TO:
SOIL
EXPLORATION
COMPANY, INC.
Soil Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Materials Testing, Geology January 21 , 2020
Project No. 19251-01
Roger Hobbs
1428 E. Chapman Ave.
Orange, CA 92866
SUBJECT: Preliminary Soil Investigation, Infiltration Tests and Liquefaction Evaluation Report, Proposed Residential Development Site (41 Lots), Cactus Avenue and Bradshaw Circle (APN 478-090-018, -024 and -025), City of Moreno Valley, California Introduction
In accordance with your authorization, Soil Exploration Co., Inc. has performed a preliminary soil investigation, infiltration tests and liquefaction evaluation for the subject site. The accompanying report presents a summary of our findings, conclusions, recommendations, and limitations of our work for proposed 41 lot, two-story wood frame residential development.
Scope of Work
• Review soils, geologic, seismic, groundwater data and maps in our files. • Perform exploration of the site by means of five 8" diameter borings, 16.5 to 50 feet deep, at readily accessible locations.
• Field engineer (California Registered RCE) for logging of the excavations, sampling of select soils, observation of excavation resistance, record SPT blow counts and water seepage (if any). • Perform basic laboratory testing of select soil samples, including moisture, density, expansion potential, sieve analysis and corrosion potential (pH, chlorides, resistivity and water soluble sulfates). • Perform digitized search of known faults within a 50-mile radius of the site. • Determine CBC (2019) seismic parameters.
• Consult with civil/structural design consultants.
• Perform two shallow infiltration tests at locations suggested by civil design engineer for WQMP design purposes.
• Prepare a report of our findings, conclusions and recommendations for site preparation, including overexcavation/removal depth, allowable bearing value, foundation/slab-on-grade depth/thickness/reinforcement recommendations, excavation characteristics of earth materials, lateral earth pressures for retaining walls design, pavement thickness estimates, suitability of onsite soils for compacted fills, liquefaction/dynamic settlement evaluation, general earthwork and grading specifications, California Building Code (2019) seismic design coefficients, Cal/OSHA classification of soils and infiltration rate (inches/hour).
Site Conditions
The rectangular shaped, relatively flat site is located on the north side of Cactus Avenue, east of Bradshaw Circle, in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California. Cactus Avenue is a paved road with curbs and no sidewalks. Bradshaw Circle is a paved road with no curbs, gutters or sidewalks.
A chain link fence borders the site on the east side and a block wall on the north side. Existing houses are located on adjacent property to the north. Adjacent property to the east is vacant. Vegetation consists of very dense weeds and dense tumbleweeds.
7535 Jurupa Ave., Unit C, Riverside, CA 92504 • Tel: (951) 688-7200 • Fax: (951) 688-7100 soilexploration@yahoo .com • [email protected]
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
The approximate locations of the above and other features are shown on Exploratory Boring and Infiltration Test Location Map, Plate 1. The base map is Site Plan prepared by Robert Beers of Jurupa Valley, California.
Proposed Development
We understand that the site is proposed for a single family, 41 lot residential development and associated improvements. The structures will be light, two-story wood frame construction with concrete floor slabs supported on prepared subgrade. Grading plans are not available for review at this time, however based on the relatively flat topography of the site, modest cut or fill grading and no significant cut or fill slopes are proposed.
Field Work
Five exploratory borings were drilled on January 8, 2020, to a maximum depth of 50 feet below existing ground surface utilizing a 8-53 mobile drill rig equipped with 8-inch diameter hollow stem augers. Refer to Plate 1 for boring locations. The borings were logged by a California Registered Civil Engineer. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) blow counts were recorded for the earth materials. Relatively undisturbed samples of the soils were also obtained by utilizing California Ring Sampler.
In general, these borings revealed that the site surface soils consist of sandy silt, silty sand and sand with silt (USCS "ML", "SM" and "SP-SM"). The granular earth materials are generally medium dense to very dense, however loose soils were noted to depths of 2 to 7 feet. Detailed descriptions of the earth materials encountered are presented in the form of Geotechnical Boring Logs in Appendix B.
USGS Geologic Map of the Sunnymead Quadrangle shows the site area is underlain with young alluvial-fan deposits (see Figure 2).
Laboratory Testing
Basic laboratory tests were performed for select soil samples. The tests consisted primarily of natural moisture contents, dry densities, sieve analysis and corrosion potential (pH, chlorides, resistivity and water soluble sulfates). Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C and with Geotechnical Boring Logs in Appendix B.
Groundwater
Groundwater, seepage or wet soils were not encountered in our exploratory borings, drilled to a maximum depth of 50 feet, at the time this work was performed. Groundwater study is not within the scope of this work. Groundwater data from well in the vicinity of the site is tabulated below (see Figure 1, Site Location Map, for location of well):
WSE* Date Distance/Location Estimated Depth
Well No. (ft) Measured Relative to Site of Water Below
Site (ft)
EMWD 10141 1471.31 11/3/2011 SW/0.27 miles 74.5
1483.11 11/27/2018 62.7
* WSE = Water Surface Elevation
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 2
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Liquefaction Evaluation
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
Soil liquefaction is a process by which loose, saturated, fine granular deposits, such as fine sands, lose a significant portion of their shear strength due to pore water pressure buildup resulting from cyclic loading, such as that caused by an earthquake. In general, liquefaction potential is higher when the groundwater table is less than 30 feet below ground surface. Soil liquefaction can lead to foundation bearing failures and excessive settlements.
Based on Riverside County GIS map, the site is located within an area of moderate liquefaction potential (see Figure 3).
Summary of conditions for the deep boring B-1 are as follows:
Depth Class SPT Count Moisture Passing 200 Sieve Compactness/ (ft) (USCS) (blows/foot) (%) (%) Consistencv
2 ML-SM 5 14.6 55 Loose
5 SM 8 - - Loose
10 SM 50 11 .9 39 Dense
15 SM 36 - - Dense
20 SM 36 9.1 41 Dense
25 SM 36 - - Dense
30 SP-SM 70 2.7 12 Very dense
35 SP-SM - - - -
40 SP-SM 77 - - Very dense
45 SP-SM - - - -
50 SP-SM 86 - - Very dense
Liquefaction Analysis/Dynamic Settlement: LiquefyPro
Liquefaction susceptibility using Standard Penetration Test data and laboratory grain size test results were analyzed using LiquefyPro software (Version 5.5g). Liquefaction analysis performed for this evaluation included: (1] evaluation of soil consistency and compactness influencing liquefaction, [2] correction of penetration resistance data to convert measured SPT N-values to standard Nso-values, (3] calculating the earthquake induced stress ratio (CSR), [4] calculating cyclic resistance ratio (CRR), [5] assume water table at 60 feet below the ground surface, and (6] evaluation of liquefaction potential by calculating a factor of safety against liquefaction (FS), by dividing CRR by CRS. The software output is presented in Appendix G.
The main observations of the results are as follows:
• Onsite soils at the site in general have a Safety Factor of 5.0 against liquefaction. Subsequent to compaction of upper 5 feet of soils, indicated settlement of saturated and unsaturated sands is 0.00 in. and 1.14 in., respectively, with total settlement of saturated and unsaturated sands of 1.14 in., with differential settlement of 0.570 to 0. 753 in. in 30 feet. • Liquefaction also involves lateral or horizontal displacement (lateral spreading) of essentially intact blocks of surficial soils on slopes or toward a free-face slope such as river or canal bank. The potential for and magnitude of lateral spreading is dependent upon many conditions, including the presence of a relatively thick, continuous, potentially liquefiable sand layer and high slopes.
Subsurface information obtained for this study indicates that high slopes are not anticipated. Based on currently available procedures, the site does not appear to be susceptible to (lateral spread) ground surface disruption during a moderate seismic event.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 3
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Seismicity/Faulting
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
The site is not located within a currently designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or County of Riverside Fault zone.
A computer search of all known Quarternary major faults within 50 miles of the site from USGS Earthquake Hazards Program is presented in Appendix D. Please note that it is probable that not all active or potentially active faults in the region have been identified. Furthermore, seismic potential of the smaller and less notable faults is not sufficiently developed for assignment of maximum magnitudes and associated levels of ground shaking that might occur at the site due to these faults.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
• All vegetable matter, old fills, buried utilities/irrigation lines, etc. and deleterious materials would require removal from the proposed building/grading areas. • Overexcavation and recompaction of the loose surficial soils should be anticipated to provide adequate and uniform support for the proposed structures. All surficial earth materials encountered during our investigation can be excavated with normal grading equipment in good working condition. • Onsite earth materials, cleansed of oversize cobbles and boulders (over 6 inches, if any), should be suitable for engineered/compacted fills.
• Based on observation and soil classification, the expansion potential of onsite near surface silty sands is expected to be very low (El<20).
• Subsequent to site preparation, the use of shallow spread footing foundations appears feasible for the proposed construction.
• Flooding potential of the site should be determined by the design civil engineer and considered in planning and construction.
• Site is located approximately 2. 78 miles from the San Jacinto fault. The site is located in a region of generally high seismicity, as is all of Southern California. During its design life, the site is expected to experience moderate to strong ground motions from earthquakes on regional and/or nearby causative faults.
• There is a 2 percent probability in 50 years (2475 year return period) that site modified peak ground acceleration at the site (PGAm) will exceed 0.909g (see Appendix D). • Groundwater was not encountered during subsurface investigation. Our experience indicates that surface or near-surface groundwater conditions can develop in areas where groundwater conditions did not exist prior to site development, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 4
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Recommendations
Site Preparation/Overexcavation
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
Grading and backfills should be performed in accordance with the City of Moreno Valley Grading Ordinance and attached General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix E), except as modified in the text of this report.
Structures should be provided with a compacted fill mat that extends to at least 5 feet beyond the structure lines in plan and to a depth of at least 5 feet below existing or proposed grade, whichever is deeper. The excavated bottom should be cleaned from roots, soft spots, wet spots, porous soils, old foundations, seepage pits and deleterious materials, etc. As a result, deeper excavations should not be precluded and this should be determined by observations and testing of excavated bottoms during grading.
After cleaning of the excavated bottom, the exposed surfaces should be further scarified to a depth of at least 12-inches, moisture conditioned/thoroughly watered and recompacted by utilizing heavy vibratory rollers to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557-12 Test Method, prior to placement of fill. Oversize material (larger than 6-inch size, if any) should not be utilized for structural fills. All fills should be placed on underlying medium dense native soils and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density.
The purposed of the above recommendations is to provide at least 3.5 feet of compacted fill mat below the foundation bottoms.
Compacted Fills/Imported Soils
Any soil to be placed as fill, whether presently onsite or import, should be approved by the soil engineer or his representative prior to its placement. All onsite soils to be used as fill should be cleansed of any roots or other deleterious materials. Cobbles larger than 3 inches in diameter should not be placed in the vicinity of foundations and utility lines. All fills should be placed in 6 to 8 inch loose lifts, thoroughly watered, mixed and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. This is relative to the maximum dry density determined by ASTM 1557-12 Test Method.
Foundation Design/Footings
Following site preparation, the use of shallow spread footings is feasible. An allowable bearing value of 1800 psf is recommended. This bearing pressure has been established based on the assumption that the footings will be embedded into compacted fill mat. Isolated column footings should be at least 24 inches wide and embedded at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent firm grade.
The above bearing value may be increased by one third for temporary (wind or seismic) loads. We recommend footings reinforcement should be at least two No. 5 bars at top and two at the bottom of footings. Conventional foundation should be in accordance with current California Building Code (CBC) 2019, with design by a qualified structural engineer. Additional recommendations for conventional foundations of one and two-story residential structures are presented on Plate 2. Please note that foundation design is under the purview of the structural engineer and structural engineer may have more restrictive requirements which will govern.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 5
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Conventional Residential Slabs-On-Grade
Project No. 19251-01
January 21, 2020
Residential slabs-on-grade should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforced with at least No. 3 bars at 18-inches on-center both ways, properly centered in mid-thickness of slabs (structural recommendations govern). Slabs-on-grade should be underlain with 10-mil Visqueen moisture barrier.
The moisture barrier should be underlain by two inches of clean rolled sand.
Tentative Pavement Design
Based on the granular nature of the onsite soils, we have assigned an R-value of 45. The recommended sections are outlined as follows:
Street Type Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base (CAB) (Tl) (inches) (inches)
Interior Street 5.5 to 6 3 6
The upper at least 12 inches of the subgrade soils below new pavements should be compacted to at last 90 percent relative compaction. Minimum relative compaction requirements for aggregated base should be 95 percent of the maximum laboratory dry density as determined by ASTM D1557-12.
Final pavement design shall be based on R-value testing of the subgrade soils at the completion of grading.
Hardscape Areas/Compaction/Concrete Joints
The upper at least 12 inches of subgrade soils for hardscape areas should be scarified and compacted to at least 90 percent.
The joints spacing for concrete slabs should be determined by the project architect. Joints should be laid out to form approximately square panels (equal transverse and longitudinal joint spacing). Rectangular panels, with the long dimension no more than one-and-one-half times the short, may be used when square panels are not feasible. The depth of longitudinal and transverse joints should be one-fourth the depth of the slab thickness.
Joint layout should be adjusted so that the joints will line up with the corners of structures, small foundations and other built-in structures. Acute angles or small pieces of slab curves as a result of joints layout should not be permitted.
Concrete Curing
Fresh concrete should be cured by protecting it against loss of moisture, rapid temperature change and mechanical injury for at least 3 days after placement. Moist curing, waterproof paper, white polyethylene sheeting, white liquid membrane compound, or a combination thereof may be used. After finishing operations have been completed, the entire surface of the newly place concrete should be covered by whatever curing medium is applicable to local conditions and approved by the engineer. The edges of concrete slabs exposed by the removal of forms should be protected immediately to provide these surfaces with continuous curing treatment equal to the method selected for curing the slab surfaces. The contractor should have at hand, and ready to install before actual placement begins, the equipment needed for adequate curing of the concrete.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 6
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
In hot or windy weather (80°F or 15 mph), the contractor must take appropriate curing precautions after the placement of concrete. The use of mechanically compacted low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 inches at the time of placement) is recommended. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if grouted tiles or other crack sensitive flooring is planned directly on concrete slabs.
Special Considerations/Excess Soils from Foundation Excavations Excess soils generated from foundation excavations should not be placed on slabs and driveways subgrade without proper moisture and compaction. Slab subgrade should be verified to contain 1.2 times the soil optimum moisture content to a depth of 6 inches prior to placement of slab building materials.
Moisture content should be tested in the field by the soil engineer. The addition of fiber mesh in the concrete and careful control of water/cement ratios may lessen the potential for slab cracking.
Lateral Earth Pressures/Retaining Walls
The following lateral earth pressures and soil parameters, in conjunction with the above-recommended bearing value (1800 psf), may be used for design of retaining walls with free draining compacted backfills.
If passive earth pressure and friction are combined to provide required resistance to lateral forces, the value of the passive pressure should be reduced to two-thirds the following recommendations :
Active Earth Pressure with level backfill (Pa)
At Rest Pressure (Po)
Passive Earth Pressure (Pp)
Horizontal Coefficient of Friction (µ)
Unit Soil Weight (yt)
35 pcf (EFP), drained, yielding
55 pcf (EFP), drained, non-yielding (part of building wall) 250 pcf (EFP), drained, maximum of 2500 psf
0.30 120 pcf
We recommend drainage for retaining walls to be provided in accordance with Plate 3 of this report.
Maximum precautions should be taken when placing drainage materials and during backfilling. All wall backfills should be properly compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction.
Seismic Considerations
The site is located approximately 2. 78 miles from the San Jacinto fault. Moderate to strong ground shaking can be expected at the site and there is a 2 percent probability in 50 years (2475 year return period) that site modified peak ground acceleration at the site (PGAm) will exceed 0.909g. The site soil profile is Class D. The structural engineer must consider City/County local codes, California Building Code (CBC) 2019 seismic data presented in this report (Appendix D), the latest requirements of the Structural Engineers Association, and any other pertinent data in selecting design parameters.
Expansion Index and Corrosion/Soluble Sulfates
Based on observation and soil classification, the expansion potential of the near surface sandy soils is anticipated to be very low (El<20).
Results of tests performed by Cal Land Engineering, Inc. of Brea, California on a select soil sample indicate negligible soluble sulfate exposure (less than 0.1 percent water soluble sulfates by weight), pH of 9.20, chlorides of 214 ppm and resistivity of 1,700 ohm-cm (see Appendix C). Based on pH, the soils are alkaline. Based on resistivity test results, soil is highly corrosive and ferrous metals/pipes/reinforcement should be protected. Concrete, mix, placement and curing for concrete should comply with ACI guidelines.
Tentatively we recommend Type II cement and concrete slump not exceeding 4 inches at the time of placement. If critical, these should be further verified by your structural or a corrosion engineer.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 7
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Drainage
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
Positive drainage must be provided and maintained for the life of the project around the perimeter of the structures and all foundations toward streets or approved drainage devices to minimize water infiltration into the underlying soils. In addition, finish subgrade adjacent to exterior footings should be sloped down and away to facilitate surface drainage. Roof drainage should be collected and directed away from foundations and slopes via nonerosive devices. Water, either natural or by irrigation, should not be permitted to pond or saturate the foundation soils.
Cal/OSHA Classification/Trench Excavations/Backfills
In general Cal/OSHA classification of onsite soils appears to be Type B.
Temporary trench excavations deeper than 5 feet should be shored or sloped at 1: 1 or flatter in compliance with Cal/OSHA requirements:
a.) The shoring should be designed by a qualified engineer experienced in the shoring design. b.) The tops of any temporary unshared excavations should be barricaded to prevent vehicle and storage loads within a 1: 1 line projected upward from the bottom of the excavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. If the temporary construction embankments , including shored excavations , are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are suggested along the tops of the excavations where necessary to prevent runoff from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. c.) The soils exposed in the excavations should be inspected during excavation by the soils engineer so that modifications can be made if variations in the soil conditions occur. d.) All unshored excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation.
Foundation Plan Review/Additional Observations and/or Testing The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions as interpreted from limited exploratory work. Our conclusions and recommendations should be reviewed and verified during construction and revised if necessary.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. should review the foundation plans and observe and/or test at the following stages of construction:
• During all overexcavations and fill placement.
• Following footing excavations and prior to placement of footing materials. • During wetting of slab subgrade (1.2X optimum to a depth of at least 6") and prior to placement of slab materials.
• During all trench and retaining wall backfills.
• During subgrade preparation/compaction, prior to paving. • When any unusual conditions are encountered.
Final Compaction Report
A final report of compaction control should be prepared subsequent to the completion of rough grading.
The report should include a summary of work performed, laboratory test results, and the results, locations and elevations of field density tests performed during grading.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 8
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Limitation of Investigation
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers practicing in this or similar locations. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report.
The field and laboratory test data are believed representative of the project site; however, soil conditions can vary significantly. As in most projects, conditions revealed during grading may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this condition occurs, the possible variations must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and adjusted as required or alternate design recommended.
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractor carry out such recommendations in the field.
This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In additions, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge.
This report was prepared for the client based on client's needs, directions and requirements at the time.
This report is not authorized for use by and is not to be relied upon by any party except the client with whom Soil Exploration Co., Inc. contracted for the work. Use of, or reliance on, this report by any other party is at that party's risk. Unauthorized use of or reliance on this report constitutes an agreement to defend and indemnify Soil Exploration Co., Inc. from and against any liability which may arise as a result of such use or reliance, regardless of any fault, negligence, or strict liability of Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Closure
If you should have any questions or concerns regarding this report, please do not hesitate to call our office.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Very truly yours,
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Gene K. Luu, PE 53417
Project Engineer
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Page 9
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Distribution:
Attachments :
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Project No. 19251-01
January 21, 2020
[1] Addressee ([email protected])
[1] Robert Beers ([email protected])
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Plate 1
Plate 2
Plate 3
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Site Location Map
USGS Geologic Map
Riverside County GIS Map
U.S. Geological Survey Faults Map
Exploratory Boring and Infiltration Test Location Map
Minimum Foundation and Slab Recommendations for Expansive Soils Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Backfill
References
Geotechnical Boring Logs
Laboratory Test Results
USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps-Source Parameters
and CBC (2019) Seismic Parameters
General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
Infiltration Test Procedures and Test Results
Liquefaction Analysis Summary
Legend
diaea Ave
- "
Bradshaw Ci
Cactus Ave . ( ,_
/ C
.. "- C , l u
.... ('O
(l)
CD
0 C
r e
0 :E
--0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 ro --1111!1- ----- ----~ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'!!!!!!!I____ ~ i miles 9
Copyright 2020 Property Research Partners LLC.
Brodiaea Ave
-a.:
:::J
_J ~
u5 ~
~ . t c::
·:5
0 Cactus Ave
. ..., . i. 't
...
Figure 1
... ___ ....... •·:·• ............... .
I • • i.
- J ~~r~ ·-·-.. ...=-~..-.;==..,..._-1=1.
-- ... ~ ... ----;•
' I
~ I
,{
J.
; ' I
I
I
~lo1
;ii- - .,_.
cJi1J/
,,,..'
t,16
.. .... •··· .,···
Base Map: USGS Geologic Map of the Sunnymead 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside County, California.
LEGEND:
Qyf: Young alluvial-fan deposits (Holocene and late Pleistocene) - Gray-hued sand and cobble- and gravel-sand deposits from lithicly diverse sedimentary units.
a: Arenaceous (very coarse sand through very fine sand.
Gravel.
Cactus Avenue and Bradshaw Circle
(APN 478-090-018, -024 and -025)
City of Moreno Valley, California
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Project No.: 19251-01
Date: January 21, 2020
Figure: 2
0 0 752 1 505 Feet
Map My County Map
C
..
. . .
'.
' F~' ·. )
~ ..
'IMPORTANT" Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards. The County of Riverside makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content (the source Is often third party), accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided, and assumes no legal responsibility for the Information contained on this map. Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user.
REPORT PRINTED ON ... 1/312020 4:52:34 PM © Riverside County GIS l.OSAn~
~- I!,; 1 .
atDt~
'", DJuana-~ em:al
Legend
□
□
Parcels
Contours 20 ft interval (with 1 O
20' CONTOUR
- 100' INDEX CONTOUR
Faults
OTHER AUTHORITY
ALQUIST .PRIOLO
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Fault Zones
C OTHER FAULT ZONE
■ COUNTY FAULT ZONE
■ ELSINORE FAULT ZONE
•
SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE
■ SAN JACINTO FAULT ZONE
Flood
Liquefaction
L Other Susceptibility
■ High
Low
Moderate
Very High
■ Verylow
Blueline Streams
City Areas
World Street Map
Notes
APN 478-090-018, 024, 025
Figure 3
U.S. Geological Survey 2014 Faults
1/9/2020, 3:38:49 PM
NSHM 2014 Fault Sources
Normal
Strike Slip
Thrust
Unassigned
0 4
0 5
1:577,791
8 10
16ml
20 km
USGS, National Geographic, Esrl, Gatmln, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA. ESA. METI. NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA. Increment p Corp,
Figure 4
USGS
Notional Geographic, Esti. Gatmln, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA. ESA. METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA. inerament P Corp, I USGS I -
7 PARCEL 4
PM 8114
PMB 38/28
_........_.
OELA
N"N ♦79-0IO-O'lf
,__ ~ -- - - >-- - -- -
r
,-it:J011Gf ---- <Md;-= 1NOU.Ne CT M.. l((J[INJI I l't'NN B0llD. Et M.
APN .f~~3 AfN •~ APN ♦7&-J20-015
FD 1• I.JI. rJ fAC:: LS .1..u.: DN_
~";~~'" ::a. I.•
31/.ll<
Lot 23
~--1-~ •~========::::::::~~v I
(.-
• Loi 2B
PAf CEL3
p .. 81 14
PMI 38/28
Lot 30
\\ Loi 15
-.,., .
R- - Open Space
~~
ltCETPao(a!IOAD:S-15-0I
lot 31
I
21tUI' 211.11' lt1 A R2
-··..;.,;:; .. ;... ... -, ....... ~) -- . - --- ~ .
T'" •• ·••• ,_, ~ mt• I.JI. Loi 37
~ :-... - ,,~•1u.PW
111~ f'llt f2A
I ARCEL2
,fM 16636
I MB 96/16
l30.0T (330.04'•., • R2)
CACTUS
~
~ e ,.
;.
•
l ..
Nominal Lot Size: 43' by 72' and 45' by 72'
--
PARCEL 1
PM 17535
PMB 96/57 - Sl
-DUAKlH ...... ET.._
-·-
RCEL 3
PM 17535
PMB 96/57 - 5
-~ lSAI, CT"-
- ♦-
Infiltration Test No. 2
Infiltration Test
No.1
GRAPHIC SCALE
i i I
(lll'm)
1 iacll • ..0 fl
..,.
j
1254.08' (1253.N' CALC PO R4 a: "5)
- ~ - -- - - -- -- - -- - - - - -- - -- - •
r
I
.
' i
I
I
I
l
I
I
l
I
I
l
11 I
l;
' l I
l I
I
' 1
r
l
i
I
I l
I
I t
I l
I
' I
l
i
I
I I
I
I
ROBERT BEERS t--Fl_ao __ e_oo_K _R_rr_. _______ __. PREPARED F'OR: I RCHobbe~ 8175 Llmonlte Avenue, Suite E
Jurupo Volley. CA 92509
Ph. (951) 317-2041 Fox (909) 360:..2070
Dote Robert M. 8..-. ilC.E. :siAoS [,.,Ir .. 12- 31- 21 1428 E. Chapman AvenJe
Orange, CA 92866
PHONE: (714) 6.33- 810q
j
.-----~~~~~~~~---------. i EXPLORATORY BORING 1
& INFILTRATION TEST LOCATION MAP II
1t-------...;;. P..;;LA;;;..;.;.T..;;E..;1;.._ _____ __.
LEGEND I
B-5 • Approximate Location of Boring
1-4 .A Approximate Location of Infiltration Test
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Proiect No. 19251-01 I January 21, 2020
Base Layout: 41
TTM37858
Bue 1-otlrg Lavout
Cly ol Manno.,.
CAl..FOfNA
Lots
DA TE 0«c- 9 :«119
JOO HO.
ORAIIN BY -1l.AJL.
C1£CXED BY...8.11.&
SHEET ..L OF ..L
EXPANSION INDEX (ASTM D 4829)
0-20
VERY LOW EXPANSION
1-Story Footings All footings at least 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous (See Note 1) footings : Two No. 5 bars top and two No. 5 bars bottom _2-Story Footing~ All footings at least 18" deep.
(See Note 1) Reinforcement for continuous footings : Two No. 5 bars top and two No. 5 bars bottom
Minimum Footing Continuous: 15" for 1-story
Width Continuous: 15" for 2-storv
Pad Footings Isolated column: 24" wide and 24" deep, tied to continuous footinQs in two directions
Garage Door A grade beam 18" deep by 15" wide for 1- and 2-story should be Grade Beam provided across the garage entrance and other large openings (See Note 2)
Living Area Floor 4" thick slab. No. 3 rebar at 18 inches on-center reinforcement at Slabs* mid-height with 10-mil Visqueen moisture barrier above 2" sand (See Notes 3, 4 and 5) base
Garage Floor 4" thick slab. No. 3 rebar at 18 inches on-center reinforcement at Slabs* mid-height with 10-mil Visqueen moisture barrier above 2" sand (See Notes 4 and 6) base. Garaae slabs should be auarter-sawn .
Presoaking of (1 .2) times optimum moisture to a depth of at least 6" Living Areas &
Garage Slabs
Subgrade**
The Above Are Minimum Recommendations.
All Work Should Comply with Applicable/Governing Agency Codes and Requirements • Based on California Green Code, a 4" thick base of½ inch or larger clean aggregate shall be used below the Visgueen . **Presoaking of living areas and garage slabs should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical engineer .
NOTES:
1. Depth of interior or exterior footings to be measured from lowest adjacent finish grade.
2. The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as that of the adjoining footings.
3. Living areas slabs may be tied to the footings as directed by the structural engineer .
4. We recommend the use of at least No. 3 bars at 18 inches on-center , each way, for all slabs.
5. 10-mil Visqueen sheeting welded at laps has proved successful. Equivalents are acceptable .
6. Garage slabs should be isolated from stem wall footings with a minimum 3/8" felt expansion joint.
7. Sand base should have a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater (e.g., washed concrete sand).
Post-Tensioned Slabs
As an alternative to conventional foundations , building may be supported on post-tensioned slabs, to be designed by a structural engineer in consultation with the geotechnical consultant. In addition , a post-tensioned slab is also recommended for VERY HIGH expansion potential (Expansion Index greater than 130), if encountered . Post-tensioned slabs should have perimeter footings embedded a minimum of 12 inches below the adjacent grade. The slabs should be designed such that they can be deformed approximately 1-inch vertically over a width of 30 feet without distress in the event of shrinkage or swelling of the supporting soils.
Living area slabs should be underlain by a 10-mil Visqueen moisture barrier covered by a 2-inch layer of sand. Presoaking is recommended for post tensioned slabs: (1.2) x optimum to a depth of 12 inches, (1 .3) x optimum to a depth of 18 inches, and (1.4) x optimum to a depth of 24 inches for LOW, MEDIUM, and HIGH expansion potential soils, respectively . LOW and MEDIUM expansive soil lots using conventional foundation should comply with 2019 CBC. For very high expansion potential (Expansion Index greater than 130), specific recommendations by the geotechnical consultant will be required. Placement of 4 inches of sand base is also suggested for post-tensioned slab systems . Unless stated in the attached report, for El=21-50 use Pl-25 , and El=51-90 use Pl=35.
Minimum Foundation and Slab Recommendations
~
Soil Exploration Co. Inc.
For Expansive Soils
Plate: 2
ONE- AND J:WO-STORY_RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
SU"i3bRAlN OPTlONS fOR NATTVE MATERIAL BACKFl~L
OPTION N2: Pip,e-S-urrotmded
with Cl-2 Maten-al·
With Prop+r Surface
Drainage
_j_
, ::'
Waterproofing T
Slope or
L.vel
OP11ON N1: Gravel Wrapped in
Fiit.ar F 11:brlc
With Proper Surface
Drainage
OPllo"N N3: G30te~l4- Drain
With Proper Surface
Drainage
6::' to 1 ::' ~
Slope or
Lwel
Fabric Flap
Behind Core
~-
Mlradrain 6000• M.mbrane
-(CptJonaQ
Wate!l)tooling
M,~mbr.ane
{Optional)
9"-1----- Claaa 2 Filter
Permeable Material
¼ to 11/, Inch Size Gravel I
Wrapped in Filter Fabric Weep Hole
J Drain 1.00. l-i}vid
D<ain 1. or e<;uivalent
4-lnch Diameter Perforated Pipe
ClaN 2 Filter Permeable Material' Grading
Pe, Caitrans Specification-.
Slt>"e Sfl:e Pereen~ p,.ssir,g
,. 100
3W 90-10p
318' 40-100
No.4 25-40
No.a 1s-33
No. 30 S-15
No.SO 0-i
No. 200 ~
Proper Ol..~lct Shc~!d be.·
Provic!ed' tor Gravel Subdra in
(See Notes)
Level or~.,,,
Slope,,.,~
4-lnch Diameter
Perforated Pipe
Fabric Flap••
Behind Core
"Miradraii:16000 or .J Drain l-00 for
non-waterprOQfed wal!a;
Miradrain 6200 or J Drain 200 for
completed waterproofed walla
**Peel back the bottom fabric flap,
place pipe next to eore,
wrap fabric around pipe and
tuck behind core.
SUBDRA IN OPTIONS FOR CLEAN SAND BACKFiLL
With Proper Surface
Drainage~
..L -,_-
Waterproofing
Membrane.......__
(Optiona0
1±" r-H/2 Min.-!
·_:_· • . • .. ~:rean sand b~cktilT
.• _' , • . • .. .' ' f;,- having sand equivaient
• of 30 or greater (can be
:iensified by water jetting)
.,..:!:t::.:i+--- Subdrain Ootion S1:
1 fl 3/ft. of ¼ to 1 ½' size
gravel wrapped in fitter fabric
(s,!e r,otes io; o-.t.le\/
I
Subdrain Option S2:
4' diameter perforated pipe
surrounded with 1 tt 3ttt of
Class 2 filter material per
Caltrans specifications as above
•
_.·.·:
_-: • Subdrain Option S3:
• •.: 4' diameter perforated pipe
• wrapped in filter fabric
'
• Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Ac:-ylonitrile Sutediene Styrene (ASS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 ?oiyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco /l2fX:IJ PVC, or approved equivalent Pipe should be installed with perforations down. • Filter fabric should be Mirafi 140N, 140NS, Supac 4NP, Amoco 4545, Trevira 1114, or approved equivalent • All drains sho_uld have a gradient of 1 percent minimum. • Outlet portion for gravel subdrain should have a 4'-diameter pipe with the perforated portion inserted imo the gravel approximately 2· minimum and the nonpertorated po1tion extending approx imately 1' outside the gravel. Proper sealing should be provided at the pipe insertion enabling water to n.m irom the gravel portion into rather than outside the pipo. • Waterproofing membrane may be r6quired for a s~r.ic retaining wat: svcii as a: stucco or besemerrt wait. • Weephole shou ld be 2" :-r.inirr.urn diame~er anc proviceo st 25' -n:r.imum ln ;ength of wail. ~ expos1.:re is permitted, weepno le shou1d be iocated at 3=' above finished grede. ii' expos.:re ;:; ~.o: permrtted s1..ch as fo: a wall adjacent to~ ~~t<Walk/cvrb, a pipe under 1h11 $idewa li< to discharge through the curb face or equiva lent should be provided, or for a ba$ement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided. Open vertical masonry joints (i.e .. omit mortar from joints of first course above finished grade) at 32' maximum intervals may be substituted for weepholes. Scrnening such as with a filter fabric; should be provided for weepholes / open joints to prevent earth materials fro"l entering the holes£i9ir,ts. ·---- ·
RETAINING WALL BACKFIL
AND SUBDRA IN DE All
SoH ·Expioration Co. ~nc.
Plate: 3
c===-==::=-----------·---------
APPENDIX A
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
REFERENCES
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
• USGS Geologic Map of the Sunnymead 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside County, California. • Riverside County GIS Liquefaction Map.
• U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program, 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters.
• U.S. Geological Survey Faults, 2014.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Appendix A
APPENDIX B
Cl)
-J
0 Cl)
0 w
z
~ c.,
I
w
Cl)
0::
~
0 u
Cl)
-J
0 Cl)
Cl
w z ;;;:
0::
(j
UJ z
Li:
MAJOR DIVISIONS
w > QJ
"vi
8 N
0 z
V
·o
V)
0 ~
C:
C1l
£
QJ
0 e,
0 0
N
0 z
V
·o_
V) Q)
- > 0 Q)
~ ·en
C:
£
Q)
0 e,
GRAVELS
(More than ½ of
coarse fraction > No.
4 sieve size)
SANDS
(More than ½ of
coarse fract ion < No.
4 sieve size)
SIL TS & CLAYS
LL < 50
SIL TS & CLAYS
LL > 50
HIGHLY
ORGANIC SOILS
SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
Pt
Well-graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines ~-: -: -:-:-:a -: -:-:-
:::-.:::::::::::~ :'.:'. Poorly graded gravels or gravel•sand mixtures, little ar no fines K1 ~ Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
¼"'~~ ~// ~ Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures
. . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . .
0 000 00
00 0 0 0
ooo 0 o 0 o
I I
... . . . . . .
Well-graded sands or gravely sands, little or no fines
Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines Silty sands, sand-salt 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, caceous or diatonaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts
Inorganic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty clays, organic silts
:✓;,; ~ ½ Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty clays, organic ~ /✓ ½ ~ silts
Peat and other highly organic soils
CLASSIFICATION CHART
(UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIF ICAT ION SYSTEM )
RANGE OF GRAIN SIZES
CLASSIFICATION U.S. Standard Grain Size in
Sieve Size Millimeters
BOULDER ABOVE 12" ABOVE 305
COBBLES 3" to 12" 305 to 76 .2 60 /
GRAVEL 3" to No . 4 762 to 4 .76
COARSE 3" TO¾ " 76.2to19 .1
FINE ¾ "'to No . 4 19.1 to4 .76
SAND No. 4 to 200 4.76 to 0 .074
COARSE No . 4to10 4.76 to 2.00
MEDIUM No . 10 to 40 2.00 to 0.420
FINE No . 40 to 200 0.420 to 0.074
X
w 50 C
~ 40
>-I-
30 c3
i'.= 20 en
~ 10 _J
C
I/ H
/
V CH
CL / & /
V MH
SILT & CLAY BELOW No . BELOW 0.074 200
0.. 7
4 0
/
Cl -Ml /
ML &OL
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GRAIN SIZE CHART PLASTICITY CHART
NR No Recovery Classificat ion in accordance with ASTM D2487 Ba Sam le Descript ion and visual observation in accordance with ASTM D2488 ri:--.---".;...,a._....::...:;.;.:..;.i:..=....-+-'"-...,;;~-=-'---' '-'-- - t----------1 All Sieve Sizes shown are US Standard Seepage SPT Refusal is defined as one of the follow ing:
10 blows for no apparent displacement
50 blows for less than 6 inches advancemen t
100 blows for 6 to 18 inches advancement
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No. 8-1
Date: January 8, 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: 8-53
Hole Diameter- 8" Drive Weight: 140 lbs Drop: 30" Elevation· Existina Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS DRY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHN ICAL DESCRIPTION (feet ) OF TEST PER DENSITY (%) CLASSIFICATION LOGGED BY: _ill,_ TEST 6 INCH (%) uses SAMPLED BY: GL
1 ML SANDY SILT: Olive/light brown, fine to medium
grained, moist, loose
2 3
X
4/2/3 - 14.6 Moist, loose
% Passing No. 200 Sieve = 55
4 5
6 X
SM SILTY SAND: Tan, fine to medium grained, slightly 1/2/6 - - moist, loose 7 8
9 10
11 X
20/24/26 - 11.9 Light brown, moist, dense
% Passing No. 200 Sieve = 39
12 13
14 15
16 X
12/15/21 - - Fine to coarse grained, dry, dense
17 18
19 20
21 X
9/16/20 - 9.1 Tan, fine to medium grained, dry, dense
% Passing No. 200 Sieve= 41
22 23
24 25
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No. B-1
Date: January 8. 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: 8-53
Hole Diameter· 8" Drive Weight · 140 lbs Drop · 30" Elevation- Existino Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS DRY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (feet) OF TEST PER DENSITY (¾) CLASSIFICAT ION LOGGED BY: GL TEST 6 INCH {%) uses SAMPLED BY:~
26 X
15/16/20 SM Very pale brown, dry, dense
27 28
29 30
31 X
35/40/30 2.7 SP-SM SAND WITH SILT: Very pale brown, fine to medium - grained, dry, very dense, trace of gravel % Passing No. 200 Sieve = 12 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 IX
32/37/40 - - Dry, very dense
42 43
44 45
46 47
48 Dry, very dense
49 /
TOT AL DEPTH = 50 FEET
[X
NO GROUNDWATER
38/41 /45 NO CAVING 50 - -
BORING BACKFILLED
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No. B-2
Date: January 8, 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: B-53
Hole Diameter· 8" Drive Weight' 140 lbs Drop· 30" Elevation· Existina Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS DRY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (feet) OF TEST PER DENSITY (¾) CLASSIFICATION LOGGED BY: GL TEST 6 INCH (%) uses SAMPLED BY:~
1 SM SIL TY SAND: Olive/light brown, fine to medium
grained , slightly moist, dry, loose
2 3 4/4/5 85.3 5.8 Dry, loose
4 5
6 7
8 91 .2 15.6 ML SANDY SILT: Pale yellow, slightly moist, medium 9/11/16 dense 9 10
11 IX
517/8 SM SIL TY SAND: Light brown, fine to medium grained, - - slightly moist, medium dense 12 13
14 15
16 X
17/20/30 - - ML SANDY SILT: Very pale brown, dry, dense 17 18
19 20
21 IX
13/14/20 SM SILTY SAND: Yellow, fine to medium grained, dry, - - dense 22 23 TOTAL DEPTH= 21 .5 FEET
NO GROUNDWATER
24 NO CAVING
BORING BACKFILLED
25 Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No. 8-3
Date: January 8. 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: B-53
Hole Diameter- 8" Drive Weight' 140 lbs Drop· 30" Elevation· Existina Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS ORY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (feet) OF TEST PER DENSITY (%) CLASSIFICATION LOGGED BY: GL TEST 6 INCH (%) uses SAMPLED BY:~
1 SM SIL TY SAND: Light brown, fine to medium grained,
slightly moist, top 5 feet loose
2 3
4 5
6 1 /'i / 11 95.6 18.7 Slightly moist, medium dense
7 ML SANDY SILT: Light brown, moist, medium dense
8 9
10 11
[X
13/23/23 - - Pale yellow, dry, dense
12 13
14 15
16 IX
8/14/21 Light brown, slightly moist, dense - -
17 18
19 TOTAL DEPTH= 16.5 FEET
NO GROUNDWATER
20 NO CAVING
BORING BACKFILLED
21 22
23 24
25 Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No. 8-4
Date: January 8, 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: B-53
Hole Diameter· 8" Drive Weight: 140 lbs Drop· 30" Elevation· Existina Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS DRY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (feet) OF TEST PER DENSITY (%) CLASSIFICATION LOGGED BY: GL TEST 6 INCH (%) uses SAMPLED BY:~
1 SM SIL TY SAND: Brown. fine to medium grained. slightly moist, top 2 feet loose
2 3
iX
10/20/19 - 11 .9 Light brown, dry, dense
4 5
6 7
IX
6/6/6 - 6.5 Pale brown, dry, medium dense
8 9
10 11
X
12/24/28 - - Light brown, slightly moist, dense
12 13
14 15
16 X
19/20/20 - - Pale brown, dry, dense
17 18
19 X
17/22/24 - - Dry, dense 20
21 22 TOT AL DEPTH = 20 FEET
NO GROUNDWATER
23 NO CAVING
BORING BACKFILLED
24 25
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGS
Drill Hole No._-=B'--5-=----
Date: January 8, 2020 Project No. 19251-01
Drilling Company: Larry Harklerode Type of Rig: 8-53
Hole Diameter· 8" Drive Weight- 140 lbs Drop· 30" Elevation· Existina Ground
DEPTH TYPE SAMPLE BLOWS DRY MOISTURE SOIL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (feet ) OF TEST PER DENSITY (%) CLASSIFICAT ION LOGGED BY: GL TEST 6 INCH (%) uses SAMPLED BY:~
1 SM SIL TY SAND: Light brown, fine to medium grained,
slightly moist, top 4 feet loose
2 3
4 5
6 [>(
7/8/10 Pale brown, dry, medium dense
7 8
9 10
11 IA
14/22/26 - - Light brown, slightly moist, dense
12 13
14 15
16 [>(
13/1 6/21 - - Dry, dense
17 18
19 20
21 IA
13/17/21 - - Dry, dense
22 23 Dry, dense
24 /
TOTAL DEPTH= 25 FEET
[X
NO GROUNDWATER
14/15/22 NO CAVING
25 BORING BACKFILLED
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
APPENDIX C
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Ave.
Moreno Valley, California
SIEVE SIZE
Proposed Residential Development
Cactus Avenue and Bradshaw Circle
City of Moreno Valley, California
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
8-1 @2' 8-1 @ 10' 8-1 @20'
% PASSING % PASSING % PASSING
3/8" 100 100 100
No. 4 99 98 99.6
No. 8 98 97 98
No. 16 96 94 95
No. 30 93 89 90
No. 50 86 80 80
No. 100 74 62 64
No. 200 55 39 41
SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST DATA
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
8-1 @30'
% PASSING
100
92 88
82 67
40 21
12 Appendix C
Cal Land Engineering, Inc.
dba Quartech Consultants
Geotechnical, Environmental & Civil Engineering ----------- ---'---"-----··-·-···· ···-· --···-------- ---- Soil Exploration Company Inc.
7535 Jurupa Avenue , Unit C
Riverside, California 92504
Attn: Mr. Gene Luu
RE: LABORATORY TEST RESULTS/REPORT
Client: Roger Hobbs
Project: Corrosion Potential
Project No.: 19251-01
QCI Job No.: 20-183 -001h
Gentlemen :
January 16, 2020
We have completed the testing program conducted on sample for above project. The tests were performed in accordance with testing procedures as follows:
TEST METHOD
Corrosion Potential CT- 417, CT- 422, CT- 532 (643)
Enclosed is Summary of Laboratory Test Results.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide testing services to Soil Exploration Company Inc.
Should you have any questions , please call the undersigned .
Sincerely yours,
Cal Land Engineering, Inc. (CLE)
dba Quartech Consultants (QCl)
Jack C. Lee, GE 2153
Principle Engineer
Enclosure
Matthew Au
Project Engineer
---·•-·-- ---· - - •. - - . - ·-· -· ---·-----·-····--- 576 E. Lambert Road, Brea, CA 92821; Tel: 714-671-1050, Fax: 714-671-1090 Cal Land Engineering, Inc.
dba Quartech Consultants
Geotechnical, Environmental, and Civil Engineering
Soil Exploration Company Inc.
7535 Jurupa Avenue , Suite C
Riverside , California 92504
Client: Roger Hobbs
Project: Corrosion Potential
Project No.: 19251-01
Corrosivity Test Results
pH Chloride Sample Sample ID Depth CT-532 CT-422
(ft) (643) (ppm)
B-1 0-5' 9.20 214
QCI Project No.: 20-183-001h
Date : January 16, 2020
Summarized by: MA
Sulfate Resistivity CT-417
%By CT-532 (643)
Weight (ohm-cm)
0.0400 1,700
576 East Lambert Road, Brea, California 92821; Tel: 714-671-1050; Fax: 714-671-1090
APPENDIX D
U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program
2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters
New Search
Pref
Distance Slip Dip Dip Slip Rupture Rupture
Name State Top Bottom
in Miles Rate (degrees) Dir Sense
(mm/yr) (km) (km)
2.78 San Jacinto :SBV+SJV+A CA n/a 90 V
strike
0 16
slip
2.78 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV+A+CC CA n/a 90 V
strike
slip 0 16
2.78 San Jacinto:SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 17
2.78 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 17
2.78 San Jacinto :SJV+A+CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
2.78 San Jacinto:SJV+A+CC +B CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
2.78 San Jacinto:SBV+SJV CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 16
2.78 San Jacinto:SJV+A+CC CA n/a 90 V
strike
slip 0 16
2.78 San Jacinto:SJV CA 18 90 V strike
slip 0 16
2.78 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+ATCC+B CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
2.78 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+ATCC+BTSM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
2.78 San Jacinto;SJV+A CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 17
3.79 San Jacinto:A+CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
3.79 San Jacinto:A+CC CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 16
3.79 San Jacinto;A CA 9 90 V strike
slip 0 17
3.79 San Jacinto:A+C CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 17
3.79 San Jacinto :A+CC+B CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.1 15
8.27 San Jacinto·SBV CA 6 90 V strike 0 16
slip
S. San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike 0.1 13 13.82 slip
13.82 S. San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 85
strike
slip 0 14
13.82 S. San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14
S.San 13.82 Andreas ·CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 83 strike
slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:SSB+BG CA n/a 71 strike
slip 0 13
13.82 S. San Andreas·NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA nla 79 strike
slip 0.2 12
13.82 S. San Andreas:SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 81 strike
slip 0 13
13.82 S. San Andreas·SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 85 strike slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 84 strike slip 0 14
13.82 S. San
Andreas:PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San
Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 86 strike
slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 13
13.82 S. San Andreas·NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 75 strike
slip 0 14
13.82 S. San Andreas:NSB+SSB CA 90 strike nla V 0 13 slip
13.82 S. San Andreas·BB+NM+SM..-NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike 0 14
slip
13.82 S. San Andreas :NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 84 strike 0.1 13 slip
13.82 S. San Andreas :NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 83 strike slip 0 14
13.82 S. San Andreas :NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 13
13.82 S. San Andreas:SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 77 strike 0.2 12
slip
13.82 S. San Andreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 86 strike slip 0 14
13.82 S San Andreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V
strike
slip 0 14
13.82 S. San Andreas:SSB CA 16 90 V
strike
slip 0 13
16.74 S. San Andreas:PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V
strike
slip 0.1 13
16.74 S. San Andreas:SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 13
16.74 S. San Andreas:BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 14
16.74 S. San Andreas:NSB CA 22 90 V strike
slip 0 13
16.74 S. San Andreas:NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike
0 13 slip
16.74 S.SanAndraa~CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a strike 90 V 0 14 slip
16.74 S. San Andreas:CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14
19.47 Elsinore:W+Gl• T +J CA n/a 84 NE strike
slip 0 16
19.47 Elsinore:GI+ T +J CA n/a 86 NE strike
0 17 slip
19.47 Elsinore ;GI+ T +J+CM CA n/a 86 NE strike
slip 0 16
19.47 Elsinore;W+GI CA n/a 81 NE strike
slip 0 14
19.47 Elsinore :W+GI+ T CA n/a 84 NE strike
0 14 slip
19.47 Elsinore :GI+ T CA 5 90 V strike
slip 0 14
19.47 Elsinore:GI CA 5 90 V strike
slip 0 13
19.47 Elsinore;W+GI+ T +J+CM CA n/a 84 NE strike
slip 0 16
20.88 Elsinore:T CA 5 90 V strike
slip 0 14
20.88 Elsinore:T +J CA n/a 86 NE strike
slip 0 17
20.88 Elsmore:T +J+CM CA n/a 85 NE strike 0 16
slip
21 .34 S. San Andreas:BG CA n/a 58 strike
slip 0 13
21 .34 S. San Andreas:BG+CO CA n/a 72
strike
slip 0.3 12
23.55 Chino . alt 2 CA 65 SW strike
slip 0 14
24.25 Cucamonga CA 5 45 N thrust 0 8
24.84 Elsinore:W CA 2.5 75 NE strike
slip 0 14
24.92 Chino. alt 1 CA 50 SW strike
slip 0 9
25.54 Cleghorn CA 3 90 V strike
slip 0 16
27.62 Pinto Mtn CA 2.5 90 V
strike
slip 0 16
28.55 North Frontal (West) CA 49 s reverse 0 16
32.99 San Jose CA 0.5 74 NW strike
slip 0 15
35.01 Helendale-So Lockhart CA 0.6 90 strike V 0 13 slip
35.40 S. San Andreas:NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 14
35.40 S. San Andreas:PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 13
35.40 S. San Andreas:SM CA 29 90 V strike
0 slip 13
35.40 S San Andreas:CH+CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
0 14 slip
35.40 S San Andreas :CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 14
35.40 S. San Andreas :BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0 14
35.86 Sierra Madre Connected CA 2 51 reverse 0 14
35.86 Sierra Madre CA 2 53 N reverse 0 14
36.19 North Frontal (East) CA 0.5 41 s thrust 0 16
36.23 San Joaquin Hills CA 0.5 23 SW thrust 2 13
40.12 Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) CA 0.7 26 N thrust 2.8 15
40.39 Elsinore:J+CM CA 3 84 NE 0 17
strike
slip
40.39 Elsinore;J CA 3 84 NE strike
slip 0 19
42.72 Lenwood-Lockhart-Old Woman Springs CA 0.9 90 V strike slip 0 13
44.65 Burnt Min CA 0.6 67 w
strike
slip 0 16
44.93 Clamshell-Sawpit CA 0.5 50 NW reverse 0 14
45.58 Newport Inglewood Connected alt 1 CA 1.3 89 strike slip 0 11
45.58 Newport Inglewood Connected alt 2 CA 1.3 90 V strike slip 0 11
45.58 Newport-Inglewood (Offshore) CA 1.5 90 V strike
slip 0 10
46.40 Landers CA 0.6 90 V strike
slip 0 15
46.80 Eureka Peak CA 0.6 90 V
strike
slip 0 15
47.24 San Jacinto;CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike
slip 0.2 14
47.24 San Jacinto:CC CA 4 90 V strike
slip 0 16
47.24 San Jacinto:CC+B CA n/a 90 V
strike
slip 0.2 14
47.67 San Jac,nto;C CA 14 90 V strike
slip 0 17
48.58 Newport-Inglewood . alt 1 CA 88 strike
slip 0 15
48.77 Puente Hills (Santa Fe Springs) CA 0.7 29 N thrust 2.8 15
49.03 Johnson Valley (Nol CA 0.6 90 V strike
0 slip 16
ASCE.
AMERICAN SOCIETY Of CML ENGINEHIS
Address:
No Address at This
Location
https://asce7hazardtool.online /
ASCE 7 Hazards Report
Standard: ASCE/SEI 7-16
Risk Category: II
Soil Class: D - Stiff Soil
----· - --- -o:
-~----)::-----~---;• -·· ......... - .. • •
'·-·---•- . ..• ti
. -,,..-:--·
•
l,tll l i
'
Elevation: 1562.21 ft (NAVO 88)
Latitude: 33.9112
Longitude: -117.1703
•"oJ
., ..
L ,· .,. ,.1 ,
I - 11
Thu Jan 09 2020
!: ,..;,of ....
1-,,1 ,.,
ASCE.
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CML ENGINEERS
Seismic
Site Soil Class:
Results:
S s
s,
F.
Fv
D - Stiff Soil
1.957
0.773
1 N/A
S o, :
T L :
PGA :
PGA M:
N/A
8 0.826
0.909
S Ms 1.957 F PGA 1.1
SM1 N/A ,. :
S os 1.305 Cv : 1.491
Ground motion hazard analysis may be required. See ASCE/SEI 7-16 Section 11.4.8.
Data Accessed: Thu Jan 09 2020
Date Source: USGS Seismic Design Maps
https://asce7hazardtoo l.online/ Page 2 Thu Jan 09 2020
APPENDIX E
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
1.0 GENERAL INTENT
These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installations of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict.
Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report.
2.0 EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant (soils engineer and engineering geologist, and their representatives) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the consultant provide adequate testing and observations so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly.
It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture conditions, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the unsatisfactory conditions are rectified.
Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials, test method ASTM 01557-12.
3.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED
3.1 Clearing and Grubbing
All brush, vegetation, and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of.
3.2 Processing
The existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction.
3.3 Overexcavation
Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be overexcavated down to firm ground, approved by the consultant.
3.4 Moisture Conditioning
Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended, and/or mixed, as required to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum.
3.5 Recompaction
Overexcavation and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture-conditioned shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Appendix E-1
3.6 Benching
Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal : vertical), the ground shall be stepped or benched.
The lowest bench shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide, shall be at least 2 feet deep, shall expose firm materials, and shall be approved by the consultant. Other benches shall be excavated in firm materials for a minimum width of 4 feet. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 (horizontal : vertical) shall be benched or otherwise overexcavated when considered necessary by the consultant.
3.7 Approval
All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas and toe-of-fill benches shall be approved by the consultant prior to fill placement.
4.0 FILL MATERIAL
4.1 General
Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by the consultant.
Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated by consultant or shall be mixed with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material.
4.2 Oversize
Oversize materials defined as rock, or other irreducible material with maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the consultant. Oversize disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground construction, unless specifically approved by the consultant.
4.3 Import
If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the requirements of Section 4.1.
5.0 FILL PLACEMENT and COMPACTION
5. 1 Fill Lifts
Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer.
5.2 Fill Moisture
Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers shall be aerated by scarification or shall be blended with drier material. Moisture conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at a uniform moisture content at or near optimum.
5.3 Compaction of Fill
After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned, and mixed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Appendix E-2
5.4 Fill Slopes
Compacting of slopes shall be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent.
5.5 Compaction Testing
Field-tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's discretion. In general, the tests will be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of embankment.
6.0 SU BO RAIN INSTALLATION
Subdrain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend and upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or material. All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrain.
7.0 EXCAVATION
Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the consultant, further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas shall be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope.
8.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS
Trench excavations for utility pipes shall be backfilled under engineering supervision.
After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand backfill shall be uniformly jetted into place before the controlled backfill is placed over the sand.
The onsite materials, or other soils approved by the soil engineer, shall be watered and mixed as necessary prior to placement in lifts over the sand backfill.
The controlled backfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D1557-12 test method.
Field density tests and inspection of the backfill procedures shall be made by the soil engineer during backfilling to see that proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained. The contractor shall provide test holes and exploratory pits as required by the soil engineer to enable sampling and testing.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Appendix E-3
APPENDIX F
Cactus Ave. & Bradshaw Cir.
Moreno Valley, California
Infiltration Test (Boring Percolation Test Procedure)
Project No. 19251-01
January 21 , 2020
The tests were performed in accordance with Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice Design Handbook for Low Impact Development, dated June 2014.
Two 8-inch diameter, 6-deep test holes (1-1 and 1-2), were drilled at the suggested locations. The soil at the test locations was visually classified as silty sand. To mitigate any possible caving or sloughing of the test holes, a 6-inch diameter perforated pipe was placed in the hole. The bottom of the hole was covered with 2 inches of gravel.
The testing was conducted after presoaking. Two consecutive measurements showed that 6 inches of water seeped away in less than 25 minutes. The tests were therefore run an additional one hour with measurements taken at 10 minute intervals. Water level was adjusted to 20 inches above the bottom of the test hole after each measurement. The drop that occurred during the final reading was used for design rate purposes.
Infiltration Test/Tabulated Test Results
Test Depth of Infiltration Rate
No. Test Earth Material (in/hr) (feet)
1-1 6 Silty Sand (SM) 3.34
1-2 6 Silty Sand (SM) 3.52
1-3 6 Silty Sand (SM) 1.83
1-4 6 Silty Sand (SM) 1.99
Soil Exploration Co., Inc. Appendix F
INFILTRATION TEST DATA
(Boring Percolation Test Procedure)
Project: ', 0 l~ [ r ~ ,,,, < :3 ", Project No.: IS 2 S: ~ -CJ .:i_ Test Hole No.: r:- j Date Excavated:__,__/ _- --4t--~-__,__l ..;._r)_ Depth of Test Hole, DT: { F 1i r....,... Diameter: '' uses Soil Classification: Y'11 Diameter: P " Presoak:__,'----.---
Tested By: 11 p Date: ~
Trial No.
1 2
Trial
No.
Time
/// ~~(/<
,, , 0 ~ ..
L- " "'r ()
l ?r :- Jt'Jl -:;
) 2'. ?S 7.7
SANDY SOIL CRITERIA TEST
Time
Interval
(min)
,.. f
' ·-
. ) -::--
I
l
Initial
Water Level
(inches)
!) 2.
j).
Final
Water Level
(inches)
CI\ I y(
61 Use Normal Sandy (Circle One) Soil Criteria
Start Time Stop Time At Do Dt
Time Initial Final
Interval Depth to Depth to
(min.) Water(in.) Water(in.)
A in
Water Level
(inches)
q,,~
~
~D
Change in
Water
Level (in.)
1 /J.; ~~ '() l 2: i/ 0 /a I (;> I jJ s7-P1{_ s;J)1{
2 I 7· s 3 3~ I :a??,,._ . ' l1 <J. {n{ 5 ,6
·3 /~/1/ __ -:, S7s75
/ '
J ~ 0{/ 11 I I S-1s/)
4 I ' I I D.., ' •/ I ~ /1 . ' \) \}
, "' I I • {;:, {) -·
5 J :1i /() I. :' .-.. :> I I
\) ') ,
I
6 ) '. L) tJ () 6 I .. ,-, 1' , I
// ,, ,,
.-, ,J :Jl I
7 8
9 -10
11 12
COMMENTS :
4 j ~ v f 5 . ~I J _
~Jr~ ~J,1{ ~ ~-1/ht - ~ "-1 f 9 AJ-! r,j 0-,,, jt 17 SJ D - 3 • ~ l+ /0 Greater
Than or
Equal to 6"
(Y/N)
I
'/
Infiltration
Rate
(in./hr.)
3~ 31-/-
INFILTRATION TEST DATA
(Boring Percolation Test Procedure)
Project: t<_og,,ey lklo bJ, Project N.o.: / O,u /-oJ Date:_l-!-/---,P,..:...,/_-z;:;:;-=--- Test Hole No.: -r---;, -'?,/' I Tested By: I -tr'(_ Date: t It q re Depth of Test Holy, DT: 6 r uses Soil Classification: _ __,_:kq~--'-- Diameter: x'' Presoak: y~
Trial No.
1 2
Trial
No.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
' 11
12 SANDY SOIL GRITERlA TEST
Time Initial Final Change in
Time Interval Water Level Water Level Water Level
I j: o 1 I !2.
I &1- 37 1:2
(min)
~
,\
(inches)
2 \}
(inches) (inches)
C/, 71 ?- ✓
61-1-vf q,/7✓-{
Use Normal Sandy {Circle One) Soil Criteria
Start Time Stop Time flt Do Dt ~D
Time Initial Final Change in
Interval Depth to Depth to Water
(min.) Water(in.) Water(in.) _ Level (in.L
/J1,3T;13 fJ,lt 7, ,] /0 ~ si-1~ 6, /~,
J 2=f-/r 5'f /,'o /; sf \ I \I -5'7-W 5J7S
):uJ-z 4( r1:r1r \I \' ~oh{ 5-/417{
>JLt ·fb I~ Jy-(b \I \j ~7,h( 5,(h,{
I -'J1 ; uJ /:t -r7:;oj \/ \/ I) \)
, ~/11 ~ Ji4-9--w ,1 t l \I v1
I
I
COMMENTS:
4 Y-6 u'l 1-6~
P'~f (JlA ~t(
1 , () r 4 -fr i-v 1 r ?.O _ r: en,;))) "p- 3, r J i·ft..,, '
Greater
Than or
Equal to 6"
Y/N
y
~ l
Infiltration
Rate
(in./hr.)
3-JoZ
INFILTRATION TEST DATA
(Boring Percolation Test Procedure)
-
Project: () b _(; f ~ ·,) ~ Project No.: ) 1 l ~ j -o 1- Test Hole No.: , 3 Date Excavated:._,____..,___-_?.O=--- a.A Depth of Test Hole, DT: 0 • [ C. ~ r Diameter: " uses Soil Classification: _...._4 __ Diameter: 2~ Preso~
Tested By: fff-, Date:~
Trial No.
1 2
Trial
No.
Time
') 1: t) 3 I_,
. "' - , .,,..
.
I ,.,L • ,,, --. I.'" .• ) '-, ./ J
)2:?';, J
SANDY SOIL CRITERIA TEST
Time
Interval
(min)
2 - -
.I
/
........ ,,.
j
Initial
Water Level
(inches)
5~
l \
Final
Water Level
(inches)
51.f?{
r-1\ ;Y5
Use Normal Sandy (Circle One) Soil Criteria
Start Time Stop Time Lit Do Dt
Time Initial Final
Interval Depth to Depth to
(min.) Water(in.) Water(in.)
Li in
Water Level
(inches)
1h(
7,/-i{
LiD
Change in
Water
Level (in.)
1 I: Or1?t> l ·,I/) 7 1 '0.2
(_(, { A 3,{ )
2 - rx.ri1 ~. ,--:;;; J .• I 1 ~ ~
I• z;;.-- () \ I , ,
·3
I ..,
J: '7 L( 3) ! ·, s ~; 3
I f·
I I ,, \ I _)
4 /!3-:JLtfO I • I • • ) I •
'I \ I \ I , I· J ....) ,.. . .
5 /',';C!o.;
I ,. ,... ,::,; ,,.,
\I \/ \)
') ( j
6 J2 ()2: 11 __) ;, /2:(]
"" \) \ 1 \\ \\
7 I
8 9 .
10 11
12 COMMENTS :
t '/b OX ; /1,j - J y ~Julrdn>-)2_ rd{ -
1014-f f-1/1o)-f r 2 t)- '3,t~ f) ._/ /, 3 ,,4 A r
I
Greater
Than or
Equal to 6"
(YIN)
t
y
Infiltration
Rate
(in./hr.)
/, /J,3
~
INFILTRATION TEST DATA
(Boring Percolation Test Procedure)
Project: ~d¼.. ;Jot½ Project No.: !j~C/--1' f DDaattee:. \?l /J1 ~ Test Hole No.( I- 4 , Tested By: r 1i1'<. __ ~
Depth of Test ~le, DT: G r uses Soil Classification: __ aj....a__,,___:.. __ _ Diameter: ~ h Presoak: ts --"---f
SANDY SOIL CRITERIA TEST
Time Initial Final Change in Greater
Than or Trial No. Time Interval Water Level Water Level Water Level Equal to 6" (min) (inches) (inches) (inches) YIN 1 ,: oJ
!;J I v,1 J, ,✓ ) (JJ M
' I
7nS
- ,, s-1 ~7 2 q h rrv.! I
Use Normal Sandy (Circle One) Soil Criteria
Trial Start Time Stop Time Llt Do Dt L\D Infiltration
No. Time Initial Final Change in Rate
Interval Depth to Depth to Water (in./hr.)
(min.) Water(in .) Water(in.) Level (in.)
1 I i4J, ){ /i)/), < to !;_? t;Si R,1-{ -?.. J>,-v{'
2 1~ 1r1 s-6 /) 71:J:/J ~Ji~ - /
\/ \/ Z .\"b1-1
3 /i)/y 4 7 /:'Jt~47 IJ ,, rJ:'fsl) 5, 45},S
4 h?i1) /1 Ii 11rf \ l ,, ljy. ?15 'S- 3 75~
5 ,~
1- ~, :s j;3J: (TT) J,: oJ I c5TJ \ I
"
\) ,,,
6 l$:oP I~ l)},,Jt;--;J \I ,l ' I 3.~7J /, gq
7 I
8 9
10 11
12 -
COMMENTS :
if v. (Jot :S- s7 S
I 1 °'/"'//. ✓ ~jilf{vJ,tft' ~ T r of 4---t(in-f (?AJ-s,?.7S)fJ -z V
APPENDIX G
UNTITLED.sum
************************************************************************************ *******************
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Copyright by CivilTech Software
www.civiltechsoftware.com
************************************************************************************ *******************
Font: Courier New, Regular, Size 8 is recommended for this report.
Licensed to, 1/17/2020 4:36:40 PM
Input File Name: UNTITLED
Title: PROJECT NAME: Roger Hobbs
Subtitle: Proj No. 19251-01
Surface Elev.=Existing Ground
Hole No.=B-1
Depth of Hole= 50.00 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 60.00 ft
Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 60.00 ft
Max. Acceleration= 0.91 g
Earthquake Magnitude= 7.50
Input Data:
Surface Elev.=Existing Ground
Hole No.=B-1
Depth of Hole=50.00 ft
Water Table during Earthquake= 60.00 ft
Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 60.00 ft
Max. Acceleration=0.91 g
Earthquake Magnitude=7.50
1. SPT or BPT Calculation.
2. Settlement Analysis Method: Ishihara/ Yoshimine
3. Fines Correction for Liquefaction: Idriss/Seed
4. Fine Correction for Settlement: During Liquefaction*
5. Settlement Calculation in: All zones*
6. Hammer Energy Ratio,
7. Borehole Diameter,
8. Sampling Method,
9. User request factor of safety (apply to CSR) ,
Plot one CSR curve (fsl=l)
10. Use Curve Smoothing: Yes*
* Recommended Options
Ce= 0.89
Cb= 1
Cs= 1
User= 1
UNTITLED.sum
In-Situ Test Data:
Depth SPT gamma Fines
ft pcf %
0.00 50.00 120.00 55.00
5.00 50.00 120.00 39.00
10.00 50.00 120.00 39.00
15.00 37.00 120.00 39.00
20.00 36.00 120.00 41.00
25.00 36.00 120.00 41.00
30.00 70.00 120.00 12.00
35.00 70.00 120.00 12.00
40.00 77.00 120.00 12.00
45.00 77.00 120.00 12.00
50.00 86.00 120.00 12.00
Output Results:
Settlement of Saturated Sands=0.00 in.
Settlement of Unsaturated Sands=l.14 in.
Total Settlement of Saturated and Unsaturated Sands:::l.14 in.
Differential Settlement:::0.570 to 0.753 in.
Depth CRRm CSRfs F.S. S_sat. S_dry S_all
ft in. in. in.
0.00 2.00 0.59 5.00 0.00 1.14 1.14
5.00 2.00 0.58 5.00 0.00 1.13 1.13
10.00 2.00 0.58 5.00 0.00 1.09 1.09
15.00 2.00 0.57 5.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
20.00 2.00 0.56 5.00 0.00 0.77 0.77
25.00 2.00 0.56 5.00 0.00 0.61 0.61
30.00 1.96 0.55 5.00 0.00 0.47 0.47
35.00 1.90 0.53 5.00 0.00 0.32 0.32
40.00 1.85 0. 50 5.00 0.00 0.17 0.17
45.00 1.80 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.09 0.09
50.00 1. 75 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
* F.S.<1, Liquefaction Potential Zone
(F.S. is limited to 5, CRR is limited to 2, CSR is limited to 2) Units: Depth = ft, Stress or Pressure = atm (tsf), Unit Weight= pcf, Settlement= in.
1 atm (atmosphere)= 1 tsf (ton/ft2)
CRRm Cyclic resistance ratio from soils
CSRsf Cyclic stress ratio induced by a given earthquake (with user
request factor of
F.S.
S_sat
S_dry
S all
Noliq
UNTITLED.sum
safety)
Factor of Safety against liquefaction, F.S.=CRRm/CSRsf
Settlement from saturated sands
Settlement from Unsaturated Sands
Total Settlement from Saturated and Unsaturated Sands
No-Liquefy Soils