurface profile within the upper 100 feet of the ground surface.  Our CPT probes extended to maximum depths of approximately 60 feet bgs, but to define the Site Class for this project, we have interpreted the results of probes advanced within the project site and estimated appropriate soil properties below the base of the probes to a depth of 100 feet as permitted by the code.   The average shear wave velocity in the upper 100 feet of the soil column was estimated to be approximately 814 feet per second at the CPT‐5 location.

Based upon our CPT shear wave velocity measurements, the subsurface conditions at the site are consistent with the characteristics of a Site Class “D” (stiff soil) as defined in Chapter 20.3‐1 of the ASCE 7‐16.  The associated probabilistic ground acceleration values and site coefficients for the general site area were obtained from the USGS geohazards web page (https://seismicmaps.org/) using the ASCE 7‐16 option and are presented in the table below.

TABLE 3.1:GROUND MOTION VALUES
Period (sec) Mapped MCE Spectral
Response Acceleration (g) Site Coefficients
Adjusted MCER
Spectral Response
Acceleration (g)
Design Spectral
Response
Acceleration (g)

0.2 Ss 1.781 Fa 1 SMs 1.781 SDs 1.187

1.0 S1 0.628 Fv * SM1 * SD1 *
2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 yearsfor Latitude, Longitude: 34.0089°, ‐117.8535° MCER = Maximum Considered Earthquake
* See 11.4.8 in ASCE 7‐16
The Site Coefficientsreferring to ASCE 7‐16 Section 11.4.8 require the structural engineerto apply appropriate calculations as needed.   Design of structures should comply with the requirements of the governing justification’s building codes and standard practices of the Structural Engineering Association of California.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

In accordance with ASCE 7‐16, Chapter 11, for a site with S1>0.2, the Fa value is governed by Section 11.4.8.

Section 11.4.8 requires a ground motion hazard analysis be performed for structures with seismic isolation elements or damping systems on all sites having S1>0.2.  Section 11.4.8 includes an exception where ground motion hazard analyses “is not required for structures other than seismically isolated structures and structures with dampening systems where” the seismic response coefficient of the structure (Chapter 12) meets specific requirements.  This report is based on no seismic isolation elements or dampening systems being installed and exceptions can be applied.

3.2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
Prior to initiation of field drilling activities, the proposed construction area was marked with white paint and DigAlert was contacted a minimum of 48 hours priorto beginning work to locate any potential buried utilities.

The DigAlert identification number for the utility locate request was #A21100649 and A221100651.

Additionally, PSI subcontracted a private utility location service to verify that the proposed boring locations were clear of subsurface utilities.  Prior to drilling, PSI also obtained a Well/Exploration Permit (SR0291700) from the Los Angeles County Environmental Health Department.

To evaluate soil conditions at the subject site, PSI advanced 11 geotechnical soil borings and five Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) probes.   The borings were drilled with a truck‐mounted CME‐75 drill rig, using hollow‐stem auger drilling methods.  The CPT probes were advanced using a truck‐mounted, 30‐ton CPT rig.

The exploration design element, exploration type, approximate exploration depth, and total approximate footage are summarized in Table 3.2 below.  Locations ofthe soil borings and CPT probes are shown on Figure

2. TABLE 3.2: FIELD EXPLORATION SUMMARY
Design Element Exploration
Type
Number of
Explorations
Exploration
Depth (ft)
Total Footage
(ft)
Cold Dock and Offices
Soil Boring 1 31
66 CPTs 2 16+19
Freezer Expansion CPTs 2 60 60
Dry Dock and Battery Charging Building   Soil Boring 1 31 31 Dry Warehouse CPT 1 60 60
Service Bay
Soil Boring 1 31
64 CPT 1 33
Bio‐Retention Area Soil Borings 2 21+21 42
Pavement Areas Soil Borings 6 6 36
TOTAL: 16 ‐‐‐  359
The boring and CPT probe locations were selected by PSI personnel and located in the field based on existing site features. However, elevations of the ground surface at the boring and probe locations were not provided and should be surveyed by others prior to construction.  The references to elevations of various subsurface strata are based on depths below existing grade at the time of drilling/probing.

Boring sampling procedures were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM methods (ASTM D1586 and ASTM D3550).  Samples were identified in the field, placed in sealed containers, and transported to the laboratory for further classification and testing.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

During drilling field activities, the encountered subsurface conditions were observed, logged, and visually classified (in general accordance with ASTM D2488/D2487).  Field notes were maintained to summarize soil types and descriptions, water levels, changes in subsurface conditions, and drilling conditions.

PSI supplemented the drilling field exploration with a laboratory testing program to determine additional engineering characteristics of the subsurface soils encountered.   The laboratory testing program was conducted in general accordance with applicable ASTM and Caltrans Test Methods, and is included in Appendix A.  Portions of samples not altered or consumed by laboratory testing will be discarded 30 days from the date shown on this report.

The CPT probes were performed in accordance with ASTM D5778.  CPT is an in‐situ testing method used to determine the geotechnical engineering properties of soils and to delineate soil lithology.  During a CPT sounding, the electric cone (tip angle 60°) and the sounding rods are pushed continuously into the ground.

Intermittent measurements of the cone resistance (qt), sleeve friction (fs), and pore pressure (u) are measured and recorded by the electric cone while it is being pushed into the ground.  The measurements from a CPT can be used to correlate a multitude of geotechnical parameters, including:
 Approximate Soil Type
 Undrained shear strength (Su)
 Effective friction angle (φ’, degree)
 Coefficient of consolidation (Cv, cm2
/sec)
 Over‐consolidation Ratio (OCR)
CPT data can be used in various geotechnical analyses including soil behavior type, soil bearing capacity, estimated settlement, liquefaction settlement, lateral spread, foundation‐design criteria, slope stability, and seismic site class.

Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDTs) were conducted at several locations to measure equilibrium water pressure at the time of the CPT sounding.  Asthe conditions are anticipated to be hydrostatic, the equilibrium water pressure can be used to determine the approximate depth of the groundwater table.  Seismic shear wave velocities weremeasured at 3‐footintervalsin CPT‐3/3A and CPT‐5 to characterize the seismic site class.

The CPT data is included in Appendix A.

Borings and CPT probe holes advanced deeper than 10 feet bgs were backfilled with cement grout, in accordance with the Los Angeles County permit.  County inspections were performed onsite by Mr. Yonas Taye.  Borings drilled to 10 feet bgs and shallower were backfilled with soil cuttings.  Borings and CPT probe holes were patched to match the existing surface conditions.

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The results of the field and laboratory testing indicate generally encountering various layers of stiff to hard silty clay,sandy silt, and silt along with layers of medium dense to very dense silty sand and sand to depths of approximately 60 feet bgs.  Layers of medium stiff silts and clays along with loose sands were also observed.

Harder (denser) layers and exploration refusal wasreached atsome of the northern locations[B1@31½ feet, C1@33 feet, C3/3A@19 feet, B5@7 feet, B8@4½ feet, and B11@16½ feet bgs which may consist of bedrock of the Monterey formation.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

The exploration logs included in Appendix A should be reviewed for specific information at individual exploration locations.  The logsinclude soil descriptions,stratifications, locations ofthe samples, and field and laboratory test data.  The descriptions provided on the logs only represent the conditions at that actual exploration location;the stratificationsrepresentthe approximate boundaries between subsurfacematerials.

The actual transitions between strata may be more gradual and less distinct.  Variations will occur and should be expected across the site.

3.4 GROUNDWATER INFORMATION
Groundwater was generally encountered at depths of 15.8 to 28.4 feet bgs in our explorations extending to maximum depths of 60 feet bgs.   Possible perched groundwater appeared to be encountered at probe location C5 at a depth of approximately 13 feet bgs.  In general, groundwater levels appear to be shallower toward the San Jose Creek Diversion Channel.

According to the California Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the San Dimas Quadrangle (SHZR‐032), historical high groundwater depths are reported at approximately 20 feet bgs.  Based on the California Department of Water Resources database, groundwater depths near the site area appear to be below depths of approximately 35 feet.  As such, groundwater is not expected to impact the proposed construction.  It is possible, however, that transient, saturated ground conditions at shallower depths could develop at a later time during periods of heavy precipitation, landscape watering, leaking water lines, or other unforeseen causes.  Variations in groundwater levels should be expected seasonally, annually, and from location to location.

The groundwater levels presented in this report were measured at the time of PSI field activities.   The contractor should determine the actual groundwater levels at the site before construction activities.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

4.1 LIQUEFACTION ESTIMATES
A liquefaction evaluation has been performed for this site using CPT data and an estimated PGAm of 0.83g, a mean magnitude earthquake of 6.74, and a historic high groundwater table of 20 feet bgs.  This analysis was performed using the GeoLogismiki CPeT‐IT and CLiq software.  Liquefaction estimates indicate that various layers of susceptible soils between depths of roughly 20 to 27 feet bgs and 41 to 50 feet bgs may liquefy during a major earthquake.  Ifsuch liquefaction were to occur, based on the design earthquake, itis estimated that less than 1 inch of seismic settlement may occur below the investigation area.  The general area can be expected to experience such movements; however, differential seismic settlements may be estimated as being roughly half of the total seismic settlement.  Surficial disturbances such as lateral spreading and sand boils are not expected to occur due to the limited liquefaction potential at depth and the non‐liquefiable layers above.  See Appendix B for the liquefaction evaluation.

4.2 EXPANSIVE SOILS
The expansion index (potential) of near‐surface clayey soil (from borings B4 & B10) was measured asranging from 24 to 53 (Low to Medium).  Previous testing onsite resulted in expansion indices of 17 to 77 (Very Low to Medium).  Following site grading, testing of site soils should be performed by the project geotechnical consultant to confirm the basis of these recommendations.  Depending upon the distribution of soil types and expansion/swell characteristics, differing design recommendations may be developed to better suit the types of conditions present at the site.

4.3 CORROSION POTENTIAL
Both metal and concrete elements in contact with soil are subject to corrosion or degradation due to the chemical activity of the soil.  Therefore, buried metal and concrete elementsshould be designed to resist this chemical activity.  Soil samples recovered from the borings were evaluated for the corrosivity characteristics of the subsoils.  A soil sample was submitted to an analytical lab to determine the Sulfate, Chloride, and pH characteristics.  The test results of the laboratory testing are presented in the following table.

TABLE 4.1: SUBSOIL CORROSIVITY CHARACTERISTICS
Sample Depth
(ft)
Water‐Soluble Sulfate (SO4)
in Soil ppm (mg/kg) [%]
Water‐Soluble
Chloride Content
in soil ppm (mg/kg)
pH
B1 1 – 3 1481 [0.1481] 138 7.2
B5 3½ 189 [0.0189] 62 7.3
B11 3½ 140 [0.014] 39 7.3

4.3.1 CHEMICAL ATTACK POTENTIAL FORDEGRADATION OF CONCRETE AND/OR METALS The concentration of water‐soluble sulfates or dissolved sulfate in water is considered to be a good indicator of the potential for chemical attack on concrete.  Based on ACI Manual of Concrete Practice (ACI 201.2R‐10) or (ACI 318/318R‐33, Table 19.3.1.1), the amount of water‐soluble sulfate in soil can be used to evaluate the need for protection of concrete based on the following table.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

TABLE 4.2: REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE Water‐soluble sulfate (SO4) in Soil
percent by mass(%)
Water‐Soluble Sulfate (SO4)
in Water ppm (mg/kg) Sulfate Exposure Class
SO4
‐ < 0.10 SO4‐ < 150 S0 or Negligible Exposure

0.10 ≤ SO4
‐ < 0.20 150 ≤ SO4‐ < 1,500 S1 or Moderate Exposure

0.20 ≤ SO4
‐
≤ 2.0 1,500 ≤ SO4
‐
≤ 10,000 S2 or Severe Exposure

2.0 < SO4
‐ 10,000 < SO4‐ S3 or Very Severe Exposure
Based on the testresults ofselected soilsamples,the sulfate ion concentration was 251 ppmand the potential for reactions within concrete exposed to sulfates is considered negligible to moderate with a Class S0 to S1 Exposure.  Evaluations ofsoluble sulfate content contained within the selected samplessuggest no restriction on the type of concrete.  The actual cement type to be used shall be determined by the project Structural Engineer.

The corrosion potential of the soils is also dependent on the chloride content present in the soil.  The onset of corrosion ofsteel in concrete associated with the presence of chloride typically occurs when the values are above 463 mg/kg or ppm (1.5 pounds/yd3
).  The American Concrete Institute suggests maximum values of chlorides in conventionally reinforced concrete in moist environments be limited to 0.10% by weight of cement.

Soil pH can have a wide range of acidity, between 2.5 and 10.  Concrete is alkaline in nature, meaning it has a pH of 7.0 or higher.  pH levels below 5 can lead to extreme corrosion rates and premature pitting of metallic objects, a neutral pH of 7 is most desirable to minimize potential for damage.  The intrinsic pH level of a soil can also be affected by precipitation.  The pH values of the composite sample tested exhibited values which indicates the soils have a low corrosive potential.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 GEOTECHNICALDISCUSSION
The following geotechnical related recommendations have been developed on the basis of the subsurface conditions encountered and PSI’s understanding of the proposed development.  Based on our investigation, the site appears to be capable of supporting the proposed development while having no affect on adjacent properties.  The primary geotechnical consideration at this site is the potential for liquefaction and seismic settlement if the design earthquake were to occur.  PSI estimatesthat up to 1 inch of totalseismic settlement may occur below the proposed structures.  Structural designs or ground improvements may be implemented to mitigate these potential ground movements if desired.  Additionally, medium expansive, medium stiff clayey soils were also encountered to depths of approximately 11 feet bgs.  Should changes in the project criteria occur, a review must be made by PSI to determine if modifications to our recommendations will be required.

The following geotechnical design recommendations have been developed based on the previously described project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered.   The proposed construction should be performed in accordance with these recommendations and the applicable building code, and local governmental standards which have jurisdiction over this project.  If there are changes in the project criteria, PSI should be retained to determine if modificationsin the recommendations will be required.  The findings of such a review would be presented in a supplemental report.  Once final design plans and specifications are available, a general review by PSI isrecommended to confirm that the conditions anticipated in preparing this geotechnicalreport are consistent with the earthwork and foundation recommendations contained within the construction documents.

5.2 SITE PREPARATION
The site development area should be cleared of all pavements, undocumented fill, utilities, surface vegetation, previous structures, or other improvements in conflict with the new construction.  All materials resulting from demolition of the existing improvements should be legally disposed off‐site.  Prepared areas should extend at least 5 feet outside the proposed improvements where possible.  Prepared areas and base of excavationsshould be proof‐rolled with heavy equipment (minimum 15 tons) prior to filling above.  Proof‐ rolled areas should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12‐inches and compacted as described below.

5.3 EARTHWORK

5.3.1 OVER‐EXCAVATION
PSI recommends removing the unsuitable soils including medium expansive clay soil and possible fill from below the proposed building areas.  These unsuitable soils should be replaced by compacted Engineered Fill having an expansion index of 50 or below.  Where unsuitable soils are encountered in subgrade excavations, PSI recommends that the subgrade soils within proposed structural areas be over‐excavated to a minimum depth of approximately 3 feet below the proposed foundations.  The base of the over‐excavation should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the building footprint or for a minimum width equal to the depth of fill constructed below, whichever is greater.  The intent of this recommendation is to provide a suitable foundation subgrade and to reduce post‐construction settlements to within tolerable limits.

In addition to the over‐excavation of structural areas, PSI recommends the soils within the pavement areas be scarified at least 12 inches below the finished subgrade elevation and compacted as described below to provide a uniform consistency of the soil subgrade.  Pavement subgrade areas consisting of softer, moist,

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

highly‐plastic clays (Fat clays, CH) should be over‐excavated an additional minimum of 12‐inches prior to scarification below and compacting fill back into place to meet subgrade excavations.

Following site preparation and over‐excavation, the newly exposed subgrades in site improvement areas intended for structures and pavements must be approved by the Geotechnical Engineering representative prior to fill placement above.  These exposed subgrades should be proof rolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck or similar piece of rubber‐tired equipment (15 tons or greater) in the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer’s representative.   The purpose of the proof rolling is to detect the existence of unsuitable soils that may require over‐excavation and compaction.   Areas which deflect, rut or pump excessively during proof rolling, and which cannot de densified in‐place, should be undercut to suitable soils and backfilled with compacted fill.  Proof rolling should not be performed on saturated, frozen soil or during wet weather conditions.  Once approved, the soils exposed at the base of all excavations should be scarified to a depth of atleast 12 inches, moisture conditioned and then compacted as described below priorto placing Engineered Fill above.

5.3.2 FILL MATERIALS
Engineered Fill may include both onsite (native and fill) and import soil, should not contain rock fragments greater than 3 inches in diameter or have greater than 30 percent retained on the ¾‐inch sieve, and should not contain more than 3 percent (by weight) of organic matter or other unsuitable material.  On‐site or Imported Engineered Fill soils should have an Expansion Index (EI) that does not exceed 50.  Based on our subsurface investigation, existing on‐site soils are generally suitable for use as Engineered Fill once processed and blended or mixed.  The suitability of onsite materials for use as engineered fill should be confirmed by a PSI representative during grading.  Import materials meeting the above requirementsshould be approved by laboratory testing several days prior to importing to the site.  Soils that are environmentally impacted should not be used as Engineered Fill onsite.

In general, Engineered Fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor (ASTM D1557).  If tilt‐up construction is used, and within the top 12‐ inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of this proctor.  The moisture content of Engineered Fill should be maintained at approximately +2 percent of the material’s optimum moisture content if non‐plastic and 0 to 4 percent above optimum if plastic.  If the Engineered Fill is too dry, water should be uniformly applied across the affected fill area.  If the Engineered Fill is too wet, it must be dried.

Engineered Fill should be thoroughly mixed by disking, or other approved methods, to obtain relatively uniform moisture content throughout the lift immediately prior to compaction.

Engineered Fill should be placed in maximum lifts of 8 inches of loose material.  Each lift of Engineered Fill should be tested by a PSI soils technician, working under the direction of our Project Geotechnical Engineer, prior to placement of subsequent lifts.  If smaller compaction equipment such as jumping jacks or plate compactors are used thinner lifts will be required to achieve compaction.

Compaction of the Engineered Fillshould be verified with a sufficient number of density tests, as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer, to determine if adequate compaction is being achieved by the contractor.  The properly compacted Engineered Fillshould extend horizontally outward beyond the exterior perimeter of the structure a distance equal to the height of newly placed fill below or 5 feet, whichever is greater, prior to significant sloping.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

TABLE 5.1:  COMPACTION CRITERIA AND TESTING FREQUENCY
Material Type (Location)
Per Modified Proctor Test (ASTM D1557)
Minimum
Compaction
(%)
Moisture Content Range
(ref. to optimum moisture content)
Testing
Frequency
Minimum Maximum (min. 3 per lift)
Engineered Fill for non‐plastic soils 90 ‐2% +2% 1 per 2,500 sf Engineered Fill for plastic soils 90 0% +4% 1 per 2,500 sf

5.3.3 EXCAVATIONS
In Federal Register, Volume 54,No. 209 (October 1989),theUnited States Department of Labor,Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P".  This document was issued to better ensure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations.  It is mandated by this federal regulation that excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement excavation or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new OSHA guidelines.  It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if they are not closely followed the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties.

The contractorissolely responsible for designing and constructing stable excavations and should shore,slope, or bench the sides of the excavations asrequired to maintain stability.  The contractor's "responsible person", as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926,should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures.  In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations.

We are providing this information solely as a service to our client.  PSI does not assume responsibility for construction site safety or other parties’ compliance with local,state, and federalsafety or other regulations.

5.3.4 UTILITIES
Utilitiesshould be designed with automatic shutoffs and flexible jointsto accommodate potentialseismically‐ induced ground motions anticipated.  Utility trenches may be backfilled with compacted soil above the pipe zone as described above.  Fill layers should be placed in 6‐ to 8‐inch lifts prior to compaction.  In pavement areas, the top 12‐inches ofsoilsubgrade should reach a minimum of 95 percent of this Proctor.  If rockslarger than 3‐inches in maximum size are encountered, they should be removed from utility backfill material prior to placement in the utility trenches.  Pipe zone backfill requirements should be in conformance with the requirements of the local agencies having jurisdiction, but should consist of clean granular sand material having a sand equivalent equal to or above 30.  Jetting or flooding of utility backfill is not recommended.  If smaller compaction equipment such as jumping jacks or plate compactors are used, thinner lifts will be required to achieve compaction.  Where utilities cross building perimeters, concrete or 2‐sack cement slurry should be used for backfilling around utilities to prevent moisture from migrating along the utility trench and entering the building envelope.  Backfill of utility trenches may incorporate a 2‐sack cement slurry as an alternative to soil compaction.

5.3.5 FLATWORK
For sidewalks or other flatwork adjacent to building and pavement areas, over‐excavation and compaction operations should extend beyond the perimeter of the building and pavements to at least the width of the adjacentsidewalk or flatwork.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

Other sidewalks or flatwork not adjacent to buildings should be placed on an improved subgrade meeting or exceeding the pavement subgrade improvement methods previously recommended.   If the sidewalk subgrade consists of material with a plasticity index of 25 or greater, a 12‐inch‐thick layer of compacted fill should be placed below the sidewalk.

Proper drainage around grade‐supported sidewalks and flatwork is also very important to reduce potential movements.  Elevating the sidewalks where possible and providing rapid, positive drainage away from them will reduce moisture variations within the underlying soils and will therefore provide valuable benefit in reducing the full magnitude of potential movements from being realized.

5.4 FOUNDATIONS
In our opinion, the structural loads of the proposed site improvements can be supported on conventional spread shallow footing foundations constructed in accordance with the following design criteria.  Additionally, PSI recommends that foundation type and bearing strata be consistent below structures.   Once SITE PREPARATION has been performed, the following structural elements may be constructed.

5.4.1 EXISTING BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS
PSI’s scope did not include an evaluation of potential differential settlements between the existing building and the proposed expansion; such an evaluation will require an investigation into the existing foundations and loading.  Based on the as‐built plans provided, it appearsthat the existing building and recent expansions were not placed on deep foundations or ground improvements; therefore, our recommendations have assumed shallow foundations will be required for the proposed structures.

If structural elements will extend to the existing building, an expansion joint should separate the existing building and new additions at the floor level, since some minor differential movement is expected to occur at this juncture.  Alternatively, new foundations could be tied to existing foundations using dowels to help mitigate this movement.   Shallow foundations for the new addition, if immediately adjacent to existing foundations,should bear at the same elevation asthe existing, adjacent foundations.  If the new and existing footings will bear at different elevations, a structural engineer should evaluate the stresses to be imposed on the lower foundation system and confirm that the structural integrity of the existing building and new addition will be maintained.  If the existing building foundations will need to be undermined, temporary shoring may be required.

Parallel foundations should be at least 1.5 footing widths apart (whichever is larger, either existing or new) to help reduce the additional stress imposed on the existing foundations, unless it is determined that the over‐lapping stressimposed by the existing and new foundations are within acceptable limitsfor the existing soil.  Where parallel foundations are farther than 4 feet apart, their different elevations should not place them within a 45‐degree envelope extending upward and downward from the outside edges of the existing foundations.

5.4.2 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
PSI recommends that the subgrade soils within proposed structural areas be over‐excavated to a minimum depth of approximately 3 feet below the proposed foundations.  Shallow spread and continuous footings founded at a depth of atleast 24 inches below lowest adjacentfinished grade can be designed for a maximum net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf).  Minimum widths of 24 inches for column footings and 18 inches for continuous footings should be used in foundation design to reduce the possibility of a local bearing capacity failure.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

If unsuitable soils are encountered at footing excavation bottoms, the unsuitable material should be over excavated to suitable subgrade material and replaced with Engineered Fill or granularstructural fill.  The total width of the over excavation area beneath the design footing elevation should increase by 1 foot for each foot of over‐excavation.  The over excavated areas should be backfilled with Engineered Fill or clean crushed rock and compacted in accordance with the FILL MATERIALS section of this report.  Alternatively, upon approval by the Geotechnical Engineer, the foundation bearing surface could be lowered to the suitable subgrade material, backfilled with lean concrete, or improved through the installation of open graded, clean aggregate.

Based on the anticipated loads and the recommended site preparation, we estimate that post‐ construction total static settlement will be less than 1 inch.  Differential settlement is estimated to be less than ½ inch over a 40‐foot span.  These magnitudes of estimated settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits but should be confirmed by the project architect and structural engineer.

Seismically‐induced liquefaction settlements of less than 1 inch are estimated.  Typically, this magnitude ofsettlement istolerable; however, the structural engineershould consider reinforced slabs and stiffened foundations to accommodate seismic settlements.  If it is desired to reduce potential seismic settlement through other means, ground improvement options such as helical piles or other options can be recommended upon request.

We recommend the use of a smooth‐edged excavator to make the footing excavations.  The foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of PSI prior to steel or concrete placement to assess that the foundation materials can support the design loads and are consistent with the materials and recommendations discussed in this report.

The base frictional resistance and the passive soil resistance will counteract the horizontal loads on shallow foundations. Footings cast against natural competent soil or compacted soil may be designed using a frictional coefficient between the concrete and soil of 0.25.  An ultimate equivalent fluid pressure of 230 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used to compute the ultimate passive resistance.  Passive resistance within the upper 1 feet of soil should be neglected if the footings are placed using form boards.

If the footings are cast against competent natural soils or properly compacted fill soils and the soils above the footings are paved or consist of concrete floor slabs, the passive resistance within the upper 1 feet can be taken into account.  The passive resistance of any un‐compacted fill material or loose natural soils should be neglected.  It is recommended that the overturning moments on the foundations be resisted by the weight of the foundation system.  A minimum factor of safety of 2 should be used for sliding resistance.

After opening, footing excavations should be observed, and concrete should be placed as quickly as possible to avoid exposure of the excavations to wetting and drying.  Surface run‐off water should be drained away from the excavations and not be allowed to pond within 10 feet of the open excavation during or after construction.  When possible, the foundation concrete should be placed during the same day the foundation excavation is made.  If it is required that footing excavations be left open for more than one day, they should be protected to reduce moisture loss or gain.

PSI should be consulted during the design of the foundations to verify that the appropriate parameters are utilized. PSI should provide periodic observation during construction of the foundations to verify that the design parameters and the soil materials used during construction correspond.

5.5 FLOOR SLABS
Soil subgrade below slab‐on‐grade areas should be prepared by proof‐rolling, removing all unsuitable soils, scarified for a minimum depth of 12 inches and compacted as described above.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

Based on the near surface soil encountered, PSI estimates that a unit modulus of subgrade reaction (K1) of 150 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) is suitable for concrete slab sections supported by compacted fill.  The coefficient ofsubgrade reaction (Ks) isthe unit pressure required to produce a unitsettlementin soils.

A general equation to account for the effect of width of foundations in clayey soils is given by:

K = K1/B
where,  B  =   Minimum width of slab in feet.

K1 =   Unit modulus of subgrade reaction for a one‐foot square area.

In areas that will have moisture‐sensitive materials placed directly on the floor, PSI recommends that the slabs‐on‐grade be underlain by a minimum 4 inches of sand or rounded aggregate base to provide a capillary break.  A durable vapor‐retarding membrane should be installed beneath the slab‐on‐grade to reduce the risks of damp floors.   The vapor‐retarding membrane should be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.

5.6 RETAINING WALLS
If retaining walls are anticipated for loading docks or elsewhere, the following recommendations are provided.

5.6.1 GENERALDESIGN CRITERIA
If retaining walls are proposed, cantilever earth retention structures, which are designed to yield at least

0.001H, where H is equal to the height of the earth retention structure to the base of its footing, may be designed using active conditions.  Rigid earth retention structures (including but not limited to rigid walls) should be designed using the at‐rest condition.

In addition to the design lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharges due to existing improvements, such as adjacent buildings or traffic loading, should be considered in the design of the earth retention structures.

Loads applied within a 1:1 (h:v) projection from the surcharge on the stem and footing of the earth retention structure should be considered in the design.

Final selection of the appropriate design parameters should be made by the designer of the earth retention structures.

5.6.2 CANTILEVERED WALLS
The recommendations presented below are for cantilevered retaining walls.  Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflections.

An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall.

Appropriate fluid unit weights are given below forspecific slope gradients of the retained material.  These do not include other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, or adverse geologic conditions.

Table 1 – Active Earth Pressure Recommendations
Surface Slope of Retained
Materials
(h:v)
Equivalent Fluid Pressure
(pcf)
(Native/Select Backfill)*
Level 40

1.5:1 65
*  The design pressures assume the backfill material has very low expansion index less than or equal to 20.  Backfill zone includes area between back of the

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

wall to a plane (1:1 h:v) up from bottom of the wall foundation (on the backside of the wall) to the (sloped) ground surface.

5.6.3 RESTRAINED RETAINING WALLS
Retaining walls that will be restrained at the top or that have reentrant or male corners, should be designed for an equivalent at‐rest fluid pressure of 60 for level conditions, respectively.  If any vertical surcharge loads will be placed within 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) from the base of wall, PSI should be contacted to estimate additional lateral earth pressures that should be added to the at‐rest earth pressures.

5.6.4 RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND DRAINAGE
Retaining walls should be provided with an adequate pipe and gravel back drain system to help prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures where this potential exists.  Backdrains should consist of a minimum 4‐ inch diameter perforated collector pipe (Schedule 40, SDR 35, or approved equivalent) embedded in a minimum of one (1) cubic foot per linear foot of ¾‐  to 1‐inch clean crushed rock or an approved equivalent, wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or an approved equivalent).  The drain system should be connected to a suitable outlet or weep‐holes.

Retaining wall backfillshould be placed in lifts no greaterthan eight (8) inchesin thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557 as Engineered Fill.  The wall drainage should include a minimum two (2) feet wide section of ¾‐ to 1‐inch clean crushed rock (or an approved equivalent).  The rock should be placed immediately adjacent to the back of the wall and extend up from a back drain to within approximately 24 inches of the finish grade.

The rock should be separated from the earth with filter fabric as described above.  The upper 24 inches should consist of compacted on‐site plastic (clayey) material.

Waterproofing the back of the retaining walls should be considered to mitigate water staining, infiltration, and moisture migration through the wall.  If a waterproofing system is used, it should be designed by a qualified waterproofing consultant.

5.6.5 RETAINING WALL FOUNDATIONS
Retaining walls may be supported by conventional shallow continuous (strip) footings bearing on competent native soil or compacted fill as described above for shallow foundations.   Construction joints should be installed at all changes in bearing material (native/fill) and above or below foundation steps.

5.7 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
Site grading should be carefully planned to promote positive drainage away from the structures and to divert surface water away from or into stormwater systems.  Water should not be allowed to collect near the foundations either during or after construction.

Pavement surfaces and open space areas should be sloped such that surface water runoff is collected and routed to suitable discharge points.  We also recommend that ground surfaces adjacentto buildings be sloped to facilitate positive drainage away from the buildings.

A positive slope gradient of 5 percent down and away from the structure’s perimeter should be applied to the finished subgrade (inclusive of topsoil).  This slope should extend no less than 10 feet away from the outside building perimeter, with drainage swales provided to remove runoff from around the structure.  Any utility trench that entersthe perimeter of a structuresshould be excavated with a slightslope down and away from the perimeter of the structure.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

5.8 LANDSCAPING CONSIDERATIONS
Landscaped or planted areas and irrigation should not be placed within 5 feet of the footings of the proposed structures.  Generally, irrigated landscaping should be positioned a minimumdistance away fromfoundations equal to half of their mature height.  Where concrete flat work such as sidewalks are placed next to the structure, concrete should be placed adjacent to the foundation to prevent a planter strip that would trap surface water between the foundation and the sidewalk.  For vegetation planted near the buildings, plants that require very little moisture should be used.  Irrigation systems (drip and/or sprinkler heads) should not direct water where it could saturate foundation soil.   If irrigation is desired adjacent to foundations, a moisture barrier may be installed to mitigate moisture intrusion beneath the foundation.

5.8.1 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS / WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS The soils encountered at thissite may be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and changes in moisture content.  During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities.  In addition, soils which become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of grading and compaction activities.   It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform earthwork and foundations construction activities during dry weather.

If grading occurs in a period of increased rainfall, unstable subgrade conditions may be present.   These conditions may require stabilizing the subgrade with admixtures, such as cement kiln dust or a coarse aggregate.   Isolated areas may be stabilized using a geogrid, such as Tensar BX‐1200 or equal, having compacted aggregate base placed above, over the geogrid.  Additional recommendations can be provided, as required, during construction.

5.9 PAVEMENT DESIGN
In designing the proposed pavement areas, the following conditions were considered:

1. Subgrade support characteristics are typically represented by an R‐Value for the design of flexible pavements in this region.

2. Vehicular traffic volumes, interms of the number and frequency of vehicles and their range of axle loads should be considered.

3. Likely changes in vehicular use over the life of the pavement should also be considered.  We have anticipated that the pavement areas will not experience additional traffic.

4. Pavement life cycle was considered to be 20 years using Caltrans and Portland Cement Association Design Methods.

All site preparations and grading should be performed as discussed above.

Since an evaluation of the characteristics of the actual soils present at pavement subgrade can only be provided at the completion of grading, the following pavement sections should be used for planning purposes only.  Final pavement designs should be evaluated after R‐value tests have been performed on the actual in‐place subgrade materials exposed for use during construction.   Such testing will require several days of laboratory testing.

It should be noted that additional earthwork and/or ground improvement efforts may be required during grading on the actual subgrade material encountered, in order to achieve the aforementioned design parameters and assumptions.  These design thicknesses anticipate that a properly prepared subgrade has been achieved.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

Based on the results of our field exploration and laboratory testing, we recommend the pavement designs presented in the table below.  The pavement design criteria are based on the soil conditions present at the site, an anticipated R‐value of 15 and the estimated Traffic Index indicated below.  If higher Traffic Indices are desired, or different pavement sections, additional options may be provided upon request.

Final pavement designs should be based on R‐value testing of the as‐graded subgrade and actual traffic volumes.

TABLE 5.2:  PAVEMENTDESIGN PARAMETERS
Location
Traffic
Index
(TI)
Asphalt
Thickness
(inches)
+
Aggregate Base
Thickness
(inches)
Portland Cement
Concrete
Thickness
(inches)
+
Aggregate Base
Thickness
(inches)
Standard Drive
Aisles Light Duty
5 [7,500
ESALS]
4 + 6 5½ + 4
Truck Drive Aisles
Heavy Duty
7 [122,500
ESALS]
4½ + 12 6 + 6
We recommend rigid pavements (Portland Cement Concrete, PCC) be constructed at all areas requiring heavy braking and turning such as intersections, entrances, dolly pads, loading docks, trash truck loading areas, etc.  PCC pavement sections should incorporate appropriate steel reinforcement and crack control joints if needed and as designed by the project structural engineer.  We recommend that sections be as nearly squared as possible and no more than 15‐feet on a side.  Contraction joints may be constructed by saw cutting to a depth of 30 percent of the slab thickness.  Expansion/cold/construction joints may be used in lieu of contraction joints.  Such joints should be properly sealed.

Pavements can be expected to crack due to environmental factors and require periodic maintenance to reduce damage to the pavement structure should be planned throughout the life of the pavement.  During the paving life,maintenance to sealsurface cracks within concrete or asphalt paving and to reseal joints within concrete pavement should be undertaken to achieve the desired paving life.  Perimeter drainage should be controlled to prevent or retard influx ofsurface water from areassurrounding the paving. Water penetration leadsto paving degradation.  Water penetration into base orsubgrade materials,sometimes due to irrigation or surface water infiltration leads to pre‐mature paving degradation.  Curbs should be used in conjunction with asphalt paving to reduce potential for infiltration of moisture into the base course.  Curbsshould extend the full depth of the base course and should extend into the underlying subgrade.  The base layer should be tied into the area inlets to drain water that may collect in the base.

5.9.1 PAVEMENT MATERIALS
Pavement material requirements for the above pavement sections are presented below:
 Compacted Subgrade:  Pavementsubgrade preparation should be performed in accordance with the FILL MATERIALS section.  Subgrade soilsshould be proof‐rolled and scarified to a depth of 12 inches.

The upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the laboratory standard.  Pavement subgrade areas consisting of softer, moist, highly‐plastic clays (Fat clays, CH) should be over‐excavated an additional minimum of 12‐inches prior to scarification below and compacting fill back into place to meetsubgrade excavations.  Aggregate Base Course:  Base materials should consist of Class II Aggregate Base.  Aggregate base should be placed in maximum 6‐inch compacted lifts.  The base materialsshould be compacted to at

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557.   Aggregate base materialsshould bemoisture conditioned to between +2 percentage points ofthe optimummoisture content.
 Portland Cement Concrete:  Concrete used for paving should have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi at 28‐days.  Concrete should have a water/cement ration of 0.45 or lower.  The air content at the point of placementshould range from 2 to 4 percent.  The concrete pavementsshould be reinforced and jointed per current ACI recommendations.

All materials should conform to and be placed in accordance with the latest revision of the Standard Specificationsfor Public Works Construction (Greenbook),the American Concrete Institute (ACI),the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and the requirements of the City Public Works.

5.10 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTIONOBSERVATION
After final plans and specifications are complete, PSI should review the design and specifications so that the earthwork and foundation recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented. It is considered imperative that the Geotechnical Engineer and/or their representative be present during earthwork operations and foundation installationsto observe the field conditions with respectto the design assumptions and specifications. PSI will not be responsible for changes in the project design or project information it was not provided, or interpretations and field quality control observations made by others. PSI would be pleased to provide these services for this project.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RISK AND REPORT LIMITATIONS
The concept of risk is an important aspect of the geotechnical evaluation.  The primary reason for this is that the analytical methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science.

The analyticaltools which geotechnical engineers use are generally empirical andmust be used in conjunction with engineering judgment and experience.  Therefore, the solutions and recommendations presented in the geotechnical evaluation should not be considered risk‐free and, more importantly, are not a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and the proposed structure will perform as planned.   The engineering recommendations presented in the preceding sections constitute PSI’s professional estimate of those measures that are necessary for the proposed structure to perform according to the proposed design based on the information generated and referenced during this evaluation, and PSI’s experience in working with these conditions.

Services performed by PSI for this project have been conducted with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area.  No warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

The recommendations submitted are based on the available subsurface information obtained by PSI, and information provided by the client, client’s representative and client’s design consultants.  If there are any revisions to the plans for this project or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, PSI should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation and/or other recommendations are required.  If PSI is not retained to perform these functions, PSI cannot be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the performance of the project.

The Geotechnical Engineer should be retained and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specificationsto check that our engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents.  At that time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Client and their design consultants.

Sysco Corporation ~ Walnut, CA
PSI Project No: 0066‐1854
July 8, 2022

7.0 REFERENCES

1. Ambrose Engineering, Inc., Structural Plans for 2008 Cooler Expansion for Sysco, Job No. 041‐08‐01, revised October 26, 2009.

2. American Concrete Institute, “Building Code Requirementsfor Structural Concrete”, ACI 318‐11, 2017.

3. California Geological Survey (CGS), “California Geomorphic Provinces”, 2002.

4. CGS, “Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, San Dimas Quadrangle”, 1999.

5. CGS, “Fault Activity Map of California”, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/APP/

6. CGS, “Seismic Hazard Zone Repot for the San Dimas 7.5‐Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California”, 1998.

7. Dibblee, T.W. and Minch, J.A., “Geologic Map of the San Dimas and Ontario Quadrangles, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, California”, Dibblee Geological Foundation, Map DF‐91, 2002.

8. GeoLogismiki Geotechnical Software, CLiq – Cone Penetration Test Soil Liquefaction software, V.3.4.1.4 and CPeT‐IT – Cone Penetration Data and Interpretation software, V.3.7.1.12.

9. Nixon Associates, Inc., Structural Plans for CFS, revised October 28, 1988.

10. Sysco Corporation, “Proposed Site Plan, 21 Facility Expansion and Site Modifications for Sysco Los Angeles, 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA 91789”, 12/17/21.

11. Portland Cement Association, “Thickness Design for Concrete Highway and Street Pavements”.

12. Professional Services Industries, Inc. (PSI), “Geotechnical Investigation and Recommendations, Proposed Pavement Replacement, 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, California 91789”, PSI Project No. 0559‐1932, 11/30/16.

13. Southern California Geotechnical, “Geotechnical Investigation and Liquefaction Evaluation, Proposed Cooler Expansion – Sysco Food Services of Los Angeles, 20701 East Currier Road, City of Industry, California”, Project No. 08G120‐1, dated April 18, 2008.

14. Southern California Geotechnical, “Geotechnical Investigation and Liquefaction Evaluation, Proposed Business Plan Review Meeting Center, 20701 East Currier Road, City of Industry, California”, Project No. 09G137‐1, dated July 16, 2009.

15. Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R. B., “Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice”, 2nd edition.

16. USDA NRCS Soil Survey, “Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, California, Southeastern Part”, March 11, 2022.

17. USGS, “San Dimas Quadrangle, California, 7.5‐minute series”, 2021.

18. USGS Website https://seismicmaps.org/, US Seismic Design Maps.

FIGURES

Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
(714) 484‐8600

SITE VICINITY MAP
PSI Project No. 0066‐1854
Sysco Corporation

SYSCO FACILITY EXPANSION
20701 Currier Road
Walnut, CA 91789
Reference:  Bing Maps
FIGURE 1
Site

Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
(714) 484‐8600
Approximate Exploration
Location Plan
PSI Project No. 0066‐1854
Sysco Corporation

SYSCO FACILITY EXPANSION
20701 Currier Road
Walnut, CA 91789
Reference: Google Earth
FIGURE 2
LEGEND
B11   Approximate Boring Location
CPT5  Approximate CPT Location
Previous Boring Location (PSI, 11/30/16)
Reference – Sysco & ESI
B1
CPT1
B2
B4
B3
B8
B7
B5
CPT3/3A
CPT4
CPT2 B6
B11 B10
CPT5
B9

APPENDIX A
Field Exploration & Laboratory Testing Program

GENERAL NOTES

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION

The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), AASHTO 1988 and ASTM designations D2487 and D-2488 are used to identify the encountered materials unless otherwise noted. Coarse-grained soils are defined as having more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve (0.075mm); they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine-grained soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are defined as silts or clay depending on their Atterberg Limit attributes. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size.

Description
Flat:

Elongated:

Flat & Elongated:

Description
Angular:

Subangular:

Subrounded:

Rounded:

Criteria
Particles with width/thickness ratio > 3
Particles with length/width ratio > 3
Particles meet criteria for both flat and
elongated
Descriptive Term
Trace:

With:

Modifier:

Size Range
Over 300 mm (>12 in.)
75 mm to 300 mm (3 in. to 12 in.)
19 mm to 75 mm (¾ in. to 3 in.)

4.75 mm to 19 mm (No.4 to ¾ in.)
2 mm to 4.75 mm (No.10 to No.4)

0.42 mm to 2 mm (No.40 to No.10)

0.075 mm to 0.42 mm (No. 200 to No.40)

0.005 mm to 0.075 mm
<0.005 mm
Component
Boulders:

Cobbles:

Coarse-Grained Gravel:

Fine-Grained Gravel:

Coarse-Grained Sand:

Medium-Grained Sand:

Fine-Grained Sand:

Silt:

Clay:

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS ANGULARITY OF COARSE-GRAINED PARTICLES N - Blows/foot
0 - 4
4 - 10
10 - 30
30 - 50
50+
Relative Density
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
% Dry Weight
< 5%
5% to 12%
>12%
Standard "N" penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D.

Split-Spoon.

A "N" penetration value corrected to an equivalent 60% hammer energy transfer efficiency (ETR) Unconfined compressive strength, TSF
Pocket penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, TSF Moisture/water content, %
Liquid Limit, %
Plastic Limit, %
Plasticity Index = (LL-PL),%
Dry unit weight, pcf
Apparent groundwater level at time noted
Criteria
Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane
sides with unpolished surfaces
Particles are similar to angular description, but have
rounded edges
Particles have nearly plane sides, but have
well-rounded corners and edges
Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges
N:

N60:

Qu:

Qp:
w%:

LL:

PL:

PI:

DD:
, ,

GRAIN-SIZE TERMINOLOGY PARTICLE SHAPE

SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS

DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS
Solid Flight Auger - typically 4" diameter
flights, except where noted.

Hollow Stem Auger - typically 3¼" or 4¼ I.D.
openings, except where noted.

Mud Rotary - Uses a rotary head with
Bentonite or Polymer Slurry
Diamond Bit Core Sampler
Hand Auger
Power Auger - Handheld motorized auger
Standard Penetration Test sampler - 1 3/8" I.D.,
2" O.D.

California Modified Sampler - 2 1/2" I.D., 3" O.D.

Shelby Tube - 3" O.D.

Rock Core
Bulk Sample
SFA:

HSA:

M.R.:

R.C.:

H.A.:

P.A.:

SPT:

ST:

RC:

BS:

CMS:

GENERAL NOTES
QU - TSF N - Blows/foot Consistency
0 - 2
2 - 4
4 - 8
8 - 15
15 - 30
30 - 50
Criteria
Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch
Damp but no visible water
Visible free water, usually soil is below water table

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL
% Dry Weight
< 15%
15% to 30%
>30%
Descriptive Term
Trace:

With:

Modifier:
0 - 0.25

0.25 - 0.50

0.50 - 1.00

1.00 - 2.00

2.00 - 4.00

4.00 - 8.00

MOISTURE CONDITION DESCRIPTION

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Description
Blocky:

Lensed:

Layer:

Seam:

Parting:

Description
Stratified:

Laminated:

Fissured:

Slickensided:

STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION

QU - TSF
Extremely Soft
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Hard
Moderately Hard
Hard
Very Hard

SCALE OF RELATIVE ROCK HARDNESS ROCK BEDDING THICKNESSES Consistency
Criteria
Alternating layers of varying material or color with
layers at least ¼-inch (6 mm) thick
Alternating layers of varying material or color with
layers less than ¼-inch (6 mm) thick
Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little
resistance to fracturing
Fracture planes appear polished or glossy,
sometimes striated
Criteria
Greater than 3-foot (>1.0 m)
1-foot to 3-foot (0.3 m to 1.0 m)
4-inch to 1-foot (0.1 m to 0.3 m)
1¼-inch to 4-inch (30 mm to 100 mm)
½-inch to 1¼-inch (10 mm to 30 mm)
1/8-inch to ½-inch (3 mm to 10 mm)
1/8-inch or less "paper thin" (<3 mm)
Description
Dry:

Moist:

Wet:

Description
Very Thick Bedded
Thick Bedded
Medium Bedded
Thin Bedded
Very Thin Bedded
Thickly Laminated
Thinly Laminated

2.5 - 10
10 - 50
50 - 250
250 - 525
525 - 1,050
1,050 - 2,600
>2,600
(Continued)
Component
Very Coarse Grained
Coarse Grained
Medium Grained
Fine Grained
Very Fine Grained

GRAIN-SIZED TERMINOLOGY
(Typically Sedimentary Rock)

ROCK VOIDS
Voids
Pit
Vug
Cavity
Cave
Void Diameter
<6 mm (<0.25 in)
6 mm to 50 mm (0.25 in to 2 in)
50 mm to 600 mm (2 in to 24 in)
>600 mm (>24 in)

ROCK QUALITY DESCRIPTION
RQD Value
90 -100
75 - 90
50 - 75
25 -50
Less than 25
Size Range
>4.76 mm

2.0 mm - 4.76 mm

0.42 mm - 2.0 mm

0.075 mm - 0.42 mm
<0.075 mm
Rock generally fresh, joints stained and discoloration
extends into rock up to 25 mm (1 in), open joints may
contain clay, core rings under hammer impact.

Rock mass is decomposed 50% or less, significant
portions of the rock show discoloration and
weathering effects, cores cannot be broken by hand
or scraped by knife.

Rock mass is more than 50% decomposed, complete
discoloration of rock fabric, core may be extremely
broken and gives clunk sound when struck by
hammer, may be shaved with a knife.

Rock Mass Description
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor

DEGREE OF WEATHERING
Slightly Weathered:

Weathered:

Highly Weathered:

Criteria
Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small
angular lumps which resist further breakdown
Inclusion of small pockets of different soils
Inclusion greater than 3 inches thick (75 mm)
Inclusion 1/8-inch to 3 inches (3 to 75 mm) thick
extending through the sample
Inclusion less than 1/8-inch (3 mm) thick
Very Soft
Soft
Firm (Medium Stiff)
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard

OH
CH
MH
OL
CL
ML
SC
SM
SP
COARSE

GRAINED
SOILS
SW

TYPICAL

DESCRIPTIONS

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -

SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL
- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

SILT MIXTURES

GRAPH LETTER

SYMBOLS MAJOR DIVISIONS

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
PT
GC
GM
GP
GW

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY

MIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE

SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY

SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,

LEAN CLAYS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY

CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY
SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH

PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH

HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
CLEAN

GRAVELS

GRAVELS WITH
FINES

CLEAN SANDS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

SANDS WITH
FINES

LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50

LIQUID LIMIT
GREATER THAN 50

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
GRAVEL
AND

GRAVELLY
SOILS
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT

OF FINES)
(APPRECIABLE AMOUNT

OF FINES)
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
FINE

GRAINED
SOILS
SAND
AND
SANDY
SOILS
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS
LARGER THAN NO.
200 SIEVE SIZE
MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

SMALLER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION
PASSING ON NO. 4
SIEVE
MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

18 18
16 18
18 ML
CL
CL
SM
CL
SM
24 27
26 18
25 25
Corrosion Series
DD = 92 pcf
LL = 45
PL = 26
Consolidation
Consolidation
DD = 93 pcf
LL = 41
PL = 19
10 inches of Concrete. No Aggregate Base.

Sandy SILT with Gravel, brown, occasional
cement and rock, moist. [FILL]
Silty Clay, grayish-brown, very stiff, trace
clay, moist.
...becomes stiff.

Silty CLAY, grayish-brown, stiff, moist.

Silty SAND with Clay, grayish-brown, loose,
moist.

Silty CLAY, grayish-brown, medium stiff,
moist.

Silty SAND, orange-brown, medium dense,
moist.
7-10-13
3-3-5
5-6-8
2-3-3
2-2-2
3-5-7
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
Continued Next Page
LATITUDE: 34.0098°
LONGITUDE: -117.8563°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

21.8 feet

22.5 feet Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Service Bay
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 25
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B1
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:

18 18
SM
SW-SM
29 12
Sieve Analysis
...becomes loose, wet.

Well-Graded SAND with Silt and Gravel, orange-brown, very dense, wet.

Boring terminated at 31-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

Groundwater encountered at 22.5 feet during
drilling; groundwater at 21.8 feet after 15
minutes.

Borehole backfilled with cement grout and
patched with rapid-set concrete (Quikrete).
3-3-6
18-37-50(6")
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
LATITUDE: 34.0098°
LONGITUDE: -117.8563°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

21.8 feet

22.5 feet Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Service Bay
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
25 30
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B1
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:

14 SM
ML
21 17
DD = 100 pcf
2 inches of Asphalt.
5 inches of Aggregate Base.

Silty SAND with Gravel, brown and dark
brown, medium dense, dry. [Possible Fill]
Sandy SILT, light gray, stiff, moist.
(Fine-Grained) [NATIVE]
Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings and
topped with asphalt cold patch.
6-9-7
3-3-5
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0112°
LONGITUDE: -117.8542°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: L. Razo
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A North of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B2
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

18 13
18 18
10 CL
ML
CL
SM
27 27
22 23
17 18
19 DD = 99 pcf
DD = 104 pcf
Sieve Analysis
4 inches of Asphalt.
5 inches of Aggregate Base.

Silty CLAY, dark gray, stiff, moist.
...becomes gray and dark gray.
...becomes brown.

Sandy SILT, brown, stiff, moist.

Silty CLAY, brown, very stiff, moist.

Silty SAND, brown, stiff, moist.

Boring terminated at 21-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings and
topped with asphalt cold patch.
4-4-9
3-5-6
4-8-12
3-5-7
3-4-6
3-8-10
6-4-6
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0119°
LONGITUDE: -117.8533°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: L. Razo
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A West of Proposed Bio-Retention Area
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B3
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 21.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>

18 18
14 18
12 CL
CL
SM
CL
SM
21 23
19 22
13 22
21 20
EI = 24
DD = 98 pcf
DD = 104 pcf
Sieve Analysis
3 inches of Asphalt.
15 inches of Aggregate Base.

Silty CLAY, dark brown, occasional
concrete, moist. [FILL]
...very stiff, becomes brown and black.

Silty CLAY, dark brown, stiff, moist.
[NATIVE]
Silty SAND, brownish-green, medium dense,
trace clay, occasional gravel, moist.

Silty CLAY, dark gray and black, stiff, moist.

Silty SAND, olive-gray, dense, occasional
gravel, moist. (Fine-Grained)
...becomes medium dense.
...becomes tan.
...becomes orange-brown, very dense.

Boring terminated at 21-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

Groundwater encountered at 18.5 feet during
drilling; groundwater at 15.8 feet after 15
minutes.

Borehole backfilled cement grout and topped
with asphalt cold patch.
4-6-10
4-6-7
7-8-10
4-14-20
6-9-11
7-9-14
5-28-24
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 15 minutes
LATITUDE: 34.0117°
LONGITUDE: -117.8523°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

15.8 feet

18.5 feet Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: L. Razo
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A South of Proposed Bio-Retention Area
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B4
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 21.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

18 18
16 16
12 SM
CL
ML
10 21
19 27
25 22
Corrosion Series
DD = 116 pcf
LL = 37
PL = 16
DD = 110 pcf
3 inches of Asphalt.
15 inches of Aggregate Base.

Silty SAND, tan, medium dense, moist.
(Fine-Grained)
Silty CLAY, brown, medium stiff, moist.
...becomes very stiff. (like claystone)
Sandy SILT, light brown with iron staining,
hard, moist. (like bedrock)
...becomes orange and tan.
8-14-12
2-2-4
6-12-15
7-14-24
12-17-17
10-24-35
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
Continued Next Page
LATITUDE: 34.0109°
LONGITUDE: -117.8528°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: L. Razo
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Cold Dock
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 25
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B5
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:
>>

18 18
ML
23 24
Boring terminated at 31-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with cement grout and
topped with asphalt cold patch.
17-23-30
10-14-26
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0109°
LONGITUDE: -117.8528°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: L. Razo
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Cold Dock
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
25 30
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B5
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:

18 CL 20
21 DD = 108 pcf
LL = 48
PL = 23
Silty CLAY, dark brown, very stiff, moist.
...becomes stiff, grayish-brown.

Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings.
9-13-18
3-6-7
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0102°
LONGITUDE: -117.8522°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY: N. Barba
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B6
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>

18 ML
CL
20 17
R-Value
DD = 108 pcf

68.1%<#200
4 inches of Asphalt.
18 inches of Aggregate Base.

Sandy SILT, gray, very stiff, moist.

Silty CLAY, brown, stiff, moist.

Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings and
topped with asphalt cold patch.
5-10-13
3-4-8
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0113°
LONGITUDE: -117.8523°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B7
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

10 ML
ML
ML
25 29 DD = 94 pcf
4 inches of Asphalt.
15 inches of Aggregate Base.

Sandy SILT, gray, moist.

SILT, light brown, stiff, moist.

SILTSTONE Bedrock, light brown, hard,
moist.

Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings.
3-5-5
15-32-50(5")
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0115°
LONGITUDE: -117.8525°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A Northeast of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B8
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.4 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:

18 CH
CH
26 26
R-Value
DD = 96 pcf
LL = 58
PL = 22
4 inches of Asphalt.
19 inches of Aggregate Base.

Fat CLAY, black, stiff, moist. [Possible Fill]
Fat CLAY, brown, stiff, moist. [NATIVE]
Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings and
topped with asphalt cold patch.
4-7-9
3-4-6
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0084°
LONGITUDE: -117.8523°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road
None Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A Southeast of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B9
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>

17 CL
CL
19 17
EI = 53
Disturbed by
Geofabric from
above.
3 inches of Clean Gravel. Geofabric below.

Silty CLAY, dark brown, stiff, moist.

Silty Clay with Sand, grayish-brown, very
stiff, moist.

Boring terminated at 6-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

No groundwater encountered.

Borehole backfilled with soil cuttings.
4-4-6
6-8-14
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
LATITUDE: 34.0096°
LONGITUDE: -117.8521°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Existing Building
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B10
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 6.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS: CMS & SPT
REMARKS:
>>

18 18
18 18
CL
ML
CL
ML
CL
SP
26 19
28 28
17 17
18 4
250 psi
Corrosion Series
Direct Shear
DD = 97 pcf
Consolidation
DD = 93 pcf
Consolidation
LL = 45
PL = 21
Atterberg NP
DD = 114 pcf
3 inches of Clean Gravel. Geofabric below.

Silty CLAY, stiff, dark brown, moist.

SILT, dark brown, stiff, trace clay, moist.

Silty CLAY, olive-brown, stiff, moist.

Sandy SILT, brown, stiff, trace clay, moist.

Silty CLAY, brown, stiff, moist.

SAND and Gravel, reddish-brown, very
dense, moist.
3-5-7
4-4-6
4-5-8
4-8-13
3-5-9
11-30-31
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 20 minutes
Continued Next Page
LATITUDE: 34.0096°
LONGITUDE: -117.8526°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

28.4 feet

29.2 feet Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Dry Dock
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
0 5
10 15
20 25
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B11
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:

18 14
SP
6 16
...less gravel, becomes dense.
...trace silt, becomes medium dense.

Boring terminated at 31-1/2 feet below ground
surface.

Groundwater encountered at 29.2 feet during
drilling; groundwater at 28.4 feet after 20
minutes.

Borehole backfilled with cement grout.
5-21-27
9-11-11
PROJECT NO.: 00661854
PROJECT: Sysco
Depth, (feet)
STRENGTH, tsf
Additional
Remarks USCS Classification
0 Qp
Sample Type

2.0 0 Moisture, %
Moisture MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST DATA
N in blows/ft
Qu
Graphic Log
Sample No.
50 PL
Elevation (feet)
LL

4.0 25
Recovery (inches)
While Drilling
After 20 minutes
LATITUDE: 34.0096°
LONGITUDE: -117.8526°
LOCATION: 20701 Currier Road

28.4 feet

29.2 feet Water
DRILLER: Nick
Professional Service Industries, Inc.
11980 Telegraph Rd, Unit 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Telephone: (714) 484-8600 Walnut, CA SPT Blows per 6-inch (SS) Push Pressure (ST) DATE STARTED: 5/4/22
BENCHMARK: N/A
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 2 DRILL COMPANY: 2R Drilling
STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A
LOGGED BY:D. Abernathy
DRILL RIG: CME-75
REVIEWED BY: Douglas Abernathy See Boring Location Plan EFFICIENCY N/A East of Proposed Dry Dock
HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION:
25 30
DATE COMPLETED: 5/4/22 BORING B11
ELEVATION: N/A
COMPLETION DEPTH 31.5 ft
DRILLING METHOD: 8" Hollow Stem Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SS/ ST: CMS, SPT, & ST
REMARKS:

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 32.68 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-1
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
3231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
987654321
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
0 500
Depth (ft)
3231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-10 -5 0
Depth (ft)
3231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
3231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
987654321
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
3231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Soil Behaviour Type
Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClayClayClayClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSand CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:09 PM 2Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 30.21 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-2
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
2928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
200 400
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
0 Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
2928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:09 PM 6Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 16.08 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-3
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
1 5 .5
15 1 4 .5
14 1 3 .5
13 1 2 .5
12 1 1 .5
11 1 0 .5
10 9 .5
9 8 .5
8 7 .5
7 6 .5
6 5 .5
5 4 .5
4 3 .5
3 2 .5
2 1 .5
1 0 .5
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
0 500
Depth (ft)
16 1 5 .5
15 1 4 .5
14 1 3 .5
13 1 2 .5
12 1 1 .5
11 1 0 .5
10 9 .5
9 8 .5
8 7 .5
7 6 .5
6 5 .5
5 4 .5
4 3 .5
3 2 .5
2 1 .5
1 0 .5
0 Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-10 -5 0 5
Depth (ft)
16 1 5 .5
15 1 4 .5
14 1 3 .5
13 1 2 .5
12 1 1 .5
11 1 0 .5
10 9 .5
9 8 .5
8 7 .5
7 6 .5
6 5 .5
5 4 .5
4 3 .5
3 2 .5
2 1 .5
1 0 .5
0 Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
1 5 .5
15 1 4 .5
14 1 3 .5
13 1 2 .5
12 1 1 .5
11 1 0 .5
10 9 .5
9 8 .5
8 7 .5
7 6 .5
6 5 .5
5 4 .5
4 3 .5
3 2 .5
2 1 .5
1 0 .5
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
16 1 5 .5
15 1 4 .5
14 1 3 .5
13 1 2 .5
12 1 1 .5
11 1 0 .5
10 9 .5
9 8 .5
8 7 .5
7 6 .5
6 5 .5
5 4 .5
4 3 .5
3 2 .5
2 1 .5
1 0 .5
0 Soil Behaviour Type
SandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:10 PM 10Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 18.85 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-3A
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
181716151413121110
987654321
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
0 200 400 600
Depth (ft)
181716151413121110
987654321
Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-10 -5 0
Depth (ft)
181716151413121110
987654321
Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
181716151413121110
987654321
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
181716151413121110
987654321
Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClaySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:10 PM 14Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 30.27 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-4
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
100 200
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
302928272625242322212019181716151413121110
9876543210
Soil Behaviour Type
Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:11 PM 18Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Project: Sysco Walnut - 00661854
PSI Intertek11980 Telegraph RoadSuite #104Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Total depth: 60.31 ft, Date: 5/2/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA Cone Type: Vertek 30-ton, 15cm2 CPT: CPT-5
Location:

SBT Index
Ic SBT
1 2 3 4
Depth (ft)
6058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Cone resistance qt SBT Index
Tip resistance (tsf)
0 200 400 600
Depth (ft)
6058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
0 10
Depth (ft)
6058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Pore pressure u
SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Friction ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (ft)
6058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Depth (ft)
6058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Soil Behaviour Type
ClaySand & silty sandClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySandSand & silty sandSandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltClaySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay CPeT-IT v.3.7.1.12 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/10/2022, 3:57:11 PM 22Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field & Lab Reports\CPT\00661854 CPT Analysis.cpt

Intertek-PSI
Sysco Facility
Walmut, CA
CPT Shear Wave Measurements
S-Wave Interval
Tip Geophone Travel S-Wave Velocity S-Wave
Depth Depth Distance Arrival from Surface Velocity
Location (ft) (ft) (ft) (msec) (ft/sec) (ft/sec)
CPT-3 3.02 2.02 2.84 4.68 607

6.10 5.10 5.48 10.28 533 471

9.02 8.02 8.27 15.38 537 547

12.01 11.01 11.19 18.40 608 968

14.99 13.99 14.13 20.76 681 1247
CPT-3A 3.08 2.08 2.89 4.80 601

6.04 5.04 5.42 9.72 558 516

9.06 8.06 8.30 14.56 570 595

12.11 11.11 11.29 17.66 639 963

15.06 14.06 14.20 19.64 723 1471

18.04 17.04 17.16 21.84 786 1343
CPT-5 3.02 2.02 2.84 4.48 635

6.00 5.00 5.39 8.12 663 699

9.06 8.06 8.30 14.12 588 487

12.04 11.04 11.22 18.52 606 663

15.06 14.06 14.20 23.88 595 556

18.08 17.08 17.20 27.84 618 756

21.06 20.06 20.16 31.48 640 814

24.05 23.05 23.14 34.16 677 1111

27.03 26.03 26.11 36.48 716 1280

30.09 29.09 29.16 39.68 735 954

33.10 32.10 32.16 43.76 735 736

39.01 38.01 38.06 50.84 749 833

42.03 41.03 41.08 54.48 754 829

45.08 44.08 44.13 57.92 762 886

48.03 47.03 47.07 61.32 768 867

51.05 50.05 50.09 64.42 778 973

54.07 53.07 53.11 67.86 783 877

56.10 55.10 55.14 70.32 784 825

60.30 59.30 59.33 75.66 784 786
Shear Wave Source Offset - 2 ft
S-Wave Velocity from Surface = Travel Distance/S-Wave Arrival Interval S-Wave Velocity = (Travel Dist2-Travel Dist1)/(Time2-Time1)

Sounding:

Depth (ft):Site:Engineer:

CPT126.62
Pore Pressure Dissipation Test Sysco Walnut DTA
5/19/2022 P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Analysis\CPT Estimates.xlsx

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM ANDPROCEDURES
The soil samples obtained during the field exploration were transported to soil laboratories and selected soil samples were tested to determine the material properties for evaluation.  Laboratory testing on selected samples included moisture content (ASTM D2216), density (ASTM D7263), Atterberg limits (ASTM D4318), Expansion Index (ASTM D4829), gradation wash (ASTM D1140), particle size distribution (ASTM D6913), Consolidation (ASTM D2435), and direct shear strength (ASTM D3080).  Corrosion series for pH, Sulfate, and Chloride were tested according to CTM‐417, ‐422, and ‐643.  Laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM and Caltrans procedures.   Unless otherwise informed, the soil samples will be discarded 30 days from the issuance of this report.  Laboratory test results are provided below.

VISUAL‐MANUAL CLASSIFICATION
The soil samples were classified in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D2487.  Certain terminology incorporating current local engineering practice, as provided in the Soil Classification Chart, is included with, or in lieu of, ASTM terminology. The term which best described the major portion of the sample was used in determining the soil type (i.e., gravel, sand, silt, or clay).

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Boring Depth (ft.) USCS Soil Type Test Result
B1
0 ‐ 3 Sandy SILT with
Gravel (ML)
Corrosion Series
(pH, S04, Cl) See Attached
8½ Silty CLAY (CL)
Consolidation See Plot
Liquid Limit 45%
Plastic Index 19%
11 Silty CLAY (CL) Consolidation See Plot
16 Silty CLAY (CL)
Liquid Limit 41%
Plastic Index 22%
26 Silty SAND (SM) Sieve Analysis See Plot
B3 21 Silty SAND (SM) Sieve Analysis See Plot
B4
0 ‐ 3 Silty CLAY (CL) Expansion Index 24
13½ Silty SAND (SM) Sieve Analysis See Plot
B5
3½ Silty SAND (SM) Corrosion Series
(pH, S04, Cl) See Attached
6 Silty CLAY (CL)
Liquid Limit 37%
Plastic Index 21%
B6 3½ Silty CLAY (CL)
Liquid Limit 48%
Plastic Index 25%
B7
1 – 3½ Sandy SILT (ML) R‐Value 21
3½ Sandy SILT (ML) Material Finer than #200 68% <#200

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
(continued)
Boring Depth (ft.) USCS Soil Type Test Result
B9 2 ‐ 5 Fat CLAY (CH)
R‐Value 13
Liquid Limit 58%
Plastic Index 36%
B10 ½ ‐ 4 Silty CLAY (CL) Expansion Index 53
B11
3½ Silty CLAY (CL)
Corrosion Series
(pH, S04, Cl) See Attached
Direct Shear See Plot
8½ Silty CLAY (CL) Consolidation See Plot
10½ Silty CLAY (CL)
Liquid Limit 45%
Plastic Index 24%
11½ Sandy SILT (ML)
Liquid Limit Non Plastic
Plastic Limit Non‐Plastic

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Exploration No. Sample No. Depth (ft) SYMBOL Wn (%) LL PI % Clay Description and Classification D 60 D 30 D 10 C u C c B1 26.0 B3 21.0 B4 13.5 


PROJECT NAME: Sysco Walnut PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES PROJECT NUMBER: 00661854 ASTM D6913
Silty Sand (SM)Silty Sand (SM)Silty Sand (SM)

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0100.0

PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
3" 2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200

0.1 0.01 0.001 100 10 1 50 20 5 2 0.5 0.2 0.05 0.02 0.005 0.002 U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
C
O
BB
L
ES

GRAVEL SAND

SILT AND CLAY

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE

HYDROMETER

Atterberg Limits Summary
(ASTM D4318
ASTM D2116
ASTM D4829)
Project Name Sysco Walnut Project Number 00661854
Address
Depth In‐Situ Liquid Plastic Plastic Soil Type Expansion Symbol Boring ID (ft) Moisture Limit (%) Limit (%) Index (%) USCS Index Content (%)
1 B1 8.5 27 45 26 19 CL
2 B1 16 25 41 19 22 CL
3 B5 6 21 37 16 21 CL
4 B6 3.5 20 48 23 25 CL
5 B9 2 ‐ 5 26 58 22 36 CH
6 B11 10 ‐ 11 27.5 45 21 24 CL
7 B11 11 ‐ 12 16.7 NP NP NP ML
8 20701 Currier Road, Walnut CA 91789
1 2 3
4 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
5 6
PSI
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714‐484‐8600

B4
0 ‐ 3 feet
Silty Clay (CL‐ML)
RESULTS:

INITIAL READING: 0.004 Liquid Limit
FINAL READING: 0.019 Plastic Limit
RING HEIGHT: 1.000 in. Plasticity Index
RING WEIGHT: 366.1 g
RING + SAMPLE WEIGHT: 766.2 g
WET WEIGHT ‐ TARE: 162.6 g
DRY WEIGHT ‐ TARE: 145.5 g
TARE WEIGHT: 30.58 g
EXPANSION INDEX (EImeas ) :                   15
w   = 14.8 %
Expansion
Index
Potential
Expansion
0 ‐ 20 Very Low
WET DENSITY  = 120.8 pcf 21 ‐ 50 Low
51 ‐ 90 Medium
δd  = 105.2 pcf 91 ‐ 130 High
> 130 Very High
Gs   = 2.70
δw   = 62.4 pcf
Smeas   = 66.7
EI50   = 24
EI50 corrected   = 24
Final Moisture Content  = 28.9 %
POTENTIAL EXPANSION:   Low
PROJECT NUMBER: 00661854
Sample Location: Date: 6/15/2022
Depth: Tested By: NB
Sample Description:

Atterberg Limits

EXPANSION INDEX OF SOILS
ASTM ‐ D4829
PROJECT NAME : Sysco Walnut
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714‐484‐8600

B10

0.5 ‐ 4 feet
Silty Clay (CL‐ML)
RESULTS:

INITIAL READING: 0.000 Liquid Limit
FINAL READING: 0.038 Plastic Limit
RING HEIGHT: 1.000 in. Plasticity Index
RING WEIGHT: 363.5 g
RING + SAMPLE WEIGHT: 776.6 g
WET WEIGHT ‐ TARE: 162.5 g
DRY WEIGHT ‐ TARE: 145.6 g
TARE WEIGHT: 30.46 g
EXPANSION INDEX (EImeas ) :                   38
w   = 14.7 %
Expansion
Index
Potential
Expansion
0 ‐ 20 Very Low
WET DENSITY  = 124.8 pcf 21 ‐ 50 Low
51 ‐ 90 Medium
δd  = 108.8 pcf 91 ‐ 130 High
> 130 Very High
Gs   = 2.70
δw   = 62.4 pcf
Smeas   = 72.2
EI50   = 53
EI50 corrected   = 53
Final Moisture Content  = 28.9 %
POTENTIAL EXPANSION:   Medium
PROJECT NUMBER: 00661854
Sample Location: Date: 6/15/2022
Depth: Tested By: NB
Sample Description:

Atterberg Limits

EXPANSION INDEX OF SOILS
ASTM ‐ D4829
PROJECT NAME : Sysco Walnut
11980 Telegraph Road, Suite 104
Santa Fe Springs, CA
714‐484‐8600

Intertek PSI # 00661854 CONSOLIDATION TEST - ASTM D2435 Job No. 2008-026 Boring / Sample No. B-1 Depth: 10' Date 05-23-22

0.9946

0.9918

0.9848

0.9873

0.9821

0.9701

0.9418

0.9061

0.9152

0.9291

0.9465

0.80 0.81

0.82 0.83

0.84 0.85

0.86 0.87

0.88 0.89

0.90 0.91

0.92 0.93

0.94 0.95

0.96 0.97

0.98 0.99

1.00 100 1000 10000 100000
Sample Height (inches)
Vertical Pressure (psf)
Silty Clay
Dry Density: 98.1 pcf
Initial Water Content: 24.5 %
Final Water Content: 23.5 %
H2O @ 800 PSF
.Natural
o Submerged

00661854-4 B1@10ft Consol Calcs.xlsx

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.56.06.57.0 100 1000 10000 100000 Consolidation (%)
Load (psf)
Consolidation
Solid Circle = Wetted
B1
11 ‐0.14 %
ft.

Intertek PSI # 00661854 CONSOLIDATION TEST - ASTM D2435 Job No. 2008-026 Boring / Sample No. B-11 Depth: 8.5' Date 05-23-22

0.9921

0.9878

0.9811

0.9819

0.9756

0.9643

0.9423

0.9118

0.9182

0.9291

0.9436

0.80 0.81

0.82 0.83

0.84 0.85

0.86 0.87

0.88 0.89

0.90 0.91

0.92 0.93

0.94 0.95

0.96 0.97

0.98 0.99

1.00 100 1000 10000 100000
Sample Height (inches)
Vertical Pressure (psf)
Silty Clay
Dry Density: 97.3 pcf
Initial Water Content: 25.3 %
Final Water Content: 23.8 %
H2O @ 800 PSF
.Natural
o Submerged

00661854-4 [email protected] Consol Calcs.xlsx
‐1.5‐1.0‐0.5

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.56.06.57.0 100 1000 10000 100000 Consolidation (%)
Load (psf)
Consolidation
Solid Circle = Wetted
B11

8.5 ft.

Samples Tested 123 Peak Ultim.

Boring ID B11 B11 B11 Friction, φ (Deg) 16 18
Depth (in/ft.) 3.5 3.5 3.5 Cohesion (psf) 296 165
Initial Moisture Content (%) 25.49 25.49 25.49
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 94.20 96.32 96.81
Final Moisture Content (%) 32.39 33.96 28.96
Normal Stress (psf) 1000 2000 3000 Sample Type: InSitu
Maximum Shear Stress (psf) 569 899 1142 Method: Drained Ultimate Shear Stress (psf) 463 871 1113 Consolidation: Yes ASTM D3080 Soil Type CL‐ML CL‐ML CL‐ML Saturation: Yes
Strain Rate (in/min): 0.0010
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS P.N.: 00661854
Sysco Date: 5/9/2022
20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA
‐0.020
‐0.015
‐0.010
‐0.005

0.000

0.005

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Vertical Deformation (in)
Displacement (in)
Vertical Deformation v. Displacement
1000
2000
3000
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Shear Stress (psf)
Displacement (in)
Shear Stress v. Displacement
1000
2000
3000
0 500
1000
1500
2000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Shear Stress (psf)
Normal Stress (psf)
Shear Stress
Peak
Ultimate
1 2
1 3
2 3

Intertek/PSI # 0066-1854 SOIL TEST RESULTS Job No. 2008-026 SAMPLE NO.: B-1 @ 1' - 3' B-5 @ 3.5' B-11 @ 3.5'Soil Type: Sandy Clay Silty Sand Silty ClayDIRECT SHEAR TEST (type)Initial Moisture Content %Dry Density (pcf)Normal Stress (psf)Peak Shear Stress (psf)Ultimate Shear Stress (psf)Cohesion (psf) Internal Friction Angle (degrees) EXPANSION TEST UBC STD 18-2
Initial Dry Density (pcf)Initial Moisture Content %Final Moisture Content %Pressure (psf)Expansion Index Swell %CORROSIVITY TESTResistivity (CTM643) (ohm-cm) pH (CTM643) 7.2 7.3 7.3CHEMICAL TESTSSoluble Sulfate (CTM 417) (ppm) 1481 189 140Chloride Content (CTM 422) (ppm) 138 62 39Wash #200 Sieve (ASTM-1140) %Sand Equivalent (ASTM D2419)

APPENDIX B
Liquefaction Evaluation

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-1

22.20 ft

20.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
0 500
Depth (ft)
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:21 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 1

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-2

23.00 ft

20.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
200 400
Depth (ft)
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:22 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 9

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-3

16.00 ft

16.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
0 500
Depth (ft)
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:23 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 17

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-3A

16.00 ft

16.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
0 200 400 600
Depth (ft)
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:24 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 25

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-4

23.00 ft

20.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
100 200
Depth (ft)
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:24 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 33

LI Q UEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT
Input parameters and analysis data
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

B&I (2014)
B&I (2014)
Based on Ic value

6.74 0.83
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : Sysco Walnut - 00661854 Location : 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA PSI Intertek
11980 Telegraph Road
Suite #104
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
CPT file : CPT-5

28.00 ft

20.00 ft
1 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Method
bd Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
0 200 400 600
Depth (ft)
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
44 42
40 38
36 34
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot
Ic (Robertson 1990)
1 2 3 4
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
44 42
40 38
36 34
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 SBTn Plot CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
44 42
40 38
36 34
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 CRR plot
During earthq.
qc1N,cs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*)

0.8 0.7

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 Liquefaction
No Liquefaction
Normalized friction ratio (%)

0.1 1 10
Normalized CPT penetration resistance
1 10
100
1,000
Friction Ratio
Rf (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
44 42
40 38
36 34
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 Friction Ratio
Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
44 42
40 38
36 34
32 30
28 26
24 22
20 18
16 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry
Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.4.1.4 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/6/2022, 6:41:25 PM Project file: P:\0066\GEO\2020\1854 Sysco Walnut GEO\Field\CPT\00661854 CPT Liquefy.clq 41

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road
Attachment C
Master Covenant Agreement (MCA)

PROVIDED AT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road
Attachment D
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Non-Structural Source Control BMPs
Yes
N1. Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants Owner shall conduct orientation during the first four weeks of startup and annually, thereafter. An awareness program will be established to inform all the employees of the impacts of dumping oil, antifreeze, paints, solvents or other potentially harmful chemicals into storm drain; the proper use (e.g., application methods, frequencies and precautions ) and management of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides in landscaping maintenance practices; the impacts of littering and improper water disposal.
• Ensure employees responsible for the
maintenance of BMPs are familiar with the
requirements of the LID Report.
• All new employees trained within first four
weeks of hire. Annual retraining required.

Owner
Yes
N2. Activity Restrictions
Owner shall conduct daily management of business activities. Owner will conduct orientation during the first four weeks of startup and annually, thereafter. Each business activity is restricted under the Owner guidance, Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs), and Conditions of Approval.
• No vehicle maintenance activities including vehicle washing • Kitchen mats may not be hosed off outside.
• Prohibition of discharge of hazardous waste to the storm drain system.
• Prohibition of storage and handling of hazardous materials. • No outdoor storage.

Inspection
• Check to ensure that all employees/tenants are
adhering to activity restrictions and other
restrictions outlined in this LID Report. Retrain/
reeducate as necessary.
• Ongoing
Maintenance
• Provide refresher water quality training.
• Annually and as necessary when employee(s)
observed to be not adhering to activity
restrictions and other restrictions outlined in the
LID REPORT.

Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
N3. Common Area Landscape Management
Owner will ensure that landscape areas shall be maintained on a weekly basis through Grounds and Maintenance personnel and when new personnel are hired.

Maintenance shall include: Plant vegetation that reduces water, fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide use. Waste shall be disposed of by composting or at a permitted landfill and shall not be raked or blown into the street, gutter, or storm drains. Irrigation systems shall be inspected monthly for leaks. Leaks shall be repaired as soon as they are observed. Avoid overwatering of vegetation. If excessive runoff is observed, automatic timers shall be adjusted. Fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides shall be used as directed on the label. If fertilizer is spilled on a paved surface it should be swept up immediately and placed in its container. Water shall not be used to clean fertilizer spills unless necessary and only after the area has been thoroughly cleaned using dry cleaning methods. Pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers shall not be applied within 48 hours prior to rain or if wind speeds exceed 5 mph.
• Landscape maintenance will consist of
trimming and replanting of vegetation
(See SC-73), repair and maintenance of
irrigation systems (See S4), and
appropriate use of fertilizers and
pesticides.
• Landscape maintenance shall be
performed on a weekly basis.

Owner
Yes
N4. BMP Maintenance
Owner through its site and landscape maintenance contractors will be responsible for inspection and maintenance activities in landscape areas.

Debris and other water pollutants will be controlled, contained and disposed of in a proper manner by the maintenance contractors hired by Owner. The site maintenance manager will maintain and inspect nonstructural and structural BMPs on the site at least once a month. Each BMPs shall be inspected per required frequency of BMP suggested in the Maintenance Responsibility / Frequency Matrix included in Section VI.

Inspect the systems for signs of erosion.
• Once a month, at minimum, or after each
major (1/2”) rain event.

Maintenance
• Remove sediment, and restore to design
specifications. Add Riprap and slope
protection as needed.
• Provide training to employees within one
month.

Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
N10. Uniform Fire Code Implementation
Compliance with Article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code enforced by fire protection agency.

See building plans for fire code implementation.

Owner
Yes
N11. Common Area Litter Control
Owner through site maintenance contractor shall implement litter control procedures and management in the landscape and parking lot areas in order to prevent and reduce pollution of storm water runoff on a daily basis. Waste containers located outside shall be provided with spill prevention features and emptied on a regular basis, but as a minimum on a weekly basis. Appropriate BMPs are included in Section VII:

SC-11 Spill Prevention, Control & Cleanup
Inspection
• Inspect common areas daily for loose
trash/litter.

Maintenance
• Pick up loose trash/litter and place in trash
receptacles.
• Sweep garden center
• Daily
• Mop trash enclosure weekly minimum, or more
frequently if needed.

Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
N12. Employee Training
Owner shall conduct an employee training program and shall inform and train employees engaged in maintenance activities regarding the impacts of dumping oil, antifreeze, paints, solvents or other potentially harmful chemicals into storm sewer; the proper use (e.g., application methods, frequencies and precautions) and management of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides in landscaping maintenance practice; the impacts of littering an improper water disposal. Employee training program shall be conducted on an annual basis and during the first month of startup period. This LID Report shall be a reference to be used for the program and an annual review of the provisions of the LID Report shall be done by each employee.

If there are any changes of ownership on the site, a new owner shall be responsible once the ownership is transferred.

Low Impact Development Plan serves as the
education for property owners, tenants, and
occupants.
• Provide water quality orientation to new
employees, tenants, etc.
• Within four weeks of hire.
• Annual Retraining is required. Owner
Yes
N13. Housekeeping of Loading Docks
Loading dock area is designed to preclude run-on and runoff to avoid the docks potential to contribute to stormwater pollution. The loading dock is designed to drain to a trench drain, and be treated by a biofiltration basin as a part of DMA #2. Wash water shall not be used to clean dock to avoid wash water being introduced into the storm drain system Loading Dock areas shall be cleaned weekly and
rid of all debris. Provide orientation to employees at
startup of basics to cleaning loading dock. Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
N14. Common Area Catch Basin Inspection
Owner shall be responsible for ensuring that the onsite catch basins, biofiltration basins, and overflow pipes shall be inspected four times per year and maintained once per year, at minimum.

See SC-74 for more information.

Inspection
• Inspect the catch basin for obstructions/debris
buildup and to ensure that it continues to
function properly.
• Four times per year, at minimum.

Maintenance
• Remove obstructions and clean debris and
contaminants out of catch basin to ensure it
continues to function properly.
• As determined necessary during inspection.

Cleaning shall take place prior to the onset of
the rainy season (generally accepted as
October 1st through April 30th).

Owner
Yes
N15. Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots
Owner through its site maintenance contractor shall provide vacuum sweeping of parking lots on a weekly basis. In addition, the sweeping program will be intensified prior to the start of the rainy season around October 15 of every year to minimize water pollution during the “first flush” storm. Further BMPs and information are listed below:

SC43-Parking/Storage Area Maintenance
SC70-Landscape Maintenance
Inspection
• Inspect the parking area daily for loose
trash/litter.

Maintenance
• Pick up loose trash/litter and place in trash
receptacles.
• Daily
• Sweep weekly using sweeping contractor
Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Structural Source Control BMPs
Yes
S1. Provide Storm Drain System Stenciling and Signage
It is widely recognized that the use of storm drains and catch basins for illegal disposal of waste materials can introduce a significant quantity of pollutants into receiving waters. Contributing to this problem is the common misconception that storm drains and sanitary sewers are part of the same system and that materials dumped into storm drains will ultimately arrive at a waste water treatment facility.

Stenciling catch basins by the owner will inform the public about nonpoint source pollution, highlighting the direct link between such basins and sensitive Los Angeles County receiving waters and draws public attention to the fate of materials that are dumped into the storm drain system. The stencil will carry the message “NO DUMPING-DRAINS TO OCEAN”. Repair of storm drain system stenciling and signage shall be performed regularly and at least three times a year or as many times a necessary during the storm seasons. Catch basins/inlets must be restenciled at a minimum once every 5 years.

SD13-Storm Drain Signage
SC44-Drainage System Maintenance
Inspection
• Inspect the legibility of storm drain signage.
• Three times per year, at a minimum.

Maintenance
• Replace storm drain signage as necessary to
maintain legibility.
• Catch basins/inlets must be re-stenciled, at
minimum, every 5 years. Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
S3. Design Trash Enclosures to Reduce Pollutant Introduction Owner shall provide trash and waste storage areas through its contractors. Owner through its site maintenance contractor shall maintain daily. Trash dumpster shall be picked up at least once a week. Loose trash shall be picked up daily and shall be placed in containers periodically. The trash storage areas shall be inspected and maintained daily by the maintenance contractor in order to prevent overflowing dumpster and open lids. The trash container area shall contain trash bins with covers and trash area shall be roofed over in order to prevent rain from entering the bin to reduce water pollution. The bins will be provided with self-closing features and will be inspected on a regular basis as needed for the amount of trash generated. The design of the trash container area will include features such that drainage from adjoining roofs and pavements shall be diverted around the trash container areas. All trash container areas will be surrounded by walls and gates to prevent offsite transport of trash. All employees will be instructed to make sure that covers are kept closed and only opened at the time the trash is deposited. Trash and waste storage areas will be constructed to reduce pollution. It will be located outside the building and trash enclosure will be installed.

SD32-Trash Storage Areas
See N11. Owner
Yes S4. Outdoor loading/Unloading Dock Area See N13. Owner

BMP
Applicable?
Yes/No
BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with
Operation & Maintenance
Responsibility
Yes
S8. Landscape Irrigation Practice
Projects shall design the timing and application methods of irrigation water to minimize the runoff of excess irrigation water into the municipal storm drain system. (Limited exclusion: detached residential homes.) The following methods to reduce excessive irrigation runoff shall be considered, and incorporated on common areas of development and other areas where determined applicable and feasible by the Permittee:

1. Employing rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation.

2. Designing irrigation systems to each landscape area's specific water requirements.

3. Using flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines.

4. Implementing landscape plan consistent with County Water Conservation Resolution or city equivalent, which may include provision of water sensors, programmable irrigation times (for short cycles), etc.

5. The timing and application methods of irrigation water shall be designed to minimize the runoff of excess irrigation water into the municipal storm drain system.

6. Employing other comparable, equally effective, methods to reduce irrigation water runoff.

7. Group plants with similar water requirements in order to reduce excess irrigation runoff and promote surface filtration. Choose plants with low irrigation requirements (for example, native or drought tolerant species). Consider other design features, such as:
•Use mulches (such as wood chips or shredded wood products) in planter areas without ground cover to minimize sediment in runoff.
•Install appropriate plant materials for the location, in accordance with amount of sunlight and climate, and use native plant material where possible and/or as recommended by the landscape architect.
•Leave a vegetative barrier along the property boundary and interior watercourses, to act as a pollutant filter, where appropriate and feasible. •Choose plants that minimize or eliminate the use of fertilizer or pesticides to sustain growth.

Irrigation practices shall comply with local and statewide ordinances related to irrigation efficiency.

See SD-12 for more information.

Inspection
• Inspect irrigation equipment for leaks and
check timers.
• Inspect landscaped areas to ensure
vegetation is not being over or under
watered.
• Monthly.

Maintenance
• Repair leaks and adjust timers and
irrigation heads.
• As necessary to maintain proper
operation of equipment and to avoid over
and under watering of vegetation and
excessive runoff from vegetated areas.

Owner

BMP Name and BMP Implementation,
Maintenance and Inspection Procedures
Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection
Frequency and Schedule
Person or Entity with Operation &
Maintenance Responsibility
LID BMP # 1
Biofiltration with underdrain
See Biofiltration Basin Operations and Maintenance Plan herein.

Owner
Treatment Control BMPs
Treatment BMP #1
Grate Inlet Filter
After rain events:
• Observe the filter with the grate removed.
• Look for any out of the ordinary obstructions on the grate or in the filter and its bypass. Write down any observations on the inspection form. • Through observation and/or digital photographs estimate the amount of trash, foliage and sediment accumulated inside the filter basket. Record this information on the inspection form.
• Observe the condition and color of the hydrocarbon boom. Record this information on the inspection form.
• Finalize inspection report for analysis by the maintenance manager to determine if maintenance is required.

Annually and as required by inspection:
• Remove grate (traffic control and safety measures to be completed prior).
• Using an extension on a vacuum truck position the hose over the opened catch basin. Insert the vacuum hose down into the filter basket and suck out trash, foliage and
sediment. A pressure wash is recommended and will assist in spraying of any debris stuck on the side or bottom of the filter basket. Power wash off the filter basket sides and bottom.
• Next remove the hydrocarbon boom that is attached to the inside of the filter basket. The hydrocarbon boom is
fastened to rails on two opposite sides of the basket
(vertical rails). Assess the color and condition of the boom using the Operation and Maintenance Manual. If
replacement is required install and fasten on a new
hydrocarbon boom.
• Booms can be ordered directly from the manufacturer.
• The last step is to replace the grate and remove all traffic control.
• All removed debris and pollutants shall be disposed of following local and state requirements.

Owner

Attachment 1
Biofiltration Basin Operations and Maintenance Plan for Sysco Los Angeles
June 17, 2024
Project Address and Cross Streets: 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA 91789 (NW of Currier Road and Reyes Drive)
Assessor’s Parcel No.: 8760-023-030
Designated Contact: Phone No.: 346.287.1977
Mailing Address: Sysco Corporation
1390 Enclave Parkway
Houston, TX 77077
The property contains two (2) Biofiltration Basins, located as described below and as shown in the attached site plan. • Biofiltration Basin No. 1 (BIO-1) is located along the northern portion of the project, directly north of the existing/proposed building and south of the San Jose Creek.
• Biofiltration Basin No. 2 (BIO-1) is located east of the proposed Dry Warehouse Building Addition within the proposed landscape island.

I. Routine Maintenance Activities
The principal maintenance objective is to prevent sediment buildup and clogging, which reduces pollutant removal efficiency and may lead to Biofiltration Basin failure. Routine maintenance activities, and the frequency at which they will be conducted, are shown in Table 1.

Table 1
Routine Maintenance Activities for Biofiltration Facilities No. Maintenance Task Frequency of Task
1 Remove obstructions, debris and trash
from biofiltration area and dispose of
properly.

Monthly, or as needed after storm
events
2 Remove sediment As needed after storm events
3 Re-mulch Void Areas As needed after storm events
4 Remove and replace all dead and
diseased vegetation.

Semi-annually, or as needed
5 Inspect inlets for channels, soil exposure or
other evidence of erosion. Clear obstructions
Semi-annually, or as needed
6 Repair outflow structures As needed
7 Unclog Underdrains Semi-annually, or as needed
8 Add Mulch Annually
9 Replace Mulch 2-3 years, or as needed
10 Inspect Biofiltration Facility to ensure that it
drains between storms and within 96 hours
after rainfall
As needed after storm events

Attachment 1
11 Maintain vegetation and the irrigation
system. Prune and weed to keep
Biofiltration Facility neat and orderly in
appearance.

Before wet season begins, or as needed
12 Check that mulch is at appropriate depth
and replenish as necessary before wet
season begins.

Monthly
13 Inspect Biofiltration Facility using the
attached inspection checklist.

Monthly, or after large storm events, and
after removal of accumulated debris or
material

Attachment 1
II. Prohibitions
The use of pesticides and quick release fertilizers shall be minimized, and the principles of integrated pest management (IPM) followed:

1. Employ non-chemical controls (biological, physical and cultural controls) before using chemicals to treat a pest problem.

2. Prune plants properly and at the appropriate time of year.

3. Provide adequate irrigation for landscape plants. Do not over water.

4. Limit fertilizer use unless soil testing indicates a deficiency. Slow-release or organic fertilizer is preferable. Check with municipality for specific requirements.

5. Pest control should avoid harming non-target organisms, or negatively affecting air and water quality and public health.

Apply chemical controls only when monitoring indicates that preventative and non-chemical methods are not keeping pests below acceptable levels. When pesticides are required, apply the least toxic and the least persistent pesticide that will provide adequate pest control. Do not apply pesticides on a prescheduled basis.

6. Sweep up spilled fertilizer and pesticides. Do not wash away or bury such spills.

7. Do not over apply pesticide. Spray only where the infestation exists. Follow the manufacturer’s instructions for mixing and applying materials.

8. Only licensed, trained pesticide applicators shall apply pesticides.

9. Apply pesticides at the appropriate time to maximize their effectiveness and minimize the likelihood of discharging pesticides into runoff. With the exception of pre-emergent pesticides, avoid application if rain is expected.

10. Unwanted/unused pesticides shall be disposed as hazardous waste.

Standing water shall not remain in the treatment measures for more than two days, to prevent mosquito generation. Should any mosquito issues arise, contact the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District as needed for assistance.

Mosquito larvicides shall be applied only when absolutely necessary, as indicated by the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and then only by a licensed professional or contractor. Contact information for Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District is shown below.

III. Vector Control Contacts
Greater Los Angeles Vector Control District
12545 Florence Avenue
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
P: (562) 944-9656
IV. Inspections
The attached Biofiltration Inspection and Maintenance Checklist shall be used to conduct inspections monthly (or as needed), identify needed maintenance, and record maintenance that is conducted.

Page D-4
Biofiltration Basin
Inspection and Maintenance Checklist
Property Address: 20701 Currier Road, Walnut, CA 91789 Property Owner: Sysco Corporation Treatment Measure No.: Date of Inspection: ___________Type of Inspection: Monthly Pre-Wet Season (circle one) ______ After heavy runoff ____End of Wet Season Inspector(s): ____________________________ ______ Other:

Defect Conditions When
Maintenance Is Needed
Maintenance
Needed? (Y/N)
Comments (Describe maintenance
completed and if needed maintenance
was not conducted, note when it will be
done)
Results Expected When
Maintenance Is Performed

1. Standing Water When water stands in the
Biofiltration Basin between
storms and does not drain
within four days after rainfall.

There should be no areas of standing water
once inflow has ceased. Any of the following
may apply: sediment or trash blockages
removed at overflow inlet, blockages removed
from underdrains, improved grade from head
to foot of Biofiltration Basin, or added
underdrains. If sediment or blockages are
built up within the underdrains, a vacuum
truck may be required for removal.

2. Trash and
Debris
Accumulation
Trash and debris accumulated
in the Biofiltration Basin.

Trash and debris removed from Biofiltration
Basin and disposed of properly.

3. Sediment Evidence of sedimentation in
Biofiltration Basin.

Material removed so that there is no clogging
or blockage. Material is disposed of properly.

4. Erosion Channels have formed around
inlets, there are areas of bare
soil, and/or other evidence of
erosion.

Obstructions and sediment removed so that
water flows freely and disperses over a wide
area. Obstructions and sediment are disposed
of properly.

5. Vegetation Vegetation is dead, diseased
and/or overgrown.

Vegetation is healthy and attractive in
appearance.

6. Mulch Areas of bare earth are
exposed, or mulch layer is less
than 3 inches in Depth.

All bare earth is covered, except mulch is kept
6 inches away from trunks of trees and
shrubs. Mulch is even in appearance, at a
depth of 3 inches.

7. Miscellaneous Any condition not covered
above that needs attention in
order for the Biofiltration Basin
to function as Designed.

Meet the design specifications.

Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan)
SYSCO Los Angeles, 20701 E. Currier Road
Attachment E
LID and Grading Plans

OFFICE OFFICE REC.

CONTROL

OPERATIONS CONTROL
PHONE

WOMEN MEN

CONFERENCE STORAGE
DRIVER
TOILET
$AUDIT_BAD_BLOCK
1647 SF235 OCCUPANT
1371 SF199 OCCUPANTS
1394 SF199 OCCUPANTS
1377 SF199 OCCUPANTS
40 OF7
OF6 OF6
OF7
OF7 OF7 OF7
OF7
OF7
OF7
OF7
OF6 OF6
OF6
OF6 OF6 OF6

PROPOSED COLD DOCK
23 DOCK DOORS

PROPOSED

OFFICES

PROPOSED FREEZER EXPANSION
41,207 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED

BATTERY

CHARGING
4,145 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED
26,422 SQ. FT.

DRY WAREHOUSE
24,535 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED

DRY DOCK
5 DOCK DOORS
6,987 SQ. FT.

PROPERTY LINE

CURRIER ROAD
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50 FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50

VALLEY BLVD

UNION PACIFIC RAILWAY TRACK

SAN JOSE CREEK

EXISTING BUILDING

TO REMAIN
FF = 30.50

EXISTING BUILDING

TO REMAIN
FF = 30.50

GARAGE AREA

DRIVE-THRU WASH AREA

TRAILER WASH
AREA
RAMP

FUEL ISLANDS
OFFICE

PARTS ROOM

PASSAGE

TOOL ROOM

WORK ROOM

STORAGE

AIR COMPRESSOR
ROOM

BATHROOM

TRENCH DRAIN

TRENCH DRAIN

LUBE PIT

FLUID DISPENSER

EDGE OF SECOND

FLOOR ABOVE

FLUID DISPENSER

BATTERY CHARGER

FLOOR DRAIN

FUEL DISPENSERS

FUEL DISPENSERS

AIR, WATER AND OIL ON MAST

AIR, WATER AND OIL ON MAST

ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE

ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE
W.H.

WASH SKID

SPRAYGUN MOUNT AND

CONTROL STATION

WASH ARC

SPRAYGUN MOUNT AND CONTROL STATION

LNG DISPENSER

LNG DISPENSER

LNG STATION

VALLEY BLVD

UNION PACIFIC RAILWAY TRACK

SAN JOSE CREEK
06/18/24 CJN
21 FACILITY EXPANSION & SITE MODIFICATIONS FOR

SYSCO LOS ANGELES
20701 CURRIER RD.

WALNUT, CA 91789 CONCEPT DRAWING. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.

REVISIONS:

PROJ. MGR: DATE:
d
N
WDID NO

PENDING
Know what'sbelow. Callbefore you dig.

PAVING LEGEND:

PROPOSED BIOFILTRATION BASIN
PROPOSED A.C. PAVEMENT

PROPOSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT

PROPOSED LANDSCAPING

PRELIMINARY CUT/FILL ESTIMATE OF EARTHWORK
NOTE

AN ALTA SUR9EY HAS NOT BEEN PREPARED
FOR THE PRO-ECT AT THIS TIME PROPERTY
BOUNDARY AND E;ISTING TOPOGRAPHY ARE

BASED ON PRECISE GRADING PLAN PREPARED
BY ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS DATED 
LEGEND:

PROPERTY LINE
E; RCP STORM DRAIN

PROPOSED CONTOURS
E;ISTING CONTOURS
PR LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
C
C
A A
A A
SITE SECTIONS  SEE SHEET GP
B B
D
D
GP-01 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN

06/18/24 CJN
21 FACILITY EXPANSION & SITE MODIFICATIONS FOR

SYSCO LOS ANGELES
20701 CURRIER RD.

WALNUT, CA 91789 CONCEPT DRAWING. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.

REVISIONS:

PROJ. MGR: DATE:
d
WDID NO

PENDING
Know what'sbelow.

Callbefore you dig.

A

ALIGNMENT A

NORTH-SOUTH
B

ALIGNMENT B

NORTH-SOUTH
C

ALIGNMENT C

EAST-WEST
D

ALIGNMENT D

EAST-WEST
H: 1" = 60'
V: 1" = 30'
H: 1" = 60'
V: 1" = 30'
H: 1" = 60'
V: 1" = 30'
H: 1" = 60'
V: 1" = 30'
GP-02 CONCEPTUAL SITE SECTIONS

PROPOSED COLD DOCK
23 DOCK DOORS

PROPOSED

OFFICES

PROPOSED FREEZER EXPANSION
41,207 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED

BATTERY

CHARGING
4,145 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED
26,422 SQ. FT.

DRY WAREHOUSE
24,535 SQ. FT.

PROPOSED

DRY DOCK
5 DOCK DOORS
6,987 SQ. FT.

OFFICE OFFICE REC.

CONTROL

OPERATIONS CONTROL
PHONE

WOMEN MEN DRIVER
TOILET
$AUDIT_BAD_BLOCK
1647 SF
235 OCCUPANT
1371 SF199 OCCUPANTS
1394 SF199 OCCUPANTS
1377 SF199 OCCUPANTS
40 OF7
OF6 OF6
OF7
OF7 OF7 OF7
OF7
OF7
OF7
OF7
OF6 OF6
OF6
OF6 OF6 OF6

VALLEY BLVD

UNION PACIFIC RAILWAY TRACK

SAN JOSE CREEK

PROPERTY LINE

CURRIER ROAD
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50
FF = 30.50

EXISTING BUILDING

TO REMAIN
FF = 30.50

EXISTING BUILDING

TO REMAIN
FF = 30.50
06/18/24 CJN
21 FACILITY EXPANSION & SITE MODIFICATIONS FOR

SYSCO LOS ANGELES
20701 CURRIER RD.

WALNUT, CA 91789 CONCEPT DRAWING. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.

REVISIONS:

PROJ. MGR: DATE:
d
N
WDID NO

PENDING
LID LEGEND:

BIOFILTRATION PLANTER FOOTPRINT

EXISTING OVERFLOW INLET

EXISTING STORM DRAIN

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN

PROPOSED UNDERDRAIN

DISTURBED AREA

CONCENTRATED FLOW

PROPOSED FLOW DIRECTION

PROPOSED CONTOURS

EXISTING CONTOURS

EXISTING/PROPOSED STORM DRAIN INLET
(PROPOSED FILTER AND STENCIL)

PROPOSED BIOFILTRATION (LINED)

CURB CUT (ENERGY DISSIPATION)

PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN
(PROPOSED FILTER AND STENCIL)

PROPOSED PUMP MANHOLE
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
SITE CONDITIONS SUMMARY:

PRO-ECT SITE

DISTURBED
 SF
 AC

SOIL TYPE  CLAY LOAM INFILTRATION IS ASSUMED INFEASIBLE

PROPOSED CONDITIONS AREA SUMMARY
PER9IOUS AREA 
 SF
 AC

IMPER9IOUS AREA  SF
 AC

SOIL TYPE 
 RAINFALL DEPTH  INCH
SW4D9

HYDROCALC

SITE
 CF
SW4D9
FILTER

  CF
DMA
AREA  ACRES
SW4D9
FILTER
 CF

BMP LINED BIOFILTRATION
PONDING   INCHES
FILTRATION RATE IN/HR
FS 

AREA RE4UIRED 
 SF
AREA PRO9IDED  SF
DMA
AREA  ACRES
SW4D9
FILTER

 CF

BMP LINED BIOFILTRATION
PONDING   INCHES
FILTRATION RATE IN/HR
FS 

AREA RE4UIRED 
SF
AREA PRO9IDED  SF
S1
S2
Know what'sbelow. Callbefore you dig.

S3
LID-01 CONCEPTUAL LID PLAN
NOTE

AN ALTA SUR9EY HAS NOT BEEN PREPARED FOR THE
PRO-ECT AT THIS TIME PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND E;ISTING

TOPOGRAPHY ARE BASED ON PRECISE GRADING PLAN
PREPARED BY ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS DATED 
DMA #1
DMA 
S2
S4
S5
F
F
E
E

SOURCE CONTROL BMPS

COMMON AREA LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT

BMP MAINTENANCE

HOUSEKEEPING OF LOADING DOCK

COMMON AREA CATCH BASIN INSPECTION

STREET SWEEPING

STORM DRAIN STENCILING

TRASH AND WASTE STORAGE

OUTDOOR LOADING DOCK

LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION PRACTICE
SC1
SC2
SC3
SC4
SC5
SC6
SC7
SC8
SC9
SC2
SC6 SC4
SC2
SC1 SC9
SC1 SC9
SC3 SC8
SC3 SC8
SC5
SC5
SC3 SC8
SC7
S1 SC6 SC4