Agenda packet — Ontario City Council, October 17, 2023 (part 13 of 18)

3765290 3765320 3765350 3765380 3765410 3765440 3765470 3765500 3765290 3765320 3765350 3765380 3765410 3765440 3765470 3765500 439600 439630 439660 439690 439720 439750 439780 439810 439840 439870 439900 439930 439600 439630 439660 439690 439720 439750 439780 439810 439840 439870 439900 439930 34° 1' 42'' N
117° 39' 15'' W
34° 1' 42'' N
117° 39' 1'' W
34° 1' 35'' N
117° 39' 15'' W
34° 1' 35'' N N 117° 39' 1'' W
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 20 40 80 120
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,650 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
3214
APPENDIX 2

NOAA PRECIPITATION DATA
3215

!"#

$

%!"# &'
(

)*+,-./01*2345*678+ ))*+,-./01*93:3 ;<=;>&<;<==<?>&@&A&=<B=& 37CD7*E0.F/7G*37.7H*IF0JKG*37.7H*L0FMG*NFOOF7C*LFC0.G*P7K-CQ-*67FJ7.F7G*I0R,.7H*67.JFCG*37CS.7 E7TO,TF/G*5+H7CF*4,UG*V7.O*W.U87O-XG*I7O0*9C.-HG*Y0CQOFC*Z7CG*6F/H70O*Z0XJ7G*W7C*[H7,G*:0,\\.0U ],CCFCG*I7CF0O*].0^0.G*NF_VH-7C*VH0CG*WU0*E7.KUR,XG*`,HC*Z7./H,7C abccG*a7JF,C7O*d07JH0.*30.TF/0G*3FOT0.*38.FCQG*67.UO7CS EYeJ7R-O7.*f*EYeQ.78HF/7O*f*678+ege70.F7O+ ;?h ;i%h
j
jj
k
lmno p

'qnr
i

'$
'qlr " " " " "% stutvwxtuyzy{ " stuy|wxtuy}~{ oo stuyxtu|z|{
! stuyvxtu|vy{ o stu|txtu{
stu|~~xtuz|~{
! stu|wvxtuz}v{ stutyxtu~~v{
stu|wxtu{ " stuz~xtuw~y{ % ! stuyvxtu|t|{ o stuy}|xtu|~{ stu|}xtuzw{ stu|}txtuzyw{ stu|vxtu~|~{ ! stuxtutv{ " stuzttxtuwty{ "" stuzyxtu}t|{ stuzvxtuv~t{ ! stuzvzxyut}{ "% stuy}xtu|zz{ stu||txtu|t{ stu|}wxtuz|t{ stuvxtu~tz{ " stuv}xtu~{ " stuzz|xtuww{ ! stuz}xtu}zw{ ! ! stu~|yxtuvv{
stu~wxyuy~{ ! stu~v}xyut{
%
" stu|~~xtuwt{ stuzxtuz}~{ " stuz~xtu{ stu~yzxtuwz{ !" stutxtuvy{ stuwtxyuy|{ o stuw|xyu|}{ ! stuwvtxyuzw{ stu}~vxyuwz{

stuvt~xyuvw{ % " stu}yxtu~~|{ "o stuzv}xtuw|z{ ! stu~txtuv~t{ o stuwwxyuyz{
stuvttxyuzz{ syuttxyuw{ syutvxyuv|{ syuy}x|uyv{ syu|}x|ut{ o syu~x|uvz{ %n stu~wtxtu}|{ o stuwz~xyut}{ stuv~xyuzy{ ! syuyxyu}{ " syuyx|utv{ " syuzzx|uzt{ syu~x|uwz{ syuxutv{ " syuw}xuy{ ! syu}xzutz{ %n " stuwyxyutz{ stuvxyu{ " syu|yxyuww{ ! syuzyx|uyt{ " syux|ut{ syuwvx|uv}{ " syuvxu}{ ! s|ut~xu}y{
s|uyvxzuz{

s|u|wxzuvz{ %n o stuvvxyuzz{ " syutxyu}v{ syuwx|uz~{ ! syuv~x|uvt{
s|u|~xu~v{
s|uzxzuyt{
o s|u~xzuz{
s|u}yx~u|{ s|uvvxut{ "" suytxuw~{ %n "" syu|vxyu}}{ syuvx|uz~{
s|uy}xuyv{
s|u~~xuwv{
! s|uv~xzuwy{ ! su|zx~uzt{ su~txuyz{ " suwxuvz{ " suv}x}ut}{ szuyzxvut|{ %n syuwvx|u{ " s|u~xut{ ! sutxzut|{
suyxzu}|{ " szu|xut{ " szuvxuv{
s~uy|xwuv{ o s~u~txvut~{ ! s~uvxytu{ " su|xyyuv{ % l s|uyx|uw}{

s|u}~xuw{
su}txzuvv{ "o szu~zxut{ s~uz|xwuw|{ !
sut}xvut{ o suwyxytuz{ o swuyxy|ut{ s}ut~xyzu{ ! s}u~~xyu{ %
l " s|u|}x|uvw{
" suytxzutz{ !
szuywx~uz}{ "!" s~utxuwy{ ! sutx}u{ ! su}xytu|{ o swu|xyyuv{ s}u~xyuw{ svu|wxyu~{
svuv|xy}uv{ %
l !! s|uz~xu|t{
suxzu}{ " szu~~x~uv}{
s~u~yxwu~{ ! suxvuz}{ o o swu~zxyyu|{ s}uvxyuy{ ! svu|yxy~uy{ " sytu|xy}u{ " syyutx|tuv{ !%
l
s|u}~xuwy{
suvyx~uyy{
s~u|xuv}{ !
" suzx}u~}{ o! swuwxyyuy{ s}uw}xyut{ svuw~xy~u|{ sytuwxywu{ " syyu}x|yuy{ !
sy|ux|zuy{ %
l
" suyyxzut~{ " szu|}x~u~v{ s~u}xwu~{ swut~xvuzy{ s}u~yxy|uy{ svu|xyzu{ sytuwxyu{ syyuwxyvu|{ ! sy|uvx|ut{ syu}x|u{ % l suwwxzuvy{ "o s~u|~xu}{ o swu||xvuz}{ s}uwvxyyuw{ sytuwxy~u|{ sy|uyxy}ut{ ! syu~x|yut{ syzuvx|zuz{ syu~x|vuz{ sywuwxuw{ %
l " szuzx~uww{ ! suyvx}utv{ o! s}u~wxyyu|{ sytu~xyzut{ " sy|u}xy}u{ !! syzux|yuw{ syuzx|~u~{
sy}uyx|vu}{ s|tuxu|{ oo s|yuvxzyuw{ "%
l "o! s~u|vxu}v{
" swu}xvuz{ sytu|xyuz{ sy|uxyu}{
sy~u~x||uy{ " sywu}x|u~{ o s|tuyxyu{ s||uzxu}{

" s|~uzxz~u|{
! s|wu~x~|u~{ %
l o suyzx}utt{ o s}u~txyyuy{
syyu}xy~u~{ syzu~xyvu{ sy}utx|~u{ " s|tu}xtu}{ o s|uxuw{

s|uzxzu~{
oo stu|x~u}{ " sutxut{ y*E.0/F8FJ7JF,C*\.0-0C/U*sEY{*0+JFM7J0+*FC*JHF+*J7RO0*7.0*R7+0S*,C*\.0-0C/U*7C7OU+F+*,\*87.JF7O*S-.7JF,C*+0.F0+*sEI3{u a-MR0.+*FC*87.0CJH0+F+*7.0*EY*0+JFM7J0+*7J*O,^0.*7CS*-880.*R,-CS+*,\*JH0*vt*/,C\FS0C/0*FCJ0.T7Ou*WH0*8.,R7RFOFJU*JH7J*8.0/F8FJ7JF,C*\.0-0C/U*0+JFM7J0+*s\,. 7*QFT0C*S-.7JF,C*7CS*7T0.7Q0*.0/-..0C/0*FCJ0.T7O{*^FOO*R0*Q.07J0.*JH7C*JH0*-880.*R,-CS*s,.*O0++*JH7C*JH0*O,^0.*R,-CS{*F+*~u*2+JFM7J0+*7J*-880.*R,-CS+*7.0*C,J /H0/X0S*7Q7FC+J*8.,R7RO0*M7FM-M*8.0/F8FJ7JF,C*sE6E{*0+JFM7J0+*7CS*M7U*R0*HFQH0.*JH7C*/-..0CJOU*T7OFS*E6E*T7O-0+u EO07+0*.0\0.*J,*abcc*cJO7+*yz*S,/-M0CJ*\,.*M,.0*FC\,.M7JF,Cu ]7/X*J,*W,8 ;?$jn 3216

3217

3218

!"#$

"%&

'(
' )*
+,!

-)*
.-"

/
0 12234 5246
3219
APPENDIX 3
RATIONAL METHOD: PRE AND POST
DEVELOPMENT (Q100-24HR & Q10-24HR)

PARKWAY CULVERT CALCULATION
3220
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date - August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989-2005 Version 7.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 04/19/23
------------------------------------------------------------------------

RATIONAL, EUCLID AND WALNUT
100-YEAR EVENT

PRE CONSTRUCTION

FUSCOE ENGINEERING
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program License Serial Number 6049
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
Computed rainfall intensity:

Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.440 (In.)
Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.010 to Point/Station 1.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ Soil classification AP and SCS values input by user
USER INPUT of soil data for subarea
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 95.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.0700 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.007(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 898.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 824.100(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 812.000(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 12.100(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01347 s(%)= 1.35
TC = k(0.292)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 10.482 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.102(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.898 Subarea runoff = 25.062(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 6.800(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.070
Initial area Fm value = 0.007(In/Hr)
3221
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.010 to Point/Station 2.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ Soil classification AP and SCS values input by user
USER INPUT of soil data for subarea
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 95.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.0500 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.005(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 879.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 817.000(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 810.300(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 6.700(Ft.)
Slope = 0.00762 s(%)= 0.76
TC = k(0.287)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 11.450 min.

Rainfall intensity = 3.890(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.899 Subarea runoff = 9.791(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 2.800(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.050
Initial area Fm value = 0.005(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 9.60 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.064
Area averaged SCS curve number = 95.0
3222
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date - August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989-2005 Version 7.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 04/25/23
------------------------------------------------------------------------

RATIONAL, EUCLID AND WALNUT
100-YEAR EVENT

POST CONSTRUCTION

Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.440 (In.)
Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.010 to Point/Station 1.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.480
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.520
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 44.48
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.174(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 595.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 821.000(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 814.800(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 6.200(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01042 s(%)= 1.04
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 10.394 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.123(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.862 Subarea runoff = 6.290(CFS)
3223
Total initial stream area = 1.770(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.174(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.020 to Point/Station 1.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 810.700(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 810.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 63.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 6.290(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 6.290(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 11.65(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.20(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.63(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.20(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.20 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 10.60 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.030 to Point/Station 1.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 809.000(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 346.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 6.290(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 6.290(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 10.86(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.61(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.63(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.64(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 1.02 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 11.62 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.030 to Point/Station 1.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ The following data inside Main Stream is listed:

In Main Stream number: 1
Stream flow area = 1.770(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 6.290(CFS)
Time of concentration = 11.62 min.
3224
Rainfall intensity = 3.856(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1744(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.010 to Point/Station 2.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 376.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 820.100(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 815.600(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 4.500(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01197 s(%)= 1.20
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 8.414 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.680(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.872 Subarea runoff = 5.957(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.460(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.020 to Point/Station 2.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 809.600(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 809.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 77.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 5.957(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 5.957(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 12.02(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.95(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.31(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.74(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.27 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.68 min.
3225
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 807.800(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Pipe length = 262.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 5.957(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 5.957(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 12.23(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.80(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.31(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.66(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.94 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 9.62 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1
Stream flow area = 1.460(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 5.957(CFS)
Time of concentration = 9.62 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.318(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.010 to Point/Station 3.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 293.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 817.700(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 815.100(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 2.600(Ft.)
Slope = 0.00887 s(%)= 0.89
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
3226
Initial area time of concentration = 8.085 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.793(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.872 Subarea runoff = 6.273(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.500(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.020 to Point/Station 3.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 810.100(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 809.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 181.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 6.273(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 6.273(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 12.70(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.41(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.62(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.70(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.64 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.73 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 807.900(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Pipe length = 16.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 6.273(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 6.273(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.48(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.57(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.62(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 13.76(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.02 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.75 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2
3227
Stream flow area = 1.500(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 6.273(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.75 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.573(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Summary of stream data:

Stream Flow rate Area TC Fm Rainfall Intensity
No. (CFS) (Ac.) (min) (In/Hr) (In/Hr)
1 5.96 1.460 9.62 0.147 4.318
2 6.27 1.500 8.75 0.147 4.573
Qmax(1) =

1.000 * 1.000 * 5.957) +

0.942 * 1.000 * 6.273) + = 11.869
Qmax(2) =

1.061 * 0.909 * 5.957) +

1.000 * 1.000 * 6.273) + = 12.018
Total of 2 streams to confluence:

Flow rates before confluence point:

5.957 6.273
Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data:

11.869 12.018
Area of streams before confluence:

1.460 1.500
Effective area values after confluence:

2.960 2.827
Results of confluence:

Total flow rate = 12.018(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.746 min.

Effective stream area after confluence = 2.827(Ac.)
Study area average Pervious fraction(Ap) = 0.200
Study area average soil loss rate(Fm) = 0.147(In/Hr)
Study area total (this main stream) = 2.96(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.040 to Point/Station 1.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 42.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 12.018(CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 12.018(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 15.80(In.)
3228
Flow top width inside pipe = 22.77(In.)
Critical Depth = 14.94(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.48(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.13 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.87 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.040 to Point/Station 1.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ The following data inside Main Stream is listed:

In Main Stream number: 2
Stream flow area = 2.827(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 12.018(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.87 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.533(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Summary of stream data:

Stream Flow rate Area TC Fm Rainfall Intensity
No. (CFS) (Ac.) (min) (In/Hr) (In/Hr)
1 6.29 1.770 11.62 0.174 3.856
2 12.02 2.827 8.87 0.147 4.533
Qmax(1) =

1.000 * 1.000 * 6.290) +

0.846 * 1.000 * 12.018) + = 16.453
Qmax(2) =

1.184 * 0.764 * 6.290) +

1.000 * 1.000 * 12.018) + = 17.705
Total of 2 main streams to confluence:

Flow rates before confluence point:

7.290 13.018
Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data:

16.453 17.705
Area of streams before confluence:

1.770 2.827
Effective area values after confluence:

4.597 4.179
Results of confluence:

Total flow rate = 17.705(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.874 min.

Effective stream area after confluence = 4.179(Ac.)
Study area average Pervious fraction(Ap) = 0.200
3229
Study area average soil loss rate(Fm) = 0.157(In/Hr)
Study area total = 4.60(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.040 to Point/Station 1.050 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 805.800(Ft.)
Pipe length = 100.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 17.705(CFS)
Given pipe size = 30.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 17.705(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 16.92(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 29.75(In.)
Critical Depth = 17.09(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 6.20(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.27 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 9.14 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 4.010 to Point/Station 4.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 641.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 816.000(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 809.400(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 6.600(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01030 s(%)= 1.03
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 10.734 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.044(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.867 Subarea runoff = 4.630(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.320(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3230
Process from Point/Station 5.010 to Point/Station 5.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 269.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 813.700(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 809.800(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.900(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01450 s(%)= 1.45
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 7.082 min.

Rainfall intensity = 5.190(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.875 Subarea runoff = 2.451(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.540(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 6.010 to Point/Station 6.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 269.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 813.900(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 810.200(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.700(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01375 s(%)= 1.38
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 7.157 min.

Rainfall intensity = 5.157(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.874 Subarea runoff = 1.849(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.410(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
3231
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 7.010 to Point/Station 7.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 284.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 816.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 810.700(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 5.500(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01937 s(%)= 1.94
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 6.831 min.

Rainfall intensity = 5.304(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.875 Subarea runoff = 4.363(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.940(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 8.010 to Point/Station 8.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 204.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 817.400(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 814.900(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 2.500(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01225 s(%)= 1.23
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 6.557 min.

Rainfall intensity = 5.435(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm 3232
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.876 Subarea runoff = 3.284(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.690(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 8.020 to Point/Station 8.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 812.700(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 811.900(Ft.)
Pipe length = 110.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.284(CFS)
Given pipe size = 12.00(In.)
NOTE: Normal flow is pressure flow in user selected pipe size.

The approximate hydraulic grade line above the pipe invert is

0.542(Ft.) at the headworks or inlet of the pipe(s)
Pipe friction loss = 0.934(Ft.)
Minor friction loss = 0.407(Ft.) K-factor = 1.50
Pipe flow velocity = 4.18(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.44 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 7.00 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 9.010 to Point/Station 9.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.850
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.150
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 35.60
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.191(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Initial area flow distance = 340.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 824.000(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 818.400(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 5.600(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01647 s(%)= 1.65
TC = k(0.324)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 7.582 min.

Rainfall intensity = 4.982(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.866 Subarea runoff = 4.182(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.970(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
3233
Initial area Fm value = 0.191(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 9.020 to Point/Station 9.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 815.300(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 815.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 30.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 4.182(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 4.182(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 10.99(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.55(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.41(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 3.70(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.14 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 7.72 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 9.030 to Point/Station 9.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 813.800(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 813.600(Ft.)
Pipe length = 49.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 4.182(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 4.182(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 10.29(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.81(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.41(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.00(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.20 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 7.92 min.

End of computations, Total Study Area = 9.60 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.200
Area averaged SCS curve number = 51.8
3234
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date - August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989-2005 Version 7.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 04/26/23
------------------------------------------------------------------------

RATIONAL, EUCLID AND WALNUT
10-YEAR EVENT

PRE CONSTRUCTION

Storm year = 10.00 1 hour rainfall = 0.930 (In.)
Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.010 to Point/Station 1.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ Soil classification AP and SCS values input by user
USER INPUT of soil data for subarea
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 95.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.0700 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.007(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 2.649(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.898 Subarea runoff = 16.171(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 6.800(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.070
Initial area Fm value = 0.007(In/Hr)
3235
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.010 to Point/Station 2.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ Soil classification AP and SCS values input by user
USER INPUT of soil data for subarea
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 95.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.0500 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.005(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 2.512(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.898 Subarea runoff = 6.319(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 2.800(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.050
Initial area Fm value = 0.005(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 9.60 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.064
Area averaged SCS curve number = 95.0
3236
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date - August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989-2005 Version 7.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 04/26/23
------------------------------------------------------------------------

RATIONAL, EUCLID AND WALNUT
10-YEAR EVENT

POST CONSTRUCTION

Storm year = 10.00 1 hour rainfall = 0.930 (In.)
Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.010 to Point/Station 1.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.480
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.520
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 44.48
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.174(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 2.663(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.841 Subarea runoff = 3.964(CFS)
3237
Total initial stream area = 1.770(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.174(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.020 to Point/Station 1.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 810.700(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 810.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 63.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.964(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.964(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.72(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.99(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.14(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.67(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.22 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 10.62 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.030 to Point/Station 1.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 809.000(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 346.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.964(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.964(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.21(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.93(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.14(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.04(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 1.14 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 11.76 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.030 to Point/Station 1.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ The following data inside Main Stream is listed:

In Main Stream number: 1
Stream flow area = 1.770(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 3.964(CFS)
Time of concentration = 11.76 min.
3238
Rainfall intensity = 2.472(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1744(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.010 to Point/Station 2.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.022(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.856 Subarea runoff = 3.779(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.460(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.020 to Point/Station 2.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 809.600(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 809.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 77.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.779(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.779(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.99(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 18.00(In.)
Critical Depth = 8.92(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.28(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.30 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.71 min.
3239
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 807.800(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Pipe length = 262.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.779(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.779(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 9.12(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 18.00(In.)
Critical Depth = 8.92(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.21(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 1.04 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 9.75 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1
Stream flow area = 1.460(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 3.779(CFS)
Time of concentration = 9.75 min.

Rainfall intensity = 2.767(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.010 to Point/Station 3.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.096(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.857 Subarea runoff = 3.981(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.500(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.020 to Point/Station 3.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 810.100(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 809.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 181.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.981(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.981(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 9.40(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.98(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.15(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.27(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.71 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.79 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 807.900(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Pipe length = 16.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3.981(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.981(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.35(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 15.41(In.)
Critical Depth = 9.15(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 12.08(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.02 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.81 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.030 to Point/Station 2.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2
3241
Stream flow area = 1.500(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 3.981(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.81 min.

Rainfall intensity = 2.940(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Summary of stream data:

Stream Flow rate Area TC Fm Rainfall Intensity
No. (CFS) (Ac.) (min) (In/Hr) (In/Hr)
1 3.78 1.460 9.75 0.147 2.767
2 3.98 1.500 8.81 0.147 2.940
Qmax(1) =

1.000 * 1.000 * 3.779) +

0.938 * 1.000 * 3.981) + = 7.513
Qmax(2) =

1.066 * 0.904 * 3.779) +

1.000 * 1.000 * 3.981) + = 7.622
Total of 2 streams to confluence:

Flow rates before confluence point:

3.779 3.981
Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data:

7.513 7.622
Area of streams before confluence:

1.460 1.500
Effective area values after confluence:

2.960 2.820
Results of confluence:

Total flow rate = 7.622(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.814 min.

Effective stream area after confluence = 2.820(Ac.)
Study area average Pervious fraction(Ap) = 0.200
Study area average soil loss rate(Fm) = 0.147(In/Hr)
Study area total (this main stream) = 2.96(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.040 to Point/Station 1.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 806.500(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Pipe length = 42.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 7.622(CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 7.622(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 11.84(In.)
3242
Flow top width inside pipe = 24.00(In.)
Critical Depth = 11.78(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.94(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.14 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 8.96 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.040 to Point/Station 1.040 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ****
______________________________________________________________________ The following data inside Main Stream is listed:

In Main Stream number: 2
Stream flow area = 2.820(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 7.622(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.96 min.

Rainfall intensity = 2.912(In/Hr)
Area averaged loss rate (Fm) = 0.1468(In/Hr)
Area averaged Pervious ratio (Ap) = 0.2000
Summary of stream data:

Stream Flow rate Area TC Fm Rainfall Intensity
No. (CFS) (Ac.) (min) (In/Hr) (In/Hr)
1 3.96 1.770 11.76 0.174 2.472
2 7.62 2.820 8.96 0.147 2.912
Qmax(1) =

1.000 * 1.000 * 3.964) +

0.841 * 1.000 * 7.622) + = 10.375
Qmax(2) =

1.191 * 0.761 * 3.964) +

1.000 * 1.000 * 7.622) + = 11.217
Total of 2 main streams to confluence:

Flow rates before confluence point:

4.964 8.622
Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data:

10.375 11.217
Area of streams before confluence:

1.770 2.820
Effective area values after confluence:

4.590 4.167
Results of confluence:

Total flow rate = 11.217(CFS)
Time of concentration = 8.955 min.

Effective stream area after confluence = 4.167(Ac.)
Study area average Pervious fraction(Ap) = 0.200
3243
Study area average soil loss rate(Fm) = 0.157(In/Hr)
Study area total = 4.59(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.040 to Point/Station 1.050 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 806.300(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 805.800(Ft.)
Pipe length = 100.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 11.217(CFS)
Given pipe size = 30.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 11.217(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 12.95(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 29.72(In.)
Critical Depth = 13.45(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.53(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.30 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 9.26 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 4.010 to Point/Station 4.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 2.612(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.849 Subarea runoff = 2.928(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.320(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3244
Process from Point/Station 5.010 to Point/Station 5.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.352(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.861 Subarea runoff = 1.558(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.540(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 6.010 to Point/Station 6.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.331(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.860 Subarea runoff = 1.175(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.410(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
3245
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 7.010 to Point/Station 7.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.425(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.861 Subarea runoff = 2.774(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.940(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 8.010 to Point/Station 8.020 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ APARTMENT subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.2000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.147(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:

Rainfall intensity = 3.510(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm 3246
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.862 Subarea runoff = 2.089(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.690(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.147(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 8.020 to Point/Station 8.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 812.700(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 811.900(Ft.)
Pipe length = 110.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 2.089(CFS)
Given pipe size = 12.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.089(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 7.31(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 11.71(In.)
Critical Depth = 7.41(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.17(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.44 min.

Rainfall intensity = 3.217(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.847 Subarea runoff = 2.642(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.970(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.200
Initial area Fm value = 0.191(In/Hr)
3247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 9.020 to Point/Station 9.030 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 815.300(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 815.200(Ft.)
Pipe length = 30.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 2.642(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.642(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.31(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.95(In.)
Critical Depth = 7.38(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 3.31(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.15 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 7.73 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 9.030 to Point/Station 9.040 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
______________________________________________________________________ Upstream point/station elevation = 813.800(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 813.600(Ft.)
Pipe length = 49.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 2.642(CFS)
Given pipe size = 18.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.642(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 7.85(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.85(In.)
Critical Depth = 7.38(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 3.57(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.23 min.

Time of concentration (TC) = 7.96 min.

End of computations, Total Study Area = 9.60 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.200
Area averaged SCS curve number = 51.8
3248
Worksheet for PARKWAY DRAIN-1
Project Description
Manning
Formula Friction Method
Full Flow
Capacity Solve For
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient 0.015
Channel Slope 0.020 ft/ft
Normal Depth 3.0 in
Height 0.3 ft
Bottom Width 6.00 ft
Discharge 5.11 cfs
Results
Flow Area 1.5 ft²
Wetted Perimeter 12.5 ft
Hydraulic Radius 1.4 in
Top Width 6.00 ft
Critical Depth 3.0 in
Percent Full 100.0 %
Critical Slope 0.020 ft/ft
Velocity 3.41 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.18 ft
Specific Energy 0.43 ft
Froude Number 1.202
Discharge Full 5.11 cfs
Slope Full 0.020 ft/ft
Flow Type Critical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth 0.0 in
Length 0.0 ft
Number Of Steps 0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth 0.0 in
Profile Description N/A
Profile Headloss 0.00 ft
Average End Depth Over Rise 0.0 %
Normal Depth Over Rise 100.0 %
Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s
Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s
Normal Depth 3.0 in
Critical Depth 3.0 in
Channel Slope 0.020 ft/ft
Critical Slope 0.020 ft/ft
27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Page 1 of 1
Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666
4/26/2023
FlowMaster
[10.03.00.03]
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution
424-027-Hydraulics.fm8 Center
3249
APPENDIX 4
HYDROLOGY MAPS:

PRE AND POST DEVELOPMENT PLANS
3250

WALNUT STREET EUCLID AVENUE

E N G I N E E R I N G
f u l l c i r c l e t h i n k i n g
Scale:

Exhibit Date:

EUCLID AND WALNUT MIXED USE

AND WALNUT STREET

PROJECT SITE

ONTARIO, CA
1" = 40'
4-26-2023 NW CORNER OF E. EUCLID
60 PROJECT

LOCATION

PRE DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP

WALNUT & EUCLID MIXED USE

ONTARIO, CA
LEGEND
3251

WALNUT STREET EUCLID AVENUE
FRONT

TRANSFORMER
FRONT

TRANSFORMER FRONT TRANSFORMER
FRONT

TRANSFORMER EUCLID AVENUE

WALNUT STREET

E N G I N E E R I N G
f u l l c i r c l e t h i n k i n g
Scale:

Exhibit Date:

EUCLID AND WALNUT MIXED USE

AND WALNUT STREET

PROJECT SITE

ONTARIO, CA
1" = 40'
4-26-2023 NW CORNER OF E. EUCLID
60 PROJECT

LOCATION
LEGEND

POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP

WALNUT & EUCLID MIXED USE

ONTARIO, CA
3252

APPENDIX 5

UNIT HYDROGRAPH, ROUTING CALCULATION

AND TEMPORARY DETENTION SYSTEM

3253
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2004, Version 7.0 Study date 04/25/23
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ San Bernardino County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
Manual date - August 1986
Program License Serial Number 6049
--------------------------------------------------------------------- UNIT HYDROGRAPH, DRAIN-1
100-YEAR EVENT

POST CONSTRUCTION

EUCLID AND WALNUT
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Storm Event Year = 100
Antecedent Moisture Condition = 2
English (in-lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
Area averaged rainfall intensity isohyetal data:

Sub-Area Duration Isohyetal
(Ac.) (hours) (In)
Rainfall data for year 100

4.73 1 1.44
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainfall data for year 100

4.73 6 3.49
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainfall data for year 100

4.73 24 6.32
-------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3254
******** Area-averaged max loss rate, Fm ********
SCS curve SCS curve Area Area Fp(Fig C6) Ap Fm
No.(AMCII) NO.(AMC 2) (Ac.) Fraction (In/Hr) (dec.) (In/Hr)

51.8 51.8 4.73 1.000 0.788 0.200 0.158
Area-averaged adjusted loss rate Fm (In/Hr) = 0.158
********* Area-Averaged low loss rate fraction, Yb ********** Area Area SCS CN SCS CN S Pervious
(Ac.) Fract (AMC2) (AMC2) Yield Fr

0.95 0.200 51.8 51.8 9.31 0.229

3.78 0.800 98.0 98.0 0.20 0.962
Area-averaged catchment yield fraction, Y = 0.816
Area-averaged low loss fraction, Yb = 0.184
User entry of time of concentration = 0.145 (hours)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Watershed area = 4.73(Ac.)
Catchment Lag time = 0.116 hours
Unit interval = 5.000 minutes
Unit interval percentage of lag time = 71.8391
Hydrograph baseflow = 0.00(CFS)
Average maximum watershed loss rate(Fm) = 0.158(In/Hr)
Average low loss rate fraction (Yb) = 0.184 (decimal)
VALLEY DEVELOPED S-Graph Selected
Computed peak 5-minute rainfall = 0.533(In)
Computed peak 30-minute rainfall = 1.091(In)
Specified peak 1-hour rainfall = 1.440(In)
Computed peak 3-hour rainfall = 2.478(In)
Specified peak 6-hour rainfall = 3.490(In)
Specified peak 24-hour rainfall = 6.320(In)
Rainfall depth area reduction factors:

Using a total area of 4.73(Ac.) (Ref: fig. E-4)
5-minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.533(In)
30-minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.091(In)
1-hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.440(In)
3-hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 2.478(In)
6-hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 3.490(In)
24-hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 6.320(In)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3255
Interval 'S' Graph Unit Hydrograph
Number Mean values ((CFS))
--------------------------------------------------------------------- (K = 57.20 (CFS))
1 9.222 5.275
2 55.464 26.452
3 90.385 19.976
4 98.145 4.439
5 100.000 1.061
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak Unit Adjusted mass rainfall Unit rainfall
Number (In) (In)
1 0.5328 0.5328
2 0.7031 0.1702
3 0.8269 0.1238
4 0.9277 0.1008
5 1.0143 0.0866
6 1.0911 0.0767
7 1.1605 0.0694
8 1.2241 0.0637
9 1.2832 0.0591
10 1.3384 0.0552
11 1.3904 0.0520
12 1.4397 0.0492
13 1.4978 0.0581
14 1.5537 0.0559
15 1.6075 0.0539
16 1.6597 0.0521
17 1.7101 0.0505
18 1.7591 0.0490
19 1.8068 0.0476
20 1.8532 0.0464
21 1.8984 0.0452
22 1.9426 0.0442
23 1.9857 0.0432
24 2.0279 0.0422
25 2.0692 0.0413
26 2.1097 0.0405
27 2.1495 0.0397
28 2.1885 0.0390
29 2.2267 0.0383
30 2.2644 0.0376
31 2.3014 0.0370
32 2.3378 0.0364
33 2.3736 0.0358
34 2.4089 0.0353
35 2.4436 0.0348
36 2.4779 0.0343
37 2.5117 0.0338
3256
38 2.5450 0.0333
39 2.5779 0.0329
40 2.6103 0.0324
41 2.6423 0.0320
42 2.6740 0.0316
43 2.7053 0.0313
44 2.7362 0.0309
45 2.7667 0.0306
46 2.7969 0.0302
47 2.8268 0.0299
48 2.8564 0.0296
49 2.8856 0.0292
50 2.9146 0.0289
51 2.9432 0.0287
52 2.9716 0.0284
53 2.9997 0.0281
54 3.0275 0.0278
55 3.0551 0.0276
56 3.0824 0.0273
57 3.1095 0.0271
58 3.1363 0.0268
59 3.1629 0.0266
60 3.1893 0.0264
61 3.2155 0.0262
62 3.2414 0.0259
63 3.2671 0.0257
64 3.2926 0.0255
65 3.3180 0.0253
66 3.3431 0.0251
67 3.3680 0.0249
68 3.3928 0.0247
69 3.4173 0.0246
70 3.4417 0.0244
71 3.4659 0.0242
72 3.4899 0.0240
73 3.5106 0.0207
74 3.5311 0.0205
75 3.5515 0.0204
76 3.5717 0.0202
77 3.5918 0.0201
78 3.6117 0.0199
79 3.6314 0.0198
80 3.6511 0.0196
81 3.6705 0.0195
82 3.6899 0.0193
83 3.7091 0.0192
84 3.7282 0.0191
85 3.7471 0.0189
86 3.7659 0.0188
87 3.7846 0.0187
3257
88 3.8032 0.0186
89 3.8217 0.0185
90 3.8400 0.0183
91 3.8582 0.0182
92 3.8763 0.0181
93 3.8943 0.0180
94 3.9122 0.0179
95 3.9300 0.0178
96 3.9476 0.0177
97 3.9652 0.0176
98 3.9827 0.0175
99 4.0000 0.0174
100 4.0173 0.0173
101 4.0344 0.0172
102 4.0515 0.0171
103 4.0685 0.0170
104 4.0853 0.0169
105 4.1021 0.0168
106 4.1188 0.0167
107 4.1354 0.0166
108 4.1519 0.0165
109 4.1683 0.0164
110 4.1847 0.0163
111 4.2009 0.0163
112 4.2171 0.0162
113 4.2332 0.0161
114 4.2492 0.0160
115 4.2651 0.0159
116 4.2810 0.0158
117 4.2967 0.0158
118 4.3124 0.0157
119 4.3281 0.0156
120 4.3436 0.0155
121 4.3591 0.0155
122 4.3745 0.0154
123 4.3898 0.0153
124 4.4050 0.0153
125 4.4202 0.0152
126 4.4353 0.0151
127 4.4504 0.0150
128 4.4653 0.0150
129 4.4803 0.0149
130 4.4951 0.0148
131 4.5099 0.0148
132 4.5246 0.0147
133 4.5392 0.0147
134 4.5538 0.0146
135 4.5684 0.0145
136 4.5828 0.0145
137 4.5972 0.0144
3258
138 4.6116 0.0143
139 4.6259 0.0143
140 4.6401 0.0142
141 4.6543 0.0142
142 4.6684 0.0141
143 4.6824 0.0141
144 4.6964 0.0140
145 4.7104 0.0139
146 4.7242 0.0139
147 4.7381 0.0138
148 4.7519 0.0138
149 4.7656 0.0137
150 4.7793 0.0137
151 4.7929 0.0136
152 4.8065 0.0136
153 4.8200 0.0135
154 4.8334 0.0135
155 4.8469 0.0134
156 4.8602 0.0134
157 4.8736 0.0133
158 4.8868 0.0133
159 4.9001 0.0132
160 4.9132 0.0132
161 4.9264 0.0131
162 4.9394 0.0131
163 4.9525 0.0130
164 4.9655 0.0130
165 4.9784 0.0129
166 4.9913 0.0129
167 5.0042 0.0129
168 5.0170 0.0128
169 5.0298 0.0128
170 5.0425 0.0127
171 5.0552 0.0127
172 5.0678 0.0126
173 5.0804 0.0126
174 5.0930 0.0126
175 5.1055 0.0125
176 5.1180 0.0125
177 5.1304 0.0124
178 5.1428 0.0124
179 5.1552 0.0124
180 5.1675 0.0123
181 5.1798 0.0123
182 5.1920 0.0122
183 5.2042 0.0122
184 5.2164 0.0122
185 5.2285 0.0121
186 5.2406 0.0121
187 5.2526 0.0121
3259
188 5.2646 0.0120
189 5.2766 0.0120
190 5.2886 0.0119
191 5.3005 0.0119
192 5.3123 0.0119
193 5.3242 0.0118
194 5.3360 0.0118
195 5.3477 0.0118
196 5.3595 0.0117
197 5.3712 0.0117
198 5.3828 0.0117
199 5.3944 0.0116
200 5.4060 0.0116
201 5.4176 0.0116
202 5.4291 0.0115
203 5.4406 0.0115
204 5.4521 0.0115
205 5.4635 0.0114
206 5.4749 0.0114
207 5.4863 0.0114
208 5.4976 0.0113
209 5.5089 0.0113
210 5.5202 0.0113
211 5.5315 0.0112
212 5.5427 0.0112
213 5.5539 0.0112
214 5.5650 0.0112
215 5.5761 0.0111
216 5.5872 0.0111
217 5.5983 0.0111
218 5.6093 0.0110
219 5.6203 0.0110
220 5.6313 0.0110
221 5.6423 0.0110
222 5.6532 0.0109
223 5.6641 0.0109
224 5.6749 0.0109
225 5.6858 0.0108
226 5.6966 0.0108
227 5.7074 0.0108
228 5.7181 0.0108
229 5.7289 0.0107
230 5.7396 0.0107
231 5.7502 0.0107
232 5.7609 0.0106
233 5.7715 0.0106
234 5.7821 0.0106
235 5.7927 0.0106
236 5.8032 0.0105
237 5.8138 0.0105
3260
238 5.8243 0.0105
239 5.8347 0.0105
240 5.8452 0.0104
241 5.8556 0.0104
242 5.8660 0.0104
243 5.8764 0.0104
244 5.8867 0.0103
245 5.8970 0.0103
246 5.9073 0.0103
247 5.9176 0.0103
248 5.9278 0.0103
249 5.9381 0.0102
250 5.9483 0.0102
251 5.9585 0.0102
252 5.9686 0.0102
253 5.9787 0.0101
254 5.9889 0.0101
255 5.9989 0.0101
256 6.0090 0.0101
257 6.0191 0.0100
258 6.0291 0.0100
259 6.0391 0.0100
260 6.0491 0.0100
261 6.0590 0.0100
262 6.0689 0.0099
263 6.0789 0.0099
264 6.0887 0.0099
265 6.0986 0.0099
266 6.1085 0.0098
267 6.1183 0.0098
268 6.1281 0.0098
269 6.1379 0.0098
270 6.1476 0.0098
271 6.1574 0.0097
272 6.1671 0.0097
273 6.1768 0.0097
274 6.1865 0.0097
275 6.1961 0.0097
276 6.2058 0.0096
277 6.2154 0.0096
278 6.2250 0.0096
279 6.2346 0.0096
280 6.2442 0.0096
281 6.2537 0.0095
282 6.2632 0.0095
283 6.2727 0.0095
284 6.2822 0.0095
285 6.2917 0.0095
286 6.3011 0.0094
287 6.3106 0.0094
3261
288 6.3200 0.0094
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Unit Unit Effective
Period Rainfall Soil-Loss Rainfall
(number) (In) (In) (In)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.0094 0.0017 0.0077
2 0.0094 0.0017 0.0077
3 0.0095 0.0017 0.0077
4 0.0095 0.0017 0.0077
5 0.0095 0.0018 0.0078
6 0.0095 0.0018 0.0078
7 0.0096 0.0018 0.0078
8 0.0096 0.0018 0.0078
9 0.0096 0.0018 0.0079
10 0.0097 0.0018 0.0079
11 0.0097 0.0018 0.0079
12 0.0097 0.0018 0.0079
13 0.0098 0.0018 0.0080
14 0.0098 0.0018 0.0080
15 0.0098 0.0018 0.0080
16 0.0098 0.0018 0.0080
17 0.0099 0.0018 0.0081
18 0.0099 0.0018 0.0081
19 0.0100 0.0018 0.0081
20 0.0100 0.0018 0.0081
21 0.0100 0.0018 0.0082
22 0.0100 0.0019 0.0082
23 0.0101 0.0019 0.0082
24 0.0101 0.0019 0.0082
25 0.0102 0.0019 0.0083
26 0.0102 0.0019 0.0083
27 0.0102 0.0019 0.0083
28 0.0103 0.0019 0.0084
29 0.0103 0.0019 0.0084
30 0.0103 0.0019 0.0084
31 0.0104 0.0019 0.0085
32 0.0104 0.0019 0.0085
33 0.0104 0.0019 0.0085
34 0.0105 0.0019 0.0085
35 0.0105 0.0019 0.0086
36 0.0105 0.0019 0.0086
37 0.0106 0.0020 0.0086
38 0.0106 0.0020 0.0087
39 0.0107 0.0020 0.0087
40 0.0107 0.0020 0.0087
41 0.0108 0.0020 0.0088
42 0.0108 0.0020 0.0088
43 0.0108 0.0020 0.0088
44 0.0109 0.0020 0.0089
3262
45 0.0109 0.0020 0.0089
46 0.0110 0.0020 0.0089
47 0.0110 0.0020 0.0090
48 0.0110 0.0020 0.0090
49 0.0111 0.0020 0.0090
50 0.0111 0.0021 0.0091
51 0.0112 0.0021 0.0091
52 0.0112 0.0021 0.0091
53 0.0113 0.0021 0.0092
54 0.0113 0.0021 0.0092
55 0.0114 0.0021 0.0093
56 0.0114 0.0021 0.0093
57 0.0115 0.0021 0.0093
58 0.0115 0.0021 0.0094
59 0.0116 0.0021 0.0094
60 0.0116 0.0021 0.0095
61 0.0117 0.0022 0.0095
62 0.0117 0.0022 0.0095
63 0.0118 0.0022 0.0096
64 0.0118 0.0022 0.0096
65 0.0119 0.0022 0.0097
66 0.0119 0.0022 0.0097
67 0.0120 0.0022 0.0098
68 0.0120 0.0022 0.0098
69 0.0121 0.0022 0.0099
70 0.0121 0.0022 0.0099
71 0.0122 0.0023 0.0100
72 0.0122 0.0023 0.0100
73 0.0123 0.0023 0.0100
74 0.0124 0.0023 0.0101
75 0.0124 0.0023 0.0101
76 0.0125 0.0023 0.0102
77 0.0126 0.0023 0.0102
78 0.0126 0.0023 0.0103
79 0.0127 0.0023 0.0103
80 0.0127 0.0023 0.0104
81 0.0128 0.0024 0.0105
82 0.0129 0.0024 0.0105
83 0.0129 0.0024 0.0106
84 0.0130 0.0024 0.0106
85 0.0131 0.0024 0.0107
86 0.0131 0.0024 0.0107
87 0.0132 0.0024 0.0108
88 0.0133 0.0024 0.0108
89 0.0134 0.0025 0.0109
90 0.0134 0.0025 0.0109
91 0.0135 0.0025 0.0110
92 0.0136 0.0025 0.0111
93 0.0137 0.0025 0.0112
94 0.0137 0.0025 0.0112
3263
95 0.0138 0.0026 0.0113
96 0.0139 0.0026 0.0113
97 0.0140 0.0026 0.0114
98 0.0141 0.0026 0.0115
99 0.0142 0.0026 0.0116
100 0.0142 0.0026 0.0116
101 0.0143 0.0026 0.0117
102 0.0144 0.0027 0.0117
103 0.0145 0.0027 0.0118
104 0.0146 0.0027 0.0119
105 0.0147 0.0027 0.0120
106 0.0148 0.0027 0.0121
107 0.0149 0.0028 0.0122
108 0.0150 0.0028 0.0122
109 0.0151 0.0028 0.0123
110 0.0152 0.0028 0.0124
111 0.0153 0.0028 0.0125
112 0.0154 0.0028 0.0126
113 0.0155 0.0029 0.0127
114 0.0156 0.0029 0.0127
115 0.0158 0.0029 0.0129
116 0.0158 0.0029 0.0129
117 0.0160 0.0030 0.0131
118 0.0161 0.0030 0.0131
119 0.0163 0.0030 0.0133
120 0.0163 0.0030 0.0133
121 0.0165 0.0030 0.0135
122 0.0166 0.0031 0.0135
123 0.0168 0.0031 0.0137
124 0.0169 0.0031 0.0138
125 0.0171 0.0031 0.0139
126 0.0172 0.0032 0.0140
127 0.0174 0.0032 0.0142
128 0.0175 0.0032 0.0142
129 0.0177 0.0033 0.0144
130 0.0178 0.0033 0.0145
131 0.0180 0.0033 0.0147
132 0.0181 0.0033 0.0148
133 0.0183 0.0034 0.0150
134 0.0185 0.0034 0.0150
135 0.0187 0.0034 0.0152
136 0.0188 0.0035 0.0153
137 0.0191 0.0035 0.0156
138 0.0192 0.0035 0.0157
139 0.0195 0.0036 0.0159
140 0.0196 0.0036 0.0160
141 0.0199 0.0037 0.0162
142 0.0201 0.0037 0.0164
143 0.0204 0.0038 0.0166
144 0.0205 0.0038 0.0167
3264
145 0.0240 0.0044 0.0196
146 0.0242 0.0045 0.0197
147 0.0246 0.0045 0.0200
148 0.0247 0.0046 0.0202
149 0.0251 0.0046 0.0205
150 0.0253 0.0047 0.0206
151 0.0257 0.0047 0.0210
152 0.0259 0.0048 0.0212
153 0.0264 0.0049 0.0215
154 0.0266 0.0049 0.0217
155 0.0271 0.0050 0.0221
156 0.0273 0.0050 0.0223
157 0.0278 0.0051 0.0227
158 0.0281 0.0052 0.0229
159 0.0287 0.0053 0.0234
160 0.0289 0.0053 0.0236
161 0.0296 0.0055 0.0241
162 0.0299 0.0055 0.0244
163 0.0306 0.0056 0.0249
164 0.0309 0.0057 0.0252
165 0.0316 0.0058 0.0258
166 0.0320 0.0059 0.0261
167 0.0329 0.0061 0.0268
168 0.0333 0.0061 0.0272
169 0.0343 0.0063 0.0279
170 0.0348 0.0064 0.0283
171 0.0358 0.0066 0.0292
172 0.0364 0.0067 0.0297
173 0.0376 0.0069 0.0307
174 0.0383 0.0071 0.0312
175 0.0397 0.0073 0.0324
176 0.0405 0.0075 0.0330
177 0.0422 0.0078 0.0344
178 0.0432 0.0080 0.0352
179 0.0452 0.0083 0.0369
180 0.0464 0.0086 0.0378
181 0.0490 0.0090 0.0400
182 0.0505 0.0093 0.0412
183 0.0539 0.0099 0.0440
184 0.0559 0.0103 0.0456
185 0.0492 0.0091 0.0402
186 0.0520 0.0096 0.0424
187 0.0591 0.0109 0.0482
188 0.0637 0.0117 0.0519
189 0.0767 0.0131 0.0636
190 0.0866 0.0131 0.0735
191 0.1238 0.0131 0.1107
192 0.1702 0.0131 0.1571
193 0.5328 0.0131 0.5197
194 0.1008 0.0131 0.0877
3265
195 0.0694 0.0128 0.0566
196 0.0552 0.0102 0.0450
197 0.0581 0.0107 0.0474
198 0.0521 0.0096 0.0425
199 0.0476 0.0088 0.0389
200 0.0442 0.0081 0.0360
201 0.0413 0.0076 0.0337
202 0.0390 0.0072 0.0318
203 0.0370 0.0068 0.0302
204 0.0353 0.0065 0.0288
205 0.0338 0.0062 0.0275
206 0.0324 0.0060 0.0265
207 0.0313 0.0058 0.0255
208 0.0302 0.0056 0.0246
209 0.0292 0.0054 0.0239
210 0.0284 0.0052 0.0231
211 0.0276 0.0051 0.0225
212 0.0268 0.0050 0.0219
213 0.0262 0.0048 0.0213
214 0.0255 0.0047 0.0208
215 0.0249 0.0046 0.0203
216 0.0244 0.0045 0.0199
217 0.0207 0.0038 0.0169
218 0.0202 0.0037 0.0165
219 0.0198 0.0036 0.0161
220 0.0193 0.0036 0.0158
221 0.0189 0.0035 0.0155
222 0.0186 0.0034 0.0151
223 0.0182 0.0034 0.0149
224 0.0179 0.0033 0.0146
225 0.0176 0.0032 0.0143
226 0.0173 0.0032 0.0141
227 0.0170 0.0031 0.0138
228 0.0167 0.0031 0.0136
229 0.0164 0.0030 0.0134
230 0.0162 0.0030 0.0132
231 0.0159 0.0029 0.0130
232 0.0157 0.0029 0.0128
233 0.0155 0.0029 0.0126
234 0.0153 0.0028 0.0124
235 0.0150 0.0028 0.0123
236 0.0148 0.0027 0.0121
237 0.0147 0.0027 0.0119
238 0.0145 0.0027 0.0118
239 0.0143 0.0026 0.0116
240 0.0141 0.0026 0.0115
241 0.0139 0.0026 0.0114
242 0.0138 0.0025 0.0112
243 0.0136 0.0025 0.0111
244 0.0135 0.0025 0.0110
3266
245 0.0133 0.0025 0.0109
246 0.0132 0.0024 0.0107
247 0.0130 0.0024 0.0106
248 0.0129 0.0024 0.0105
249 0.0128 0.0024 0.0104
250 0.0126 0.0023 0.0103
251 0.0125 0.0023 0.0102
252 0.0124 0.0023 0.0101
253 0.0123 0.0023 0.0100
254 0.0122 0.0022 0.0099
255 0.0121 0.0022 0.0098
256 0.0119 0.0022 0.0097
257 0.0118 0.0022 0.0097
258 0.0117 0.0022 0.0096
259 0.0116 0.0021 0.0095
260 0.0115 0.0021 0.0094
261 0.0114 0.0021 0.0093
262 0.0113 0.0021 0.0092
263 0.0112 0.0021 0.0092
264 0.0112 0.0021 0.0091
265 0.0111 0.0020 0.0090
266 0.0110 0.0020 0.0090
267 0.0109 0.0020 0.0089
268 0.0108 0.0020 0.0088
269 0.0107 0.0020 0.0088
270 0.0106 0.0020 0.0087
271 0.0106 0.0020 0.0086
272 0.0105 0.0019 0.0086
273 0.0104 0.0019 0.0085
274 0.0103 0.0019 0.0084
275 0.0103 0.0019 0.0084
276 0.0102 0.0019 0.0083
277 0.0101 0.0019 0.0083
278 0.0101 0.0019 0.0082
279 0.0100 0.0018 0.0082
280 0.0099 0.0018 0.0081
281 0.0099 0.0018 0.0080
282 0.0098 0.0018 0.0080
283 0.0097 0.0018 0.0079
284 0.0097 0.0018 0.0079
285 0.0096 0.0018 0.0078
286 0.0096 0.0018 0.0078
287 0.0095 0.0018 0.0078
288 0.0094 0.0017 0.0077
-------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Total soil rain loss = 1.04(In)
Total effective rainfall = 5.28(In)
Peak flow rate in flood hydrograph = 17.92(CFS)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 3267
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T O R M
R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS))
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+ 5 0.0003 0.04 Q | | | |
0+10 0.0020 0.24 Q | | | |
0+15 0.0047 0.40 Q | | | |
0+20 0.0077 0.43 Q | | | |
0+25 0.0107 0.44 Q | | | |
0+30 0.0138 0.44 Q | | | |
0+35 0.0168 0.44 Q | | | |
0+40 0.0199 0.45 Q | | | |
0+45 0.0230 0.45 Q | | | |
0+50 0.0261 0.45 Q | | | |
0+55 0.0292 0.45 Q | | | |
1+ 0 0.0323 0.45 Q | | | |
1+ 5 0.0354 0.45 Q | | | |
1+10 0.0385 0.45 Q | | | |
1+15 0.0417 0.46 Q | | | |
1+20 0.0448 0.46 Q | | | |
1+25 0.0480 0.46 Q | | | |
1+30 0.0512 0.46 Q | | | |
1+35 0.0543 0.46 QV | | | |
1+40 0.0575 0.46 QV | | | |
1+45 0.0607 0.46 QV | | | |
1+50 0.0640 0.47 QV | | | |
1+55 0.0672 0.47 QV | | | |
2+ 0 0.0704 0.47 QV | | | |
2+ 5 0.0737 0.47 QV | | | |
2+10 0.0769 0.47 QV | | | |
2+15 0.0802 0.47 QV | | | |
2+20 0.0835 0.48 QV | | | |
2+25 0.0868 0.48 QV | | | |
2+30 0.0901 0.48 QV | | | |
2+35 0.0934 0.48 QV | | | |
2+40 0.0967 0.48 QV | | | |
2+45 0.1000 0.48 QV | | | |
2+50 0.1034 0.49 QV | | | |
2+55 0.1067 0.49 Q V | | | |
3+ 0 0.1101 0.49 Q V | | | |
3+ 5 0.1135 0.49 Q V | | | |
3+10 0.1169 0.49 Q V | | | |
3+15 0.1203 0.50 Q V | | | |
3+20 0.1237 0.50 Q V | | | |
3+25 0.1272 0.50 Q V | | | |
3268
3+30 0.1306 0.50 |QV | | | |
3+35 0.1341 0.50 |QV | | | |
3+40 0.1375 0.50 |QV | | | |
3+45 0.1410 0.51 |QV | | | |
3+50 0.1445 0.51 |QV | | | |
3+55 0.1480 0.51 |QV | | | |
4+ 0 0.1516 0.51 |QV | | | |
4+ 5 0.1551 0.51 |QV | | | |
4+10 0.1587 0.52 |Q V | | | |
4+15 0.1622 0.52 |Q V | | | |
4+20 0.1658 0.52 |Q V | | | |
4+25 0.1694 0.52 |Q V | | | |
4+30 0.1730 0.52 |Q V | | | |
4+35 0.1767 0.53 |Q V | | | |
4+40 0.1803 0.53 |Q V | | | |
4+45 0.1840 0.53 |Q V | | | |
4+50 0.1876 0.53 |Q V | | | |
4+55 0.1913 0.54 |Q V | | | |
5+ 0 0.1950 0.54 |Q V | | | |
5+ 5 0.1987 0.54 |Q V | | | |
5+10 0.2025 0.54 |Q V | | | |
5+15 0.2062 0.54 |Q V | | | |
5+20 0.2100 0.55 |Q V | | | |
5+25 0.2138 0.55 |Q V | | | |
5+30 0.2176 0.55 |Q V | | | |
5+35 0.2214 0.55 |Q V | | | |
5+40 0.2253 0.56 |Q V | | | |
5+45 0.2291 0.56 |Q V | | | |
5+50 0.2330 0.56 |Q V | | | |
5+55 0.2369 0.56 |Q V | | | |
6+ 0 0.2408 0.57 |Q V | | | |
6+ 5 0.2447 0.57 |Q V | | | |
6+10 0.2487 0.57 |Q V | | | |
6+15 0.2526 0.58 |Q V | | | |
6+20 0.2566 0.58 |Q V | | | |
6+25 0.2606 0.58 |Q V | | | |
6+30 0.2646 0.58 |Q V | | | |
6+35 0.2687 0.59 |Q V | | | |
6+40 0.2727 0.59 |Q V | | | |
6+45 0.2768 0.59 |Q V | | | |
6+50 0.2809 0.60 |Q V | | | |
6+55 0.2850 0.60 |Q V | | | |
7+ 0 0.2892 0.60 |Q V | | | |
7+ 5 0.2934 0.61 |Q V | | | |
7+10 0.2975 0.61 |Q V | | | |
7+15 0.3018 0.61 |Q V | | | |
7+20 0.3060 0.61 |Q V | | | |
7+25 0.3102 0.62 |Q V | | | |
7+30 0.3145 0.62 |Q V | | | |
7+35 0.3188 0.62 |Q V | | | |
3269
7+40 0.3232 0.63 |Q V | | | |
7+45 0.3275 0.63 |Q V | | | |
7+50 0.3319 0.64 |Q V | | | |
7+55 0.3363 0.64 |Q V | | | |
8+ 0 0.3407 0.64 |Q V | | | |
8+ 5 0.3452 0.65 |Q V | | | |
8+10 0.3497 0.65 |Q V | | | |
8+15 0.3542 0.65 |Q V | | | |
8+20 0.3587 0.66 |Q V | | | |
8+25 0.3633 0.66 |Q V | | | |
8+30 0.3679 0.67 |Q V | | | |
8+35 0.3725 0.67 |Q V | | | |
8+40 0.3771 0.68 |Q V | | | |
8+45 0.3818 0.68 |Q V | | | |
8+50 0.3865 0.68 |Q V | | | |
8+55 0.3912 0.69 |Q V | | | |
9+ 0 0.3960 0.69 |Q V | | | |
9+ 5 0.4008 0.70 |Q V | | | |
9+10 0.4057 0.70 |Q V | | | |
9+15 0.4105 0.71 |Q V | | | |
9+20 0.4154 0.71 |Q V | | | |
9+25 0.4204 0.72 |Q V | | | |
9+30 0.4253 0.72 |Q V | | | |
9+35 0.4303 0.73 |Q V | | | |
9+40 0.4354 0.73 |Q V | | | |
9+45 0.4405 0.74 |Q V | | | |
9+50 0.4456 0.74 |Q V | | | |
9+55 0.4507 0.75 |Q V | | | |
10+ 0 0.4559 0.75 |Q V | | | |
10+ 5 0.4612 0.76 |Q V | | | |
10+10 0.4665 0.77 |Q V | | | |
10+15 0.4718 0.77 |Q V| | | |
10+20 0.4771 0.78 |Q V| | | |
10+25 0.4825 0.79 |Q V| | | |
10+30 0.4880 0.79 |Q V| | | |
10+35 0.4935 0.80 |Q V| | | |
10+40 0.4990 0.81 |Q V| | | |
10+45 0.5046 0.81 |Q V| | | |
10+50 0.5103 0.82 |Q V| | | |
10+55 0.5160 0.83 |Q V| | | |
11+ 0 0.5217 0.83 |Q V | | |
11+ 5 0.5275 0.84 |Q V | | |
11+10 0.5334 0.85 |Q V | | |
11+15 0.5393 0.86 |Q V | | |
11+20 0.5453 0.87 |Q V | | |
11+25 0.5513 0.88 |Q V | | |
11+30 0.5574 0.88 |Q V | | |
11+35 0.5635 0.89 |Q V | | |
11+40 0.5698 0.90 |Q V | | |
11+45 0.5760 0.91 |Q |V | | |
3270
11+50 0.5824 0.92 |Q |V | | |
11+55 0.5888 0.93 |Q |V | | |
12+ 0 0.5953 0.94 |Q |V | | |
12+ 5 0.6020 0.97 |Q |V | | |
12+10 0.6092 1.05 | Q |V | | |
12+15 0.6168 1.11 | Q |V | | |
12+20 0.6247 1.14 | Q | V | | |
12+25 0.6326 1.15 | Q | V | | |
12+30 0.6406 1.16 | Q | V | | |
12+35 0.6487 1.18 | Q | V | | |
12+40 0.6569 1.19 | Q | V | | |
12+45 0.6652 1.21 | Q | V | | |
12+50 0.6736 1.22 | Q | V | | |
12+55 0.6821 1.24 | Q | V | | |
13+ 0 0.6908 1.25 | Q | V | | |
13+ 5 0.6995 1.27 | Q | V | | |
13+10 0.7084 1.29 | Q | V | | |
13+15 0.7174 1.31 | Q | V | | |
13+20 0.7265 1.32 | Q | V | | |
13+25 0.7357 1.34 | Q | V | | |
13+30 0.7452 1.37 | Q | V | | |
13+35 0.7547 1.39 | Q | V | | |
13+40 0.7644 1.41 | Q | V | | |
13+45 0.7743 1.43 | Q | V | | |
13+50 0.7844 1.46 | Q | V | | |
13+55 0.7946 1.49 | Q | V | | |
14+ 0 0.8050 1.52 | Q | V | | |
14+ 5 0.8157 1.54 | Q | V | | |
14+10 0.8265 1.58 | Q | V | | |
14+15 0.8376 1.61 | Q | V | | |
14+20 0.8490 1.65 | Q | V | | |
14+25 0.8606 1.69 | Q | V | | |
14+30 0.8725 1.73 | Q | V | | |
14+35 0.8847 1.77 | Q | V | | |
14+40 0.8973 1.82 | Q | V | | |
14+45 0.9102 1.87 | Q | V | | |
14+50 0.9235 1.93 | Q | V | | |
14+55 0.9372 1.99 | Q | V | | |
15+ 0 0.9515 2.07 | Q | V | | |
15+ 5 0.9662 2.14 | Q | V | | |
15+10 0.9816 2.23 | Q | V | | |
15+15 0.9976 2.33 | Q | V| | |
15+20 1.0144 2.44 | Q | V| | |
15+25 1.0318 2.52 | Q | V| | |
15+30 1.0485 2.44 | Q | V | |
15+35 1.0653 2.43 | Q | V | |
15+40 1.0833 2.62 | Q | V | |
15+45 1.1033 2.90 | Q | |V | |
15+50 1.1265 3.37 | Q | |V | |
15+55 1.1546 4.08 | Q | | V | |
3271
16+ 0 1.1929 5.56 | |Q | V | |
16+ 5 1.2583 9.50 | | Q| V | |
16+10 1.3817 17.92 | | | V | Q |
16+15 1.4769 13.82 | | | QV | |
16+20 1.5179 5.96 | |Q | V| |
16+25 1.5421 3.51 | Q | | V| |
16+30 1.5609 2.72 | Q | | V |
16+35 1.5783 2.54 | Q | | V |
16+40 1.5943 2.32 | Q | | V |
16+45 1.6091 2.15 | Q | | V |
16+50 1.6229 2.00 | Q | | |V |
16+55 1.6358 1.87 | Q | | |V |
17+ 0 1.6480 1.77 | Q | | |V |
17+ 5 1.6596 1.69 | Q | | |V |
17+10 1.6707 1.61 | Q | | | V |
17+15 1.6813 1.54 | Q | | | V |
17+20 1.6916 1.49 | Q | | | V |
17+25 1.7014 1.43 | Q | | | V |
17+30 1.7110 1.39 | Q | | | V |
17+35 1.7202 1.34 | Q | | | V |
17+40 1.7292 1.30 | Q | | | V |
17+45 1.7380 1.27 | Q | | | V |
17+50 1.7465 1.24 | Q | | | V |
17+55 1.7548 1.20 | Q | | | V |
18+ 0 1.7629 1.18 | Q | | | V |
18+ 5 1.7707 1.14 | Q | | | V |
18+10 1.7779 1.04 | Q | | | V |
18+15 1.7845 0.97 |Q | | | V |
18+20 1.7910 0.93 |Q | | | V |
18+25 1.7973 0.91 |Q | | | V |
18+30 1.8034 0.89 |Q | | | V |
18+35 1.8094 0.87 |Q | | | V |
18+40 1.8153 0.86 |Q | | | V |
18+45 1.8211 0.84 |Q | | | V |
18+50 1.8268 0.83 |Q | | | V |
18+55 1.8324 0.81 |Q | | | V |
19+ 0 1.8379 0.80 |Q | | | V |
19+ 5 1.8433 0.78 |Q | | | V |
19+10 1.8486 0.77 |Q | | | V |
19+15 1.8539 0.76 |Q | | | V |
19+20 1.8590 0.75 |Q | | | V |
19+25 1.8641 0.74 |Q | | | V |
19+30 1.8691 0.73 |Q | | | V |
19+35 1.8740 0.72 |Q | | | V |
19+40 1.8789 0.71 |Q | | | V |
19+45 1.8837 0.70 |Q | | | V |
19+50 1.8884 0.69 |Q | | | V |
19+55 1.8931 0.68 |Q | | | V |
20+ 0 1.8977 0.67 |Q | | | V |
20+ 5 1.9023 0.66 |Q | | | V |
3272
20+10 1.9068 0.65 |Q | | | V |
20+15 1.9112 0.65 |Q | | | V |
20+20 1.9156 0.64 |Q | | | V |
20+25 1.9200 0.63 |Q | | | V |
20+30 1.9243 0.62 |Q | | | V |
20+35 1.9286 0.62 |Q | | | V |
20+40 1.9328 0.61 |Q | | | V |
20+45 1.9369 0.60 |Q | | | V |
20+50 1.9411 0.60 |Q | | | V |
20+55 1.9451 0.59 |Q | | | V |
21+ 0 1.9492 0.59 |Q | | | V |
21+ 5 1.9532 0.58 |Q | | | V |
21+10 1.9571 0.58 |Q | | | V |
21+15 1.9611 0.57 |Q | | | V |
21+20 1.9650 0.56 |Q | | | V |
21+25 1.9688 0.56 |Q | | | V |
21+30 1.9726 0.55 |Q | | | V |
21+35 1.9764 0.55 |Q | | | V |
21+40 1.9802 0.54 |Q | | | V |
21+45 1.9839 0.54 |Q | | | V |
21+50 1.9876 0.54 |Q | | | V |
21+55 1.9912 0.53 |Q | | | V |
22+ 0 1.9949 0.53 |Q | | | V |
22+ 5 1.9985 0.52 |Q | | | V |
22+10 2.0020 0.52 |Q | | | V |
22+15 2.0056 0.51 |Q | | | V |
22+20 2.0091 0.51 |Q | | | V |
22+25 2.0126 0.51 |Q | | | V |
22+30 2.0160 0.50 |Q | | | V |
22+35 2.0195 0.50 Q | | | V |
22+40 2.0229 0.49 Q | | | V |
22+45 2.0262 0.49 Q | | | V |
22+50 2.0296 0.49 Q | | | V|
22+55 2.0329 0.48 Q | | | V|
23+ 0 2.0363 0.48 Q | | | V|
23+ 5 2.0395 0.48 Q | | | V|
23+10 2.0428 0.47 Q | | | V|
23+15 2.0461 0.47 Q | | | V|
23+20 2.0493 0.47 Q | | | V|
23+25 2.0525 0.46 Q | | | V|
23+30 2.0557 0.46 Q | | | V|
23+35 2.0588 0.46 Q | | | V|
23+40 2.0620 0.46 Q | | | V|
23+45 2.0651 0.45 Q | | | V|
23+50 2.0682 0.45 Q | | | V|
23+55 2.0713 0.45 Q | | | V|
24+ 0 2.0743 0.44 Q | | | V|
24+ 5 2.0771 0.40 Q | | | V|
24+10 2.0784 0.20 Q | | | V|
24+15 2.0787 0.04 Q | | | V|
3273
24+20 2.0788 0.01 Q | | | V|
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3274

FLOOD HYDROGRAPH ROUTING PROGRAM
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2005
Study date: 04/25/23
---------------------------------------------------------------------

ROUTING CALCULATION
DA-1 TO DA-3
PUMP CAPACITY 0.51 CFS

EUCLID AND WALNUT
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Program License Serial Number 6049
-------------------------------------------------------------------- ********************* HYDROGRAPH INFORMATION ********************** From study/file name: 424027UHPOST1.rte
****************************HYDROGRAPH DATA**************************** Number of intervals = 292
Time interval = 5.0 (Min.)
Maximum/Peak flow rate = 17.918 (CFS)
Total volume = 2.079 (Ac.Ft)
Status of hydrographs being held in storage
Stream 1 Stream 2 Stream 3 Stream 4 Stream 5
Peak (CFS) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Vol (Ac.Ft) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
*********************************************************************** ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.050 to Point/Station 1.060 **** FLOWBY BASIN ROUTING OR SPLIT FLOW ****
______________________________________________________________________ All flow in excess of 0.51(CFS) is diverted
into stream number 1
Total volume of excess flow diverted into flowby
basin (stream number 1 ) is 1.08(Ac.Ft)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

P R I N T O F S T O R M
R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals (CFS)
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 3275
Time(h+m) Volume(Ac.Ft) Q(CFS) 0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+ 5 0.0003 0.04 V Q | | | |
0+10 0.0020 0.24 V | Q| | |
0+15 0.0047 0.40 V | | |Q |
0+20 0.0077 0.43 V | | | Q |
0+25 0.0107 0.44 V | | | Q |
0+30 0.0138 0.44 V | | | Q |
0+35 0.0168 0.44 V | | | Q |
0+40 0.0199 0.45 V | | | Q |
0+45 0.0230 0.45 V | | | Q |
0+50 0.0261 0.45 V | | | Q |
0+55 0.0292 0.45 |V | | | Q |
1+ 0 0.0323 0.45 |V | | | Q |
1+ 5 0.0354 0.45 |V | | | Q |
1+10 0.0385 0.45 |V | | | Q |
1+15 0.0417 0.46 |V | | | Q |
1+20 0.0448 0.46 |V | | | Q |
1+25 0.0480 0.46 |V | | | Q |
1+30 0.0512 0.46 | V | | | Q |
1+35 0.0543 0.46 | V | | | Q |
1+40 0.0575 0.46 | V | | | Q |
1+45 0.0607 0.46 | V | | | Q |
1+50 0.0640 0.47 | V | | | Q |
1+55 0.0672 0.47 | V | | | Q |
2+ 0 0.0704 0.47 | V | | | Q |
2+ 5 0.0737 0.47 | V | | | Q |
2+10 0.0769 0.47 | V | | | Q |
2+15 0.0802 0.47 | V | | | Q |
2+20 0.0835 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+25 0.0868 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+30 0.0901 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+35 0.0934 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+40 0.0967 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+45 0.1000 0.48 | V | | | Q |
2+50 0.1034 0.49 | V | | | Q |
2+55 0.1067 0.49 | V | | | Q |
3+ 0 0.1101 0.49 | V | | | Q |
3+ 5 0.1135 0.49 | V | | | Q |
3+10 0.1169 0.49 | V | | | Q |
3+15 0.1203 0.50 | V | | | Q |
3+20 0.1237 0.50 | V | | | Q |
3+25 0.1272 0.50 | V | | | Q|
3+30 0.1306 0.50 | V | | | Q|
3+35 0.1341 0.50 | V | | | Q|
3+40 0.1375 0.50 | V | | | Q|
3+45 0.1410 0.51 | V | | | Q|
3+50 0.1445 0.51 | V | | | Q|
3+55 0.1480 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+ 0 0.1516 0.51 | V | | | Q
3276
4+ 5 0.1551 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+10 0.1586 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+15 0.1621 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+20 0.1656 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+25 0.1691 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+30 0.1726 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+35 0.1761 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+40 0.1797 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+45 0.1832 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+50 0.1867 0.51 | V | | | Q
4+55 0.1902 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+ 0 0.1937 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+ 5 0.1972 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+10 0.2007 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+15 0.2042 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+20 0.2077 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+25 0.2113 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+30 0.2148 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+35 0.2183 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+40 0.2218 0.51 | V | | | Q
5+45 0.2253 0.51 | V| | | Q
5+50 0.2288 0.51 | V| | | Q
5+55 0.2323 0.51 | V| | | Q
6+ 0 0.2358 0.51 | V| | | Q
6+ 5 0.2394 0.51 | V| | | Q
6+10 0.2429 0.51 | V| | | Q
6+15 0.2464 0.51 | V| | | Q
6+20 0.2499 0.51 | V | | Q
6+25 0.2534 0.51 | V | | Q
6+30 0.2569 0.51 | V | | Q
6+35 0.2604 0.51 | V | | Q
6+40 0.2639 0.51 | V | | Q
6+45 0.2675 0.51 | V | | Q
6+50 0.2710 0.51 | V | | Q
6+55 0.2745 0.51 | V | | Q
7+ 0 0.2780 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+ 5 0.2815 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+10 0.2850 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+15 0.2885 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+20 0.2920 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+25 0.2956 0.51 | |V | | Q
7+30 0.2991 0.51 | | V | | Q
7+35 0.3026 0.51 | | V | | Q
7+40 0.3061 0.51 | | V | | Q
7+45 0.3096 0.51 | | V | | Q
7+50 0.3131 0.51 | | V | | Q
7+55 0.3166 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+ 0 0.3201 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+ 5 0.3237 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+10 0.3272 0.51 | | V | | Q
3277
8+15 0.3307 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+20 0.3342 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+25 0.3377 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+30 0.3412 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+35 0.3447 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+40 0.3482 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+45 0.3518 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+50 0.3553 0.51 | | V | | Q
8+55 0.3588 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+ 0 0.3623 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+ 5 0.3658 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+10 0.3693 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+15 0.3728 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+20 0.3763 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+25 0.3799 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+30 0.3834 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+35 0.3869 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+40 0.3904 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+45 0.3939 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+50 0.3974 0.51 | | V | | Q
9+55 0.4009 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+ 0 0.4044 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+ 5 0.4080 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+10 0.4115 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+15 0.4150 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+20 0.4185 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+25 0.4220 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+30 0.4255 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+35 0.4290 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+40 0.4325 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+45 0.4361 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+50 0.4396 0.51 | | V | | Q
10+55 0.4431 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+ 0 0.4466 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+ 5 0.4501 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+10 0.4536 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+15 0.4571 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+20 0.4606 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+25 0.4642 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+30 0.4677 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+35 0.4712 0.51 | | V | | Q
11+40 0.4747 0.51 | | V| | Q
11+45 0.4782 0.51 | | V| | Q
11+50 0.4817 0.51 | | V| | Q
11+55 0.4852 0.51 | | V| | Q
12+ 0 0.4887 0.51 | | V| | Q
12+ 5 0.4923 0.51 | | V| | Q
12+10 0.4958 0.51 | | V| | Q
12+15 0.4993 0.51 | | V | Q
12+20 0.5028 0.51 | | V | Q
3278
12+25 0.5063 0.51 | | V | Q
12+30 0.5098 0.51 | | V | Q
12+35 0.5133 0.51 | | V | Q
12+40 0.5168 0.51 | | V | Q
12+45 0.5204 0.51 | | V | Q
12+50 0.5239 0.51 | | V | Q
12+55 0.5274 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+ 0 0.5309 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+ 5 0.5344 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+10 0.5379 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+15 0.5414 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+20 0.5449 0.51 | | |V | Q
13+25 0.5485 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+30 0.5520 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+35 0.5555 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+40 0.5590 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+45 0.5625 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+50 0.5660 0.51 | | | V | Q
13+55 0.5695 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+ 0 0.5730 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+ 5 0.5766 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+10 0.5801 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+15 0.5836 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+20 0.5871 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+25 0.5906 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+30 0.5941 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+35 0.5976 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+40 0.6011 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+45 0.6047 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+50 0.6082 0.51 | | | V | Q
14+55 0.6117 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+ 0 0.6152 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+ 5 0.6187 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+10 0.6222 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+15 0.6257 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+20 0.6292 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+25 0.6327 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+30 0.6363 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+35 0.6398 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+40 0.6433 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+45 0.6468 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+50 0.6503 0.51 | | | V | Q
15+55 0.6538 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+ 0 0.6573 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+ 5 0.6608 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+10 0.6644 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+15 0.6679 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+20 0.6714 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+25 0.6749 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+30 0.6784 0.51 | | | V | Q
3279
16+35 0.6819 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+40 0.6854 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+45 0.6889 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+50 0.6925 0.51 | | | V | Q
16+55 0.6960 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+ 0 0.6995 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+ 5 0.7030 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+10 0.7065 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+15 0.7100 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+20 0.7135 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+25 0.7170 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+30 0.7206 0.51 | | | V | Q
17+35 0.7241 0.51 | | | V| Q
17+40 0.7276 0.51 | | | V| Q
17+45 0.7311 0.51 | | | V| Q
17+50 0.7346 0.51 | | | V| Q
17+55 0.7381 0.51 | | | V| Q
18+ 0 0.7416 0.51 | | | V| Q
18+ 5 0.7451 0.51 | | | V| Q
18+10 0.7487 0.51 | | | V Q
18+15 0.7522 0.51 | | | V Q
18+20 0.7557 0.51 | | | V Q
18+25 0.7592 0.51 | | | V Q
18+30 0.7627 0.51 | | | V Q
18+35 0.7662 0.51 | | | V Q
18+40 0.7697 0.51 | | | V Q
18+45 0.7732 0.51 | | | |V Q
18+50 0.7768 0.51 | | | |V Q
18+55 0.7803 0.51 | | | |V Q
19+ 0 0.7838 0.51 | | | |V Q
19+ 5 0.7873 0.51 | | | |V Q
19+10 0.7908 0.51 | | | |V Q
19+15 0.7943 0.51 | | | |V Q
19+20 0.7978 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+25 0.8013 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+30 0.8049 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+35 0.8084 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+40 0.8119 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+45 0.8154 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+50 0.8189 0.51 | | | | V Q
19+55 0.8224 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+ 0 0.8259 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+ 5 0.8294 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+10 0.8330 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+15 0.8365 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+20 0.8400 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+25 0.8435 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+30 0.8470 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+35 0.8505 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+40 0.8540 0.51 | | | | V Q
3280
20+45 0.8575 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+50 0.8611 0.51 | | | | V Q
20+55 0.8646 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+ 0 0.8681 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+ 5 0.8716 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+10 0.8751 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+15 0.8786 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+20 0.8821 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+25 0.8856 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+30 0.8892 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+35 0.8927 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+40 0.8962 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+45 0.8997 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+50 0.9032 0.51 | | | | V Q
21+55 0.9067 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+ 0 0.9102 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+ 5 0.9137 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+10 0.9173 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+15 0.9208 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+20 0.9243 0.51 | | | | V Q
22+25 0.9278 0.51 | | | | V Q|
22+30 0.9312 0.50 | | | | V Q|
22+35 0.9347 0.50 | | | | V Q|
22+40 0.9381 0.49 | | | | VQ |
22+45 0.9414 0.49 | | | | VQ |
22+50 0.9448 0.49 | | | | Q |
22+55 0.9481 0.48 | | | | QV |
23+ 0 0.9515 0.48 | | | | QV |
23+ 5 0.9547 0.48 | | | | QV |
23+10 0.9580 0.47 | | | | QV |
23+15 0.9613 0.47 | | | | Q V |
23+20 0.9645 0.47 | | | | Q V |
23+25 0.9677 0.46 | | | | Q V |
23+30 0.9709 0.46 | | | | Q V|
23+35 0.9740 0.46 | | | | Q V|
23+40 0.9772 0.46 | | | | Q V|
23+45 0.9803 0.45 | | | | Q V|
23+50 0.9834 0.45 | | | | Q V|
23+55 0.9865 0.45 | | | | Q V|
24+ 0 0.9895 0.44 | | | | Q V|
24+ 5 0.9923 0.40 | | | |Q V|
24+10 0.9936 0.20 | | Q | | V|
24+15 0.9939 0.04 | Q | | | V|
24+20 0.9940 0.01 Q | | | V|
----------------------------------------------------------------------- ****************************HYDROGRAPH DATA**************************** Number of intervals = 292
Time interval = 5.0 (Min.)
Maximum/Peak flow rate = 0.510 (CFS)
Total volume = 0.994 (Ac.Ft)
3281
Status of hydrographs being held in storage
Stream 1 Stream 2 Stream 3 Stream 4 Stream 5
Peak (CFS) 17.408 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Vol (Ac.Ft) 1.085 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
*********************************************************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
APPENDIX 6

SUPPORTING DOCUMENT (MPD MAP)
3287
IV
V
VI
VII
IX
XIV
VIII
30"
42" 36"
36"
42"
42"
36"
48" 66"
36"
30"
30"
42"
84" 96" 2-6x6 36"
72"
72"
84" 90"
30"
90"
42"
36"
48" 108" 108" 30"
30"
108"
13x9
2-9x7
24"
10X9
108"
42"
24" 36" 42"
66" 84" 84"
24"
84"
24"
54"
60" 66"
24"
24"
78"
36"
24"
24"
24"
66"
66"
36"
42"
60"
24"
66"
24"
54"
84" 84"
42"
36"
54"
60"
42"
84" 96" 102"
42"
72"
96"
36"
30"
72" 78"
30"
60"
36"
54"
36"
48"
42"
66"
30" 54" 72" 30"48"
120"
78"
54"
30"
36"
36"
42"
42"
90"
60"
60"
96" 102"
9x7.5
48"
36"
60" 66"
24"
42"
36" 66" 42" 54"
30"
48"
30"
42"
30"
60"
72" 78" 84"
60"
36"
48"
48"
42"
36" 60"
72"
60"
78"
72" 78"
42"
54"
42" 48" 60"
48"
66"
72"
60"
66"
66"
42"
36" 30"
48"
60"
66"
120" 132" (P) 108"
60"
30" 42"
30"
30"
48"
60"
36"
48" 66"
42" 48" 54"
72"
48"
48" 54"
72"
54"
48"
66"
48"
72"
60"
36"
96"
96"
60"
36"
36"
36"
78" 96" 102"
54"
66"
96"
48"
132"
84"
54" 48"
54"
90"
36"
24"
48"
90" 108"
60"
78"
24"
54"
36"
30"
24" 24" 24" 24" 24"
54" 54" 30"
72"
84"
48" 42"
30"
9x7.5
9x7.5
30"
36"
36"
42"
36"
84"
30" 48"
36"
120"
120"
24"
87"
54"
24"
48" 66" 66"
42"
78"
48"
54" 48"
42"
66"
8th ST
BASINS

GROVE AVE
BASIN

ELY BASINS

RIVERSIDE DR
STORM DRAIN 2

ELY BASINS

EAST STATE ST

STORM DRAIN

EAST STATE ST

STORM DRAIN

FRANCIS ST

STORM DRAIN

WEST STATE STREET

STORM DRAIN

CHINO STORM DRAIN

MAGNOLIA

STORM DRAIN

CYPRESS

CHANNEL

SULTANA

CYPRESS

STORM DRAIN

EAST STATE STREET

STORM DRAIN

RIVERSIDE DR
STORM DRAIN 1

RIVERSIDE DR
STORM DRAIN 1
LOWER

CUCAMONGA

SPREADING

GROUNDS
X"
X
project site
3288
APPENDIX 7

SOILS REPORT
3289

GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT

PROPOSED EUCLID AND WALNUT

MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
112 WALNUT STREET, 2502 AND 2530 EUCLID AVENUE

ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA
Prepared For LEGACY/COLLIER RESIDENTIAL, LLC
5154 CALIFORNIA AVENUE
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92617
Prepared By LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
17781 COWAN
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614
Project No. 13493.001
May 13, 2022
3290
May 13, 2022
Project No. 13493.001
Legacy/Collier Residential, LLC
5154 California Avenue
Irvine, California 92617
Attention: Mr. David Pinto
Subject: Geotechnical Exploration Report
Proposed “Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use” Development
112 Walnut Street, 2502 and 2530 Euclid Avenue
Ontario, San Bernardino County, California
In accordance with our March 30, 2022 proposal, Leighton and Associates, Inc. submits this geotechnical engineering report for the proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Development located at 112 Walnut Street, 2502 and 2530 Euclid Avenue in the City of Ontario, California. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site to provide geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed concept as currently planned. The results of our exploration, findings, conclusions and recommendations are presented in this report.

The recommendations presented in this report are considered to be preliminary and subject to revision based upon the limited information regarding the proposed development. Upon review of project design concept plans, revision to the recommendations may be considered necessary. In addition, revision to design recommendations may be necessary upon review by the local building official or their designated, third party technical reviewer.

We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please contact us at (866) LEIGHTON; directly at the phone extensions or e-mail as listed below.

Respectfully submitted,
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

Eric M. Holliday, PG, 9219 John E. Haertle, PE, GE 2352 Senior Project Geologist Principal Engineer
Ext 4252, [email protected] Ext: 4268, [email protected] EMH/JEH/ lr
3291
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001 TOC Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Site Description.......................................................................................... 1

1.2 Proposed Development ............................................................................. 1

1.2.1 Structural Loads.............................................................................. 2

1.2.2 Finish Floor Elevations.................................................................... 2

1.2.3 Pavement........................................................................................ 2

1.2.4 Ancillary Improvements................................................................... 3

1.3 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................... 3

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ............................................................................... 6

2.1 Regional Geologic Setting ......................................................................... 6

2.2 Surficial Geology........................................................................................ 6

2.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions........................................................................ 6

2.3.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill (Afu).................................................... 7

2.3.2 Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf)...................... 7

2.4 Engineering Properties .............................................................................. 7

2.4.1 Expansive Soil Characteristics........................................................ 7

2.4.2 Soil Corrosivity ................................................................................ 8

2.4.3 Soil Compressibility......................................................................... 8

2.4.4 Shear Strength................................................................................ 9

2.4.5 Excavation Characteristics.............................................................. 9

2.5 Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................ 9

2.6 Infiltration ................................................................................................. 10

3.0 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ............................................................ 12

3.1 Surface Fault Rupture.............................................................................. 12

3.2 Regional Faulting..................................................................................... 12

3.3 Strong Ground Shaking ........................................................................... 12

3.4 Liquefaction Potential............................................................................... 14

3.5 Seismically-Induced Settlement............................................................... 14

3.6 Lateral Spreading .................................................................................... 15

3.7 Earthquake-Induced Landsliding ............................................................. 16

3.8 Flooding................................................................................................... 16

3.9 Seiches and Tsunamis............................................................................. 16

3.10 Methane................................................................................................... 17

4.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................... 18

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................... 19 3292
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001 TOC Page ii

5.1 Earthwork................................................................................................. 19

5.1.1 Site Preparation ............................................................................ 20

5.1.2 Removals and Overexcavations.................................................... 20

5.1.3 Subgrade Preparation................................................................... 21

5.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction..................................................... 22

5.1.5 Shrinkage and Bulking .................................................................. 22

5.1.6 Reuse of Concrete and Asphalt Rubble........................................ 23

5.2 Foundation Design................................................................................... 24

5.2.1 Vertical Load Bearing Capacity..................................................... 24

5.2.2 Lateral Load Resistance ............................................................... 25

5.2.3 Settlement Estimate...................................................................... 26

5.3 Slab-on-Grade Floors .............................................................................. 26

5.4 Temporary Excavations ........................................................................... 27

5.5 Trench Backfill ......................................................................................... 28

5.6 Soil Corrosivity......................................................................................... 29

5.7 Cement Type ........................................................................................... 30

5.8 Elevator Pit Wall Design .......................................................................... 31

5.9 Pavements............................................................................................... 31

5.9.1 Pavement Subgrades.................................................................... 31

5.9.2 Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavement Sections.................................. 31

5.9.3 Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavements.............................. 33

5.10 Concrete Flatwork and Exterior Slabs...................................................... 33 Surface .................................................................................................... 34

5.11 Drainage .................................................................................................. 34

5.12 Additional Geotechnical Services ............................................................ 35

6.0 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................... 36

7.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................... 38 Tables
Table 1 – Measured (Unfactored) Infiltration Rate ........................................................ 10 Table 2 – 2019 CBC Based Ground Motion Parameters (Mapped Values) .................. 13 Table 3 – Seismically-Induced Settlement - MCEG Seismic Event................................ 15 Table 4 – Soil Corrosivity as a Function of Resistivity................................................... 29 Table 5 – Summary of Corrosivity Testing .................................................................... 30 Table 6 – Asphalt Pavement Sections........................................................................... 32 3293
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001 TOC Page iii
Attachments
Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Rear of Text Figure 1 – Site Location Map Rear of Text
Figure 2 – Geotechnical Map Rear of Text
Figure 3 – Regional Geology Map Rear of Text
Figure 4 – Regional Fault Map and Historical Seismicity Map Rear of Text Figure 5 – Flood Hazard Zone Map Rear of Text
Figure 6 – Dam Inundation Map Rear of Text
Figure 7 – Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail (EI≤50) Rear of Text Appendix A – Exploration Logs
Appendix B – Percolation Test Data
Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results
Appendix D – General Earthworks and Grading Recommendations 3294
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 1 ends

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Site Description
The project site is a rectangular parcel of land, approximately 10.6-acres in size, located at the northwest corner of Walnut Street and Euclid Avenue in the city of Ontario, California. The site consists of the properties located at the street addresses of 112 W. Walnut Street, and 2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue. The site is bordered by Euclid Avenue on the east, Walnut Street to the south, and residential development on the west and north. The southeastern region of the property is occupied by an existing Carl’s Jr. restaurant. The site location (latitude

34.0275°, longitude -117.6524°) and immediate vicinity are shown on Figure 1, Site Location Map.

Based on visual site reconnaissance and review of the Alta/NSPS Land Title Survey prepared by Hillwig-Goodrow Inc., the site is currently occupied by a large rectangular-shaped structure formerly used as a K-Mart store located in the western portion of the site, and a strip mall retail development in the northeast region. The remainder of the site was generally paved with asphalt concrete and served as the parking lot for the development. The property is relatively flat, generally level with the adjacent roadways with site elevations (EL.) ranging from approximately EL. +823 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the northeastern region to approximately EL. +812 feet msl in the southwest region.

Based on review of historic aerial photographs (NETR, 2021), the project site appears to have a similar configuration dating back to at least 1985. The strip mall located in the northeast corner of the site was constructed between 1980 and 1985 and the K-Mart and Carl’s Jr. structures were constructed at some point between 1966 and 1980. Prior to at least 1966, the site seems to have been used for agricultural purposes.

1.2 Proposed Development
Our understanding of the proposed development is based on review of the Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use Site Plan Options A and B, Scale 1” = 100’, dated March 10, 2022, prepared by AO Architects (AOA, 2022). The development conceptually consists of two options for a proposed mixed-use development with 3- to 4-story residential and commercial structures:
3295
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 2 ends

• Option A includes a total of 346 residential units in 8 structures with 5,000 square feet of commercial development. In the Option A development scheme it appears the existing Carl’s Jr. restaurant in the southeast corner of the site will remain.
• Option B consists of full-site development with 376 residential units in 10 structures with 11,400 square feet of commercial development.

We understand the current preferred option for development is Option A and, therefore, is the development scheme that serves as the basis for the geotechnical recommendations presented in this report. Ancillary improvements will include pavement for vehicle access and parking, landscaping, utility infrastructure, and flatwork.

1.2.1 Structural Loads
Information regarding total building height, finish floor elevations, and proposed loading conditions were not readily available at the time of this report. However, we understand that subterranean levels are not currently planned. Based upon the type of development planned for project site and our experience with similar developments, the buildings have been assumed to consist of wood frame structures supported by load bearing wall and isolated columns. Structural loads have been assumed to be a maximum of 3 kips per lineal foot for bearing walls and 40 kips for columns, Should additional design information become available, it should be provided to Leighton for review.

1.2.2 Finish Floor Elevations
The finish first floor elevations of the proposed structures have been assumed to be within 1 to 2 feet of existing grade with floor elevations established or minimize cut and fill required on site. The actual quantity of cut and fill will be dependent upon the actual floor elevations determined by the project civil engineer and the quantity of overexcavation required to prepare building pad areas.

1.2.3 Pavement
Pavements proposed for the development are expected to be primarily subjected to automobiles and occasional heavy truck traffic. Pavement 3296
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 3 ends

recommendations have been based upon a Traffic Index of 4.0 for automobile parking stalls; 5.0 for general purpose drive aisles; and 6.0 for areas subject to heavy trucks. Pavement recommendations have been based upon a twenty-year design life.

1.2.4 Ancillary Improvements
Based on email correspondence with Mr. Steve Ellis with Fuscoe Engineering, Inc., we understand preliminary infiltration system design is considering an invert depth of 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) along the southern property line.

1.3 Purpose and Scope
The purpose of our geotechnical exploration was to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site relative to the proposed development concept and provide geotechnical recommendations to aid in the design and construction for the project as currently planned. The scope of this geotechnical exploration included the following tasks:
• Background Review – We reviewed readily available in-house geotechnical reports, literature, aerial photographs, and maps relevant to the site. We evaluated geological hazards and potential geotechnical issues that may significantly impact the site. The documents reviewed are listed in Section 7.0. • Pre-Field Exploration Activities – A site visit was performed by a member of our technical staff to mark the proposed exploration locations. Underground Service Alert (USA) was notified to identify and mark the locations of existing underground utilities prior to our subsurface exploration. • Field Exploration – Our subsurface exploration was performed on April 6, 2022 and included drilling, logging, and sampling of five (5) hollow-stem auger borings (designated LB-1 through LB-5) to approximate depths ranging from 25 to 51½ feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). One (1) additional boring (designated LP-2) was drilled to an approximate depth of 20 feet bgs for subsequent percolation testing. To supplement the hollow-stem auger borings, four (4) Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) soundings (designated CPT-1 through CPT-4) were advanced to depths of approximately 50 feet bgs. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Geotechnical Map. The boring and CPT logs are presented in Appendix A, Exploration Logs. 3297
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 4 ends

During drilling of the hollow-stem auger borings both bulk and drive samples were obtained from the borings for geotechnical laboratory testing. Driven ring samples were collected from the borings using a Modified California ring-lined sampler conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3550.

Representative samples were also collected by conducting the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) within the borings in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1586. Samples were collected at 5-foot intervals throughout the depth of exploration. In both test methods, the sampler is driven below the bottom of the borehole by a 140-pound weight (hammer) free-falling 30 inches.

The drilling rig was equipped with an automatic hammer to provide greater consistency in the drop height and striking frequency. The number of blows to drive the sampler the final 12-inches of the 18-inch drive interval is termed the “blowcount” or SPT N-value. The N-values provide a measure of relative density in granular (non-cohesive) soils and comparative consistency in cohesive soils. The number of blows per 6 inches of penetration was recorded on the boring logs included in Appendix A, Exploration Logs.

In-situ percolation testing was performed in general accordance with the County of San Bernardino guidelines. The results of the percolation testing are presented in Appendix B, Percolation Test Data. Additional details regarding the field percolation tests and results are presented in Section 2.4.1, Infiltration.

Upon completion of the percolation testing, the well casing was removed from each boring and the borings were backfilled with soil cuttings and patched at the surface with cold-mix asphalt concrete to match existing site conditions. • Laboratory Testing – Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained from the borings during our field exploration. The laboratory testing 3298
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 5 ends

program was designed to evaluate the physical and engineering characteristics of the onsite soil. Tests performed during this exploration included:
˗ In- situ Moisture Content and Dry Density (ASTM D2216 and ASTM D2937); ˗ Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
˗ Direct Shear (ASTM D 3080)
˗ Consolidation (ASTM D 2435);
˗ One Dimensional Swell or Settlement (ASTM D 4546)
˗ Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D 1557);
˗ Particle Size Distribution (ASTM D 6913);
˗ Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829);
˗ R-value (DOT CA Test 301)
˗ Sand Equivalent Test (DOT CA Test 217); and
˗ Corrosivity Suite – pH, Sulfate, Chloride, and Resistivity (California Test Methods 417, 422, and 532/643).

Results of the in-situ moisture content and dry density testing are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. Other laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C, Laboratory Test Results
• Engineering Analysis – The data obtained from our background review and field exploration were evaluated and analyzed to develop recommendations for the proposed development.
• Report Preparation – This report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the proposed development.
3299
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 6 ends

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS

2.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The project site is located in the Chino Basin in the northern portion of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. Major structural features surround this region, including the Cucamonga fault and the San Gabriel Mountains to the north, the Chino fault and Puente/Chino Hills to the west, and the San Jacinto fault to the east. This is an area of large-scale crustal disturbance as the relatively northwestward moving Peninsular Ranges province collides with the Transverse Ranges province (San Gabriel Mountains) to the north. Several active and potentially active faults have been mapped in the region and are believed to accommodate compression associated with this collision. The Sierra Madre fault, a major structural feature along the southern flank of the San Gabriel Mountains, is located approximately 8.3 miles north of the site. This fault, as well as other faults in the region, has the potential for generating strong ground motions at the project site. Further discussion of faulting relative to the site is provided in Section

3.0, Seismic and Geologic Hazards.

The site is located in an area underlain by thick accumulations of alluvial sand, silt, gravel, cobbles, and boulders eroded from the mountains and deposited in the site vicinity by the Santa Ana River and smaller tributaries such as the San Antonio Creek and Cucamonga Creek (Morton and Miller, 2006; Dibblee, 2002).

2.2 Surficial Geology
The Quaternary age deposits that cover the floor and margins of the Chino Basin are composed primarily of unconsolidated recent (Holocene) young alluvial fan deposits consisting predominately of sands and gravels derived from the surrounding mountains and hills with finer clays and silts deposited into the basin over the broad floodplain. The surficial geologic units mapped in the vicinity of the project site are shown on Figure 3, Regional Geology Map.

2.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions
Based on our subsurface explorations, the site is underlain by a relatively thin mantle of undocumented artificial fill materials (Afu) overlying Quaternary-aged (Holocene) young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf).
3300
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 7 ends

A general description of the encountered soils is presented as follows:

2.3.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill (Afu)
The artificial fill encountered in our borings extended to a depth of approximately 5 feet below grade and likely associated with the existing site improvements. In general, the encountered fill soils consist primarily of sandy silt and silty sand. Localized thicker accumulations of fill materials may be present between explored locations, particularly beneath the existing buildings.

2.3.2 Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf) Below the mantle of artificial fill material, Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits were encountered in the borings to the maximum depth explored (approximately 51½ feet). As encountered, this younger alluvial unit consists of stiff to very stiff sandy silt, silty clay, and clay; interbedded with medium dense to dense silty sand, sand with silt, and sand with gravel.

Although relatively variable across the site, in general, fine-grained material is more prevalent in the upper 15 to 25 feet with coarser grained material becoming more frequent at depths of 25 feet or greater.

Detailed descriptions of the subsurface soils encountered in the borings are presented on the logs included in Appendix A. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, Geotechnical Location Map.

2.4 Engineering Properties
The results of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C of this report.

Discussion regarding select engineering properties of these soils are described in the following sections based upon the results of the laboratory testing program.

2.4.1 Expansive Soil Characteristics
Expansive soils contain significant amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wetted and which shrink when dried. Foundations constructed on these soils are subject to uplifting forces caused by the swelling. Without proper mitigation measures, heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs-on-grade could result.
3301
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 8 ends

One (1) near-surface bulk soil sample collected from Boring LB-1 was tested for expansion potential. The test results indicate an Expansion Index (EI) value of 18, corresponding to a “Very Low” expansion potential. The Expansion Index laboratory test results are included in Appendix C of this report.

Variance in expansion potential of onsite soil is anticipated; therefore, additional testing is recommended upon completion of site grading and excavation to confirm the expansion potential presented in this report. For purposes of this report and based upon visual characterization of alluvial materials at approximate foundation depth, low expansion potential of site materials may be considered to support design and verified upon completion of earthwork grading.

2.4.2 Soil Corrosivity
One (1) near-surface bulk soil sample collected from Boring LB-3 was tested for corrosivity to assess corrosion potential to buried concrete. The chemical analysis test results for the onsite soil from our geotechnical exploration are included in Appendix C of this report.

The test results indicate a soluble sulfate concentration of 266 parts per million (ppm), chloride content of 40 ppm, pH 7.92, and a minimum resistivity value of 1,335 ohm-cm.

The results of the resistivity tests indicate the underlying soil is severely corrosive to buried ferrous metals per ASTM STP 1013. Based on the measured water-soluble sulfate contents from the soil samples, concrete in contact with the soil is expected to have negligible exposure to sulfate attack per ACI 318 (ACI, 2014). The samples tested for water-soluble chloride content indicate a low potential for corrosion of steel in concrete due to the chloride content of the soil.

2.4.3 Soil Compressibility
Three (3) samples of the onsite soils recovered from the borings were subjected to consolidation testing to evaluate the compressibility of these materials under assumed loads representative of anticipated structural bearing stresses. The results of testing indicate these soils exhibit a low 3302
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 9 ends

compressibility potential. The results of testing are presented in Appendix C.

2.4.4 Shear Strength
Evaluation of the shear strength characteristics of the soils included laboratory direct shear testing. The results of testing are included in Appendix C that provide values of angle of internal friction (ø) and cohesion (c) for use in geotechnical analysis.

2.4.5 Excavation Characteristics
Based on our subsurface explorations performed at the site and our experience from grading jobs in the vicinity of the site, we anticipate the onsite artificial fill and alluvial materials can generally be excavated using conventional excavation equipment in good operating condition.

The soils within the planned excavation depths are variable, and locally consist of layers that contain granular, unconsolidated soils with little or no cementation and few fines. These materials are prone to cave in or collapse in unshored excavations. See Section 5.4, Temporary Excavations for additional information on soil type and excavation characteristics.

2.5 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration to the maximum depth of 51.5 feet bgs. Based on review of the Chino Basin Optimum Basin Management Plan 2008 State of the Basin Report (Wildermuth, 2009), groundwater depth at the site is anticipated to be on the order of approximately 225 feet bgs. Review of available information from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR, 2022) for a nearby groundwater monitoring well located approximately 1.8 miles northwest of the project site (State Well # 01S07W29A001S) indicates the shallowest groundwater level measured for a monitoring period between October 1959 and September 2021 was approximately 214 feet bgs in 1959; with the most recent groundwater levels documented to be on the order of 250 feet bgs.

Based on these findings, groundwater is not expected to pose a constraint during or after construction. Fluctuations of the groundwater level, localized zones of perched water, and an increase in soil moisture, should be anticipated during and 3303
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 10 ends

following the rainy seasons or periods of locally intense rainfall or storm water runoff, or from stormwater infiltration.

2.6 Infiltration
Percolation testing was performed in temporary wells installed within borings LB4/LP-1 and LP-2 located in the southern region of the site with test zone at depths of 17 to 22 feet bgs and 15 to 20 feet bgs, respectively. The percolation tests were conducted in general accordance with the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for Water Quality Management Plans (2013). Results of the percolation testing are presented in Appendix B. The test locations and tested depth intervals are shown on Figure 2.

A boring percolation test is useful for field measurements of the infiltration rate of soils, and is suited for testing when the design depth of the infiltration device is deeper than current existing grades, especially in areas where it is difficult to dig test pits, or where the depths of these test pits would be considerably deep. At the subject site, testing consisted of advancing the borings to the anticipated depth for the invert of the proposed infiltration devices.

The Percolation Test Procedure (falling-head test method) as outlined in the County Guidelines was implemented at each percolation test well location. The infiltration rate was calculated by dividing the rate of discharge by the infiltration surface area, or flow area. The volume of discharge was calculated by adding the total volume of water that dropped within the PVC pipe and within the annulus, and incorporating a porosity reduction factor to account for the porosity of the annulus material. The flow area was based on the average water height within the test well.

Detailed results of the field testing data and measured infiltration rate for the test well are presented in Appendix B. The test results are summarized in the table below:

Table 1 – Measured (Unfactored) Infiltration Rate
Test Well
Designation
Approximate Depth of
Test Zone (feet bgs)
Measured
Infiltration Rate
(inches per hour)
LB-4/LP-1 17 to 22 0.32
LP-2 15 to 20 0.69
3304
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 11 ends

Based on the results of our field percolation testing that was performed at the site, the measured (unfactored) infiltration rates for the two (2) tests performed were

0.32 inches per hour (LB-4/LP-1) and 0.69 inches per hour (LP-2), respectively.

According to the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for Water Quality Management Plans (2013), the measured infiltration rate at both test well locations technically exceeds the minimum feasibility criteria of 0.3 inch per hour. However, implementation of a minimum factor of safety of 2.0 as required for the design infiltration rate indicates the depth and location tested for LB-4/LP-1 is considered infeasible for infiltration.

In consideration of the general greater prevalence of coarse-grained material at the site below depths of 25 feet or deeper, a more feasible infiltration rate may be achieved in percolation testing performed at depths greater than those tested during this exploration.
3305
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 12 ends

3.0 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Depending upon the geographic location and geologic setting of a particular site in southern California, seismic-related hazards can include surface fault rupture; strong ground shaking; seismically-induced landslides; liquefaction and associated effects such as settlement and/or lateral spreading; and seiches, tsunamis and/or flooding depending upon the proximity of bodies of water. The following sections discuss each of these hazards and potential effect upon this site.

3.1 Surface Fault Rupture
Known surface faults in the region are mapped on Figure 4, Regional Surface Fault and Historical Seismicity Map. Review of available literature indicates that no known active faults have been mapped across the site, and the site is not located within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Bryant and Hart, 2007). Therefore, a surface fault rupture hazard evaluation is not mandated for this site. Given an absence of known faults, potential risk for surface fault rupture at this site is low.

3.2 Regional Faulting
The location of the closest active faults to the site was evaluated using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program National Seismic Hazard Maps (USGS, 2008b). The closest active faults to the site with the potential for surface fault rupture are the Chino fault, San Jose fault, Cucamonga fault and Sierra Madre fault, located approximately 4.7 miles, 6.0 miles, 7.9 miles and 8.3 miles from the site, respectively. The San Andreas fault, which is the largest active fault in California, is approximately 20.3 miles northeast of the site on the north side of the San Gabriel Mountains. As discussed, major regional faults with surface expression in proximity to the site are shown on Figure 4, Regional Fault and Historic Seismicity Map.

3.3 Strong Ground Shaking
The principal seismic hazard to the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along any of several major active and potentially active faults in southern California (Figure 4). The intensity of ground shaking at a given location depends primarily upon the earthquake magnitude, the distance from the source, and the site response characteristics. Accordingly, design of the project should be performed in accordance with all applicable current codes and standards 3306
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 13 ends

utilizing the appropriate seismic design parameters to reduce seismic risk as defined by California Geological Survey (CGS) Chapter 2 of Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). The 2019 edition of the California Building Code (CBC) is the current edition of the code. Through compliance with these regulatory requirements and the utilization of appropriate seismic design parameters selected by the design professionals, potential effects relating to seismic shaking can be reduced.

The following code-based seismic parameters should be considered for design under the 2019 CBC:

Table 2 – 2019 CBC Based Ground Motion Parameters (Mapped Values) Categorization/Coefficient Code-Based
Site Latitude 34.0275°
Site Longitude -117.6523°
Site Class D
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SS 1.5 g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), S1 0.579 g Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0
Long Period (1 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.72*
Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SMS 1.5 g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), SM1 0.996* Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SDS 1.0 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), SD1 0.664* Site Coefficient for Peak Ground Acceleration, FPGA 1.1 Peak Ground Acceleration adjusted for Site Class effects, PGAM 0.644 g

1. All were derived from the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool web page: https://asce7hazardtool.online/

2. All coefficients in units of g (spectral acceleration)

3. *Requires Cs calculation, see Note below.

Based on Table 1613.2.3(2) of the 2019 CBC, the long period site coefficient (Fv) should be determined in accordance with Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 since the mapped spectral response acceleration at 1 second is greater than 0.2g for Site Class D. In accordance with Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, a site-specific seismic analysis is required; however, the values provided herein may be utilized if design 3307
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 14 ends

is performed in accordance with exception (2) in Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, with special requirements for the seismic response coefficient (Cs) as noted below.

The project structural engineer should review the seismic parameters.

Note: Long period coefficient (Fv) of 1.7 may be utilized for calculation of Ts, provided that the value of the Seismic Response Coefficient (Cs) is determined by Equation 12.8- 2 for values of the fundamental period of the building (T) less than or equal to 1.5Ts, and taken as 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either equation 12.8-3 for T greater than 1.5 Ts and less than or equal to TL or equation 12.8-4 for T greater than TL.

3.4 Liquefaction Potential
The term liquefaction is generally referenced to loss of strength and stiffness in soils due to build-up of pore water pressure when subject to cyclic or monotonic loading.

Both sandy and clayey soils are susceptible to loss of strength and stiffness.

Because of the difference in strength characteristic and methods for evaluating strength loss potential for granular and clayey soils, the term liquefaction is used for granular soils while cyclic softening is used for fine-grained soils (i.e. clays and plastic silts).

In general, adverse effects of liquefaction or cyclic softening include excessive ground settlement, loss of bearing support for structural foundations, and seismically-induced lateral ground deformations such as lateral spreading.

Depending upon the relative thickness of the liquefied strata with respect to overlying non-liquefiable soils, other potentially adverse effects such as ground oscillation and ground fissuring may occur.

As regionally mapped on the California Geological Survey Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation (EZRIM) for the Ontario Quadrangle (CGS, 200) and shown on Figure 4, Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the site is not within an area potentially susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, review of the San Bernardino County Geologic Hazard Overlays map FH27C (2010), the project site is not located within a County liquefaction susceptibility zone. The historically shallowest groundwater level recorded by DWR near the site is 214 feet bgs and the recent recorded depth to groundwater is greater than 200 feet bgs. Based on these findings, liquefaction is not considered a hazard at the site.

3.5 Seismically-Induced Settlement
Seismically-induced settlement consists of dynamic settlement of unsaturated soil (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). 3308
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 15 ends

These settlements occur primarily within low density sandy soil due to reduction in volume during and shortly after an earthquake event.

As previously discussed, the site is not considered susceptible to the occurrence of liquefaction. Therefore, seismically-induced settlement will consist solely of densification of non-saturated soils upon exposure to strong ground shaking.

Evaluation of the potential for such seismically-induced settlements to occur was performed for the Geomean Maximum Considered Event (MCEG) and the associated ground motion that corresponds to a 2,475 year average return period (ARP) for the CPT soundings that were advanced to a depth of 50 feet below grade.

The results of the analysis are presented below:

Table 3 – Seismically-Induced Settlement - MCEG Seismic Event Design Scenario CPT
I.D.

Settlement (inches)
PGA MW Liquefaction(1) Non-Liquefaction(2) Total

0.64 6.78 CPT-1 No Liquefaction 0.23 0.23
CPT-2 No Liquefaction 0.09 0.09
CPT-3A No Liquefaction 0.16 0.16
CPT-4 No Liquefaction 0.45 0.45
Notes: (1) Liquefaction-induced settlement; Design Groundwater below depth of 50 feet (2) Non-liquefaction induced (“dry sand”) settlement
The results of the analysis indicated the magnitude of seismically-induced settlement under the MCEG scenario will be less than ½ to 1 inch. Based on the general consistency in soil conditions as depicted by the test borings conducted at the site, the differential settlement is estimated to be approximately ½ inch over a distance of at least 40 feet, which results in an angular distortion less than 0.0021 in./in., which is anticipated to be within tolerable levels for structural design.

3.6 Lateral Spreading
Liquefaction may also cause lateral spreading. For lateral spreading to occur, the liquefiable zone must be continuous, unconstrained laterally, and free to move along gently sloping ground toward an unconfined area. Since the site is relatively flat and constrained laterally and liquefaction is not considered a hazard at the site, earthquake-induced lateral spreading is also not considered a hazard at the site. 3309
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 16 ends

3.7 Earthquake-Induced Landsliding
As regionally mapped on the California Geological Survey Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation for the Torrance Quadrangle (CGS, March 25, 1999) and shown on Figure 4, Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the site is not located within an area potentially susceptible to liquefaction (CGS, 2000a). Review of the San Bernardino County Geologic Hazard Overlays map FH27C (2010) indicates the project site is not located within a County landslide susceptibility zone. The project site is relatively flat with no significant slopes on or immediately adjacent. It is our opinion that seismically-induced landsliding is not considered a hazard at the site.

3.8 Flooding
According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2015), the project site is located within a flood hazard area identified as “Zone X”, which is defined as an area of minimal flood hazard.

Regionally, storm runoff flow is generally directed to the southwest. As shown on Figure 5, Flood Hazard Zone Map, the site is not located within a 100-year or 500- year flood hazard zone.

Earthquake-induced flooding can be caused by failure of dams or other waterretaining structures as a result of earthquakes. As shown on Figure 6, Dam Inundation Map, the site is mapped within an inundation zone associated with San Antonio Dam. Catastrophic failure of this dam is expected to be a very unlikely event in that dam safety regulations exist and are enforced by the DOSD, Army Corps of Engineers and Department of Water Resources. Inspectors may require dam owners to perform work, maintenance or implement controls if issues are found with the safety of the dam. Due to the location and distance of the site from San Antonio Dam, along with the unlikely failure of the dam, the potential for earthquake-induced flooding to occur due to a failure of this dam is considered low.

3.9 Seiches and Tsunamis
Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. Tsunamis are waves generated in large bodies of water by fault displacement or major ground movement. Based on the absence of an enclosed water body near the site and the inland location of the site, seiche and tsunami risks at the site are considered negligible.
3310
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 17 ends

3.10 Methane
Based on review of State of California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) records, the project site is not located within an oil field boundary (CalGEM, 2021). The nearest documented oil well to the site is located approximately 0.6 miles southwest of the site (API# 0407100083; Donald B.

Lamont, Donald B. Lamont Lease, Well No. 1) and is reported as a plugged dry hole (CalGEM, 2021). Based on these findings, the potential for methane hazard at the site is low.
3311
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 18 ends

4.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
No evidence of adverse geological or geotechnical hazards was noted at the site that will preclude the development of the project as currently planned. Presented below is a summary of findings based upon the results of our geotechnical exploration of the site.

Geotechnical recommendations for design and construction are presented in Section 4.0 of this report.
• The potential for surface fault rupture is considered to be low since the site is not located in a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. • The site may be subjected to strong ground shaking during the design life of the proposed development due to the proximity of several active faults in the vicinity of the site. The Chino fault, located approximately 4.7 miles southwest of the site is the nearest active fault to the site with a potential for surface rupture and generation of strong ground shaking. However, strong ground shaking may occur at the site due to seismic activity on one of a number of faults in the area. • The site is not located within an area shown as susceptible to liquefaction according to the CGS Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map for the Ontario Quadrangle or the San Bernardino County Geologic Hazard Overlays map FH27C.

Given the lack of shallow groundwater underlying the site, the potential for liquefaction is considered low.
• Groundwater was not encountered to the maximum depth explored of 51½ feet bgs.

Recent nearby groundwater levels as documented by the California Department of Water Resources indicate the depth to groundwater is likely on the order of greater than 200 feet bgs. Groundwater is not anticipated to be a constraint to site grading or construction.
• At a minimum, development of the site for support of the proposed mixed-use development should include overexcavation and recompaction of the existing artificial fill materials as well as a portion of the underlying native soils to develop a layer of structural compacted fill to provide foundation support. • The results of the infiltration testing performed at the site indicate stormwater infiltration is marginally feasible based on the tested locations and depths. • The proposed structures may be supported by a shallow foundation system supported on structural compacted fill underlain by suitable bearing native soils. 3312
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 19 ends

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon this study, we conclude that the proposed development for the subject site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are properly incorporated in design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development are presented in the following sections and are intended to provide sufficient geotechnical information to develop the project plans in accordance with 2019 CBC requirements. The following recommendations may be superseded by more restrictive requirements of the architect, structural engineer, and/or local building official.

The recommendations below are based upon the exhibited geotechnical engineering properties of the soils and their anticipated response both during and after construction.

The recommendations are also based upon proper field observation and testing during construction. The project geotechnical engineer should be notified of suspected variances in field conditions to determine the effect upon the recommendations subsequently presented. These recommendations are considered minimal and may be superseded by more restrictive requirements of the civil and structural engineers, the City of Ontario, the County of San Bernardino and other governing agencies.

Leighton should review the grading plans, foundation plans and project specifications as they become available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been incorporated into the plans for this project.

5.1 Earthwork
All site grading should be performed in accordance with the project specifications that are prepared by the appropriate design professional. The guide specifications presented in Appendix D, General Earthwork and Grading Recommendations may be used as a guideline in developing the project specifications.

Earthwork and grading operations are recommended to be observed and appropriate testing be performed by representatives of the geotechnical engineer to verify that the site is properly prepared, the selected fill materials are satisfactory, and that placement and compaction of fills has been performed in accordance with our recommendations and the project specifications. 3313
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 20 ends

5.1.1 Site Preparation
Initial preparation of the site should include demolition and removal of the existing facility from the project site including all foundations, slabs and underground structures. Existing utilities not planned for reuse with the proposed development should be either removed in their entirety, properly abandoned in-place, or rerouted around the development area to preserve their function. Disposal of all debris and remnants of the existing development should be performed in accordance with the type of material and local regulations.

The existing development includes a relatively large paved parking lot that consists of asphalt concrete. Based upon the conditions encountered at the test boring locations, the thickness of the existing asphalt concrete ranged from 2½ to 5 inches underlain by base course that ranged from 3 to 12 inches in thickness. Reuse of the pavement with the proposed development will require consideration of proposed finish grades and the need to construct an asphalt overlay to prolong the service life of the pavement.

Recommendations for reuse of the pavement can be provided upon request. However, for purposes of this report, the existing pavement is assumed to not be salvaged for reuse and will be removed from the site. If properly processed during demolition and removal, the pavement may be reused as the base course for construction of new pavement.

Upon completion of demolition and site clearing activities, the soils should be carefully observed for the removal of all unsuitable deposits. All undocumented fill or man-made debris, unsuitable native soils and former foundation remnants should be excavated and removed from the proposed building/structure footprint prior to fill placement.

5.1.2 Removals and Overexcavations
The recommended depths of overexcavation presented below have been based upon the assumed structural loads and the recommended allowable bearing pressure. The actual depth recommended for preparation of foundation areas may be revised depending upon the actual footing sizes that result from structural design of the foundations. Consequently, the recommendations for building pad preparation/overexcavation should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer as foundation design proceeds. 3314
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 21 ends

To provide uniform foundation support and reduce the potential for excessive static settlement, all existing undocumented fill and any unsuitable soil, as deemed by the geotechnical engineer, should be removed to expose suitable native soils and replaced as engineered fill below the proposed building and other structural improvements. Based on our field explorations, we estimate removals of existing undocumented fill will be approximately 5 feet below existing grade across most of the site.

Localized areas are anticipated to require deeper removals, in particular beneath the existing buildings and in areas of existing utilities.

Removals should be performed such that all undocumented fill is removed and replaced as engineered fill. In addition, overexcavations should be performed such that a minimum of 4 feet of engineered fill is established below the proposed building foundation elements and the at-grade slabs of the buildings. The lateral extent of overexcavation beyond foundations should be equal to the depth of overexcavation below the proposed foundations as measured at the excavation subgrade.

The depth of overexcavation in non-structural areas planned for new pavement construction is recommended to be 2 feet below the current grade or planned subgrade elevation to develop a suitable bearing subgrade for pavement support. Deeper overexcavations in localized areas may be recommended during grading by a representative of the geotechnical engineer depending on observed subsurface conditions.

5.1.3 Subgrade Preparation
All excavation bottoms or removal bottoms should be observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer prior to placement of fill or other improvements to determine that geotechnically suitable soil is exposed.

Excavation bottoms observed to be suitable for fill placement or other improvements should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moistureconditioned as necessary to achieve a moisture content of at least 2 percentage points above the optimum moisture content, and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (Modified Proctor).
3315
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 22 ends

5.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction
The onsite soil, free of organic material, cobbles, boulders, rubble, and rock less than 3 inches in largest dimension, is suitable to be used as structural fill. All fill soil should be placed in loose lifts no greater than 8 inches in thickness, moisture-conditioned as necessary to a moisture content 1 to 2 percentage points above optimum moisture content and compacted using proper equipment to the minimum standard as noted below, unless stated otherwise in the specific sections.
• Fill soil should be moisture-conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557.
• Subgrade exposures should be moisture-conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557
• Base course material should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction.
• Utility trench backfill is discussed in Section 5.5.

Material imported to the site for use as fill should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to import to the site and placement as fill.

Imported soils should be very low in expansion potential (EI less than 20); non-corrosive to metals and concrete; and be free of hazardous substances.

When grading is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations should not be resumed until the moisture content and the dry density of the placed fill are satisfactory.

5.1.5 Shrinkage and Bulking
The change in volume of excavated and recompacted soil varies according to soil type and location. This volume change is represented as a percentage increase (bulking) or decrease (shrinkage) in volume of fill after removal and recompaction. Field and laboratory data used in our calculations included laboratory-measured maximum dry density for the 3316
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 23 ends

general soil type encountered at the subject site, the measured in-place densities of near surface soils encountered and our experience.

Earthwork operations are generally anticipated to be limited to soils to a depth of 5 to 6 feet below current grade with some additional overexcavation in localized areas of the site where unsuitable bearing/very loose relative density soils may be encountered in the southern to southwestern region of the site. Data regarding the in-place density of the near surface soils could not be collected due to the manner in which field exploration was encountered whereby the soils to a depth of 5 feet at the boring locations were pre-drilled by use of a hand auger to protect against damaging buried utilities. Therefore, earthwork quantities (shrinkage/bulking) are primarily based upon experience with similar materials at other project sites and the limited available data from soils recovered from a depth of 6 feet.

On a preliminary basis, the existing fill materials requiring removal and recompaction are anticipated to exhibit volume shrinkage on the order of of 10 to 15 percent. The estimated shrinkage does not include material losses due to removal of organic material or other unsuitable bearing materials (debris, rubble, oversize material greater than 6-inches) and the actual shrinkage that occurs during grading may vary throughout the site.

5.1.6 Reuse of Concrete and Asphalt Rubble
If encountered during site clearing and/or during preparation activities, construction rubble (i.e., Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete) may be incorporated in the proposed development. For use as structural fill, the processed material should be crushed to develop a relatively wellgraded mixture with a maximum particle size of 3-inch nominal diameter. Concrete rubble should be free of rebar and processed asphalt pavement rubble may be used if mixed with the existing base course (where present). Processed material may be used as structural fill if uniformly mixed with onsite soils in proportion of 1 part processed material to 3 parts soil. For use as pavement base course, rubble should be crushed to satisfy gradation requirements of Section 200-2.4 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (SSPWC, “Greenbook”). Such materials must be free of and segregated from any hazardous materials and/or organic material of any kind.
3317
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 24 ends

5.2 Foundation Design
Preparation of the building areas should be performed as described in Section 5.1 of this report. Upon completion of building pad preparation, the soils that will provide support of the foundations are expected to consist of properly moistureconditioned structural compacted fill that exhibits very low to low expansion potential underlain by suitable bearing native soils.

5.2.1 Vertical Load Bearing Capacity
The proposed structures are recommended to be supported by a shallow foundation system in which continuous strip footings are used for wall support and isolated square pad footings for column support. Footings to support the proposed buildings are recommended to be designed for a maximum net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) for continuous strip footings for wall support and 3,000 psf for isolated square pad footings for column support.

The foundations for ancillary structures separate from the proposed buildings are recommend to be designed for a maximum 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for continuous strip footings for wall support and 2,500 psf for isolated square pad footings for column support. The recommended bearing pressures assume the foundations will be supported by a layer of structural compacted fill that is a minimum 2 feet in thickness below foundations and extends laterally distance of at least 2 feet beyond the edges of the foundations.

The allowable bearing values may be increased by one-third when considering short-term seismic or wind loads. The recommended bearing pressure is net so the unit weight of concrete may be assumed to be 50 pcf when calculating the component of load demand due to foundation weight; the weight of soil backfill can be neglected when determining the downward loads.

The recommended allowable bearing pressures stated above have been based upon specific minimum footing sizes and embedment depths:
• Minimum widths for foundations are recommended to be 18 inches for continuous strip footings and 24 inches for square pad footings. 3318
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 25 ends

• Minimum footing embedment depth for the isolated exterior footings and the footings for the exterior walls is recommended to be 18 inches. • The minimum embedment depth for interior footings is recommended to be 18 inches.
• The minimum embedment depth for ancillary structures is 18 inches below adjacent subgrade elevation.

The depth of embedment should be determined from the finish subgrade elevation adjacent to the building for the perimeter footings and the finish pad grade within the structure for interior footings. Additional foundation embedment depth may be considered for foundations located close to property lines to protect foundations from being undermined due future excavation that may be performed on the adjacent properties.

Determination of the minimum steel reinforcement requirements of the continuous strip and isolated square pad footings should be performed by the structural engineer.

The foundation bearing soils are recommended to be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing reinforcing steel. Evaluation is intended to verify suitable bearing conditions to support the footings and the footing excavations are generally in compliance with foundation plans.

5.2.2 Lateral Load Resistance
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction acting along the bottoms of the footings and passive resistance of the soil adjacent to the vertical sides of the foundations provided the foundations are poured neat against properly compacted fill or undisturbed native soils. Resistance to lateral load may be calculated on the basis of an allowable frictional coefficient of 0.30 and allowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds-per-cubic-foot (pcf) to a maximum of 2,500 psf. No reduction will be needed to any of the above two components for computing the total resistance to lateral loads. The use of passive resistance in lateral load analysis requires the foundations to be cast against vertical, undisturbed trench walls or any voids along the footing be backfilled with structural compacted fill.
3319
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 26 ends

5.2.3 Settlement Estimate
Estimated post-construction total and differential settlement under the assumed loading conditions and preparation of the building areas as described in this report are estimated to be on the order of 1 inch and ½ inch, respectively. The differential settlement is expected to occur over a minimum span of 30 feet, thereby resulting in an angular distortion less than

0.002, which is expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed structures.

Settlement is a function of footing size and contact bearing pressure. As a result, differential settlement can be expected between adjacent columns or walls where a large differential loading condition exists. Leighton should review the settlement estimates when final foundation plans and loads for the proposed structures become available.

5.3 Slab-on-Grade Floors
Upon completion of the recommended building pad preparation, the subgrades of the slabs supported on grade are anticipated to consist of newly placed structural compacted fill, which is generally expected to consist of the existing soils that have been overexcavated and recompacted under engineering controlled conditions.

Based upon the anticipated subgrade conditions, the floor slabs of the proposed buildings that will be supported on grade may be designed and constructed as a mat on elastic foundation using a modulus of subgrade reaction (kv1) of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci). These slabs are recommended to be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and include No. 3 rebar placed at center of the slab at 18 inches oncenter in each direction based on geotechnical considerations. Increase in the slab thickness and/or reinforcing may be necessary due to structural engineering considerations as determined by the structural engineer.

The slabs may are recommended to be underlain by a minimum 4-inch thick coarse granular material to serve as a working mat during construction and serve as a capillary moisture break.

Interior slabs-on-grade are recommended to be underlain by a synthetic sheeting to serve as a retarder to moisture vapor transmission in areas where moisturesensitive floor coverings are used (such as vinyl, tile, or carpet) or storage areas 3320
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 27 ends

for personal possessions. Prior to installing the synthetic sheeting, the exposed subgrade surface should be clear of all extruding rock and gravel that could damage the sheeting. The sheeting should be evaluated for the presence of punctures or tears by the installer prior to pouring concrete. Installation of the sheeting should include proper overlap and taping of seams.

Appropriate synthetic sheeting should be determined by others qualified in evaluating and mitigating moisture vapor transmission through concrete slabs. Our firm does not practice in the field of moisture vapor transmission evaluation, since this is not specifically a geotechnical issue. Therefore, we recommend that a qualified person, such as the flooring subcontractor and/or structural engineer, be consulted with to evaluate the general and specific moisture vapor transmission paths and any impact on the proposed construction with respect to the storage facility and retail areas. That person should provide recommendations for mitigation of the potential adverse effects of moisture vapor transmission on various components of the structures as deemed appropriate.

Care should be taken to avoid slab curling if slabs are poured in hot weather.

Frequent construction joints should be provided to minimize the potential for cracking. Slabs should be designed and constructed as promulgated by the Portland Cement Association (PCA). Prior to the slab pour, all utility trenches should be properly backfilled and compacted. Differential settlement of this material could result in movement and distress to hardscape and other improvements. The need to repair cracks, etc. should be anticipated.

5.4 Temporary Excavations
All temporary excavations, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavations, and other excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications and all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements.

Temporary excavations should be treated in accordance with the State of California version of OSHA excavation regulations, Construction Safety Orders for Excavation General Requirements, Article 6, Section 1541, effective October 1, 1995. The sides of excavations should be shored or sloped in accordance with OSHA regulations. OSHA allows the sides of unbraced excavations, up to a maximum height of 20 feet, to be cut to a ¾H:1V (horizontal:vertical) slope for Type A soils, 1H:1V for Type B soils, and 1½H:1V for Type C soils. Onsite sandy soils 3321
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 28 ends

are to be considered Type C soils which are subject to collapse in shallow unbraced excavations (i.e., approximately 3 to 4 feet in vertical height).

OSHA regulations are applicable in areas with no restriction of surrounding ground deformations. Shoring should be designed for areas with deformation restrictions.

The soil type should be verified or revised based on geotechnical observation and testing during construction, as soil classifications may vary over short horizontal distances.

Typical cantilever shoring should be designed based on an active fluid pressure of 38 pcf, assuming level ground above the shoring. If excavations are braced at the top and at specific design intervals, the active pressure may then be approximated by a rectangular soil pressure distribution with the pressure per foot of width equal to 25H psf, where H is equal to the depth of the excavation being shored.

Heavy construction loads, such as those resulting from stockpiles and heavy machinery, should be kept a minimum distance equivalent to the excavation height or 5 feet, whichever is greater, from the excavation unless the excavation is shored and these surcharges are considered in the design of the shoring system.

Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundation should be properly shored to maintain support of the adjacent structures.

5.5 Trench Backfill
Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with Sections 306-1.2 and 306-1.3 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (SSPWC, “Greenbook”), 2018 Edition. Utility trenches can be backfilled with onsite material free of rubble, debris, organic and oversized material up to 3 inches in largest dimension. Prior to backfilling trenches, pipes should be bedded in and covered with either:
• Granular Bedding: a) ½-inch open grade aggregate; or b) a uniform sand material with a Sand Equivalent (SE) greater than or equal to (≥) 30, passing the No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve (or as specified by the pipe manufacturer).

Testing to evaluate the Sand Equivalent (SE) of representative samples of the near surface soils indicated SE values below 30, thereby indicating the on-site soils may not be suitable for reuse in this manner.
3322
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 29 ends

• CLSM: Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) conforming to Section 201- 6 of the SSPWC. CLSM bedding should be placed to 1 foot (0.3 m) over the top of the conduit, and vibrated.

Pipe bedding should extend at least 4 inches below the pipeline invert and at least 12 inches over the top of the pipeline. The bedding and shading sand is recommended to be densified in place by vibratory, lightweight compaction equipment. Jetting or hydro-consolidation may be suitable for this project site where utility trenches will be underlain by the silty sands, typically present in the upper 5 to 10 feet.

Trench backfill over the pipe bedding zone may consist of native and clean fill soils.

All backfill should be placed in thin lifts (appropriate for the type of compaction equipment), moisture conditioned above optimum, and mechanically compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, relative to the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density.

5.6 Soil Corrosivity
In general, soil resistivity, which is a measure of how easily electrical current flows through soils, is the most influential factor for corrosion to ferrous metals. The following table presents an approximate relationship between soil resistivity and soil corrosiveness.

Table 4 – Soil Corrosivity as a Function of Resistivity Soil Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
Classification of
Soil Corrosiveness
0 to 900 Very severe corrosion
900 to 2,300 Severely corrosive
2,300 to 5,000 Moderately corrosive
5,000 to 10,000 Mildly corrosive
10,000 to >100,000 Very mildly corrosive
Note: 1 ASTM STP 1013 titled Effects of Soil Characteristics on Corrosion (February, 1989).

In addition to resistivity, the concentration of chloride ions can also be used to evaluate corrosive potential to steel, either in the form of reinforcement protected by concrete cover or plain steel substructures, such as steel pipes. As a general guideline, the chloride threshold adopted by Caltrans is a concentration of 500 ppm 3323
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 30 ends

or greater as determined by California Test 532. Concentrations of chloride ions above the stated concentration or other characteristics such as soil resistivity or redox potential may warrant special corrosion protection measures. The results of corrosivity testing are summarized in the following table.

Table 5 – Summary of Corrosivity Testing
Test Parameter Test Results
LB-3 @ 0’-5’ General Classification of Hazard
Water-Soluble Sulfate in Soil
(ppm) 260 Negligible sulfate exposure to buried concrete Water-Soluble Chloride in Soil
(ppm) 40 Non-corrosive to buried reinforced
concrete
pH 7.92 Moderately alkaline
Minimum Resistivity
(saturated, ohm-cm) 1,335 Severely corrosive to buried ferrous pipes The results of the resistivity tests indicate the underlying soil is moderately corrosive to buried ferrous metals per ASTM STP 1013. The samples tested for water-soluble chloride content indicate a low potential for corrosion of steel in concrete due to the chloride content of the soil.

Based on the test results, ferrous pipes buried in moist to wet site earth materials should be avoided by using high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and/or other non-ferrous pipe when possible provided the pipe walls possess sufficient strength for the embedment and external loading to which the pipe will be subjected. Ferrous pipe can also be protected by polyethylene bags, tape or coatings, di-electric fittings or other means to separate pipe from on-site soils. If buried ferrous pipes are planned for this site, further corrosivity testing of soil samples should be performed upon completion of rough grading and specific corrosion protection measures should be recommended by a qualified corrosion engineer.

5.7 Cement Type
In general, soil environments that are detrimental to concrete have high concentrations of soluble sulfates and/or pH values of less than 5.5. Section 4.3 of ACI 318 (ACI, 2014) provides specific guidelines for the concrete mix-design when the soluble sulfate content of the soil exceeds 0.1 percent by weight or 1,000 parts per million (ppm).
3324
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 31 ends

The results of laboratory testing indicated concentrations of soluble sulfate less than 0.1 percent. The test results indicate a sulfate Exposure Class designation of “S0” appears to be appropriate for the project site based upon criteria presented in ACI 318. However, if the concrete is expected to be in contact with reclaimed water, Type V cement and a water/cement ratio of 0.45 should be used. Samples should be collected from the compacted fill subgrade upon completion of grading to confirm the initial findings of this exploration.

5.8 Elevator Pit Wall Design
The proposed development is not expected to include new earth retaining structures due to the generally level topographic relief of the site and no below grade levels associated with the buildings. However, in consideration that the buildings will be multi-stories in height, the buildings are anticipated to include elevators. In the anticipation that elevator equipment will include below-grade pits to house the mechanical workings, design of the pit walls should include provisions to resist the lateral load of the adjacent soils. Based on the recommended building pad parathion and the anticipated soil conditions, design of the pit walls is recommended to be based upon an equivalent lateral earth pressure of 60 psf per foot of retained height.

5.9 Pavements

5.9.1 Pavement Subgrades
The pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in Section 5.1 of this report. In accordance with the recommendations, preparation of the subgrade within the areas of new pavement construction are recommended to be overexcavated to a depth of 2 feet below the current grade or planned subgrade elevation, or to the depth of undocumented fill whichever is greater, to allow placement of a minimum of 2 feet of structural fill to develop a suitable bearing subgrade for pavement support.

5.9.2 Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavement Sections
Asphalt pavements are anticipated to be feasible for the proposed development. Based on the anticipated subgrade conditions and the results of laboratory testing conducted on one bulk sample of the near surface soils 3325
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 32 ends

(LB-1), the following recommendations for pavement design have been based upon a design R-value of 30 for the anticipated subgrade. R-value tests should be performed upon completion of grading to verify the design value is appropriate for the actual subgrade conditions. Based on the design procedures outlined in the current Caltrans Highway Design Manual and using an R-value of 78 for the pavement base course, the following flexible pavement sections may be used for Traffic Index values that correspond to various levels of vehicle traffic.

Table 6 – Asphalt Pavement Sections
Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete
(inches)
Base Course (inches)

CAB CMB
4 or less 3 5 6

5.0 3 6 7

6.0 4 7 8
Notes: CAB – Crushed Aggregate Base Course; Caltrans Class 2, Section 26 or SSPWC Section 200-2.2
CMB – Crushed Miscellaneous Base Course; SSPWC Section 200-2.4 The asphalt concrete should conform to the specifications outlined in Section 203-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC, a.k.a. “Greenbook”), and asphalt concrete construction methods should meet the requirements of Section 302-5 of the Green Book.

The base course should conform to requirements of Section 26 of State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (Caltrans), latest edition, or meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2.2 of the SSPWC (Greenbook). As an alternate, the base course may comply with the specifications for Crushed Miscellaneous Base per SSPWC Section 200-2.4 with an appropriate increase in thickness.

Prior to placement of the base course, the subgrade soil should be processed to a minimum depth of 8 inches, moisture-conditioned to 1 to 2 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Base course should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned, as necessary, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction (ASTM D1557).
3326
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 33 ends

5.9.3 Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavements
Portland cement concrete is recommended for areas of the development subjected to large loads and truck loading/unloading areas. In such areas, a minimum 6-inch thick Portland Concrete Cement (PCC) pavement section reinforced is recommended. Reinforcement is recommended to consist of No. 4 rebar at a maximum on-center spaced at 16 inches in each direction.

The recommended PCC pavement section was based on the procedures described in the Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots by the American Concrete Institute (ACI 330R-08).

All PCC pavements should have a minimum 28-day concrete compressive strength of 3,000 pounds-per-square-inch (psi). The reinforcement should be evaluated by the civil/structural engineer to accommodate any additional structural loading requirements. Control joints are recommended to be installed at a maximum on-center spacing of 12 feet for 6-inch thick slabs, and should form square panels.

Concrete pavement may be underlain by a minimum 4-inch thick layer of compacted granular base to serve as a leveling mat for construction and to assist in load transfer at construction joints.

Integral curbs should be used at the perimeter of PCC pavement.

Longitudinal joints should be avoided near curbs and gutters. Use of concrete cutoff or edge barriers should be considered at the perimeter of common parking or driveway areas when abutting either open (unfinished) or landscaped areas.

5.10 Concrete Flatwork and Exterior Slabs
Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches.

Common Type II cement should be adequate for concrete flatwork not exposed to recycled water. Type V cement and a water:cement ratio of 0.45 should be used for concrete exposed to recycled water.

Concrete flatwork should be placed on compacted fill. If this material has been disturbed or dried out, the subgrade soil to a depth of 12 inches should be moisture conditioned to 1 to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and recompacted to minimum 90 percent relative compaction.
3327
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 34 ends

Exterior concrete driveways, ramps, curbs, gutters, sidewalks often crack.

Inclusion of joints at frequent intervals and reinforcement will help control the locations of the cracks, and thus reduce the unsightly appearance. Construction or weakened plane joints should be spaced at intervals of 6 feet or less for sidewalks, curbs and gutters. The spacing may be increased to 10 feet for ramps and driveways. If cracking occurs, repairs may be needed to mitigate the trip hazard and/or improve the appearance.

Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to expansion, drying and shrinkage is normal and should be expected. However, cracking is often aggravated by a high water-to-cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected.

The use of low-slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. Inclusion of joints at frequent intervals and reinforcement will help control the locations of the cracks, and thus improve aesthetics. Control joints should be spaced at intervals no more than 10 feet. If cracking occurs, repairs may be needed to mitigate the trip hazard and/or improve the appearance.

Slab cracking and/or uneven slab surfaces may result due to the presence of fill if the fill is left in place below the slabs. Slab distortion may result in tripping hazards.

Standard methods to mitigate trip hazards include the following:
• Saw Cutting
• Grinding
• Patching and ramping
• Removing and replacement
A regular maintenance program should be implemented to mitigate trip hazards and comply with safety requirements.

5.11 Surface Drainage
Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important. Water should not be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings or new site improvements.

Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away at a minimum of 2 percent for earthen surfaces for a lateral distance of at least five feet and further maintained by a swale or drainage path at a gradient of at least 1 percent. 3328
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 35 ends

Where necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by the use of area drains and collector pipes. Eave gutters are recommended and should reduce water infiltration into the subgrade materials. Downspouts should be connected to appropriate outlet devices.

Irrigation of landscaping should be controlled to maintain, as much as possible, consistent moisture content sufficient to provide healthy plant growth without over watering.

5.12 Additional Geotechnical Services
Leighton should review the grading plans, foundation plans, and specifications when they are available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated.

Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided during the following activities:
• Grading and excavation of the site;
• Subgrade Preparation;
• Compaction of all fill materials;
• Utility trench backfilling and compaction;
• Footing excavation and slab-on-grade preparation;
• Pavement subgrade and base preparation;
• Placement of asphalt concrete and/or concrete; and
• When conditions are encountered on site that are not consistent with the conditions described in this report.
3329
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 36 ends

6.0 LIMITATIONS
This report was prepared using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing at this time in San Bernardino County. We do not make any warranty, either express or implied.

As in many projects, conditions revealed in excavations may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant and additional recommendations be developed as needed.

The identification and testing of hazardous, toxic or contaminated materials was outside the scope of Leighton's work. Should such materials be encountered at any time, or their existence be suspected, all measures stipulated in local, County, State and Federal regulations, as applicable, should be implemented.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the necessary design consultants for the project and incorporated into the plans; and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractors carry out such recommendations in the field.

Changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on the subject or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in standards of practice may occur from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may at some future time be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside Leighton’s control.

The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained from a necessarily limited number of observations, site visits, excavations, samples and tests. Such information can be obtained only with respect to the specific locations explored, and therefore may not completely define all subsurface conditions throughout the site. The nature of many sites is that differing geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions.

Furthermore, changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton has the opportunity to perform additional investigation of the site, finalize and complete the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report, and finally to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to verify that our preliminary findings are representative of the site. 3330
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 37 ends

This report is intended only for the use of Legacy/Collier Residential, LLC and its design consultants, and only as related expressly to evaluation of the feasibility of developing the subject site with the proposed development and for preliminary planning and design.

If parties other than Leighton are engaged to provide construction geotechnical services, they must be notified that they will be required to assume complete responsibility for the geotechnical phase of the project by concurring with the findings and recommendations in this report or by providing alternative recommendations.

Any persons using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform such independent explorations as they deem necessary to satisfy themselves as to the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used in the performance of work on the subject site.
3331
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 38 ends

7.0 REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary, an ACI Standard, reported by ACI Committee 318.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-16, with Supplement 1, Effective December 12, 2018.

Bray, J.D. and Sancio, R.B., 2006, Assessment of the Liquefaction Susceptibility of FineGrained Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, September 2006, V. 132, No. 9, pp. 1165- 1177.

Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps, Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, 2007 Interim Revision.

California Building Standards Commission, 2019, 2019 California Building Code (CBC), California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on 2018 International Building Code, Effective January 1, 2020.

California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM), 2021, Interactive Wellfinder Website,
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/
California Geological Survey (CGS; formerly California Division of Mines and Geology, CDMG), 2000a, Seismic Hazards Zones, Ontario Quadrangle, Official Map Released November 17, 2000.
, 2000b, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Ontario 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report No. 040. _____, 2000c, CD-ROM containing digital images of Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones that affect the Southern Region, DMG CD 2000-003 2000. , 2008, Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California.
, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners / Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 2018. 3332
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Ontario, CA 13493.001

Page 39 ends

San Bernardino County, 2010, Land Use Services, General Plan, Geologic Hazard Overlays, map FH27 C – Ontario, scale 1:14,400, dated march 9, 2010. , 2013, Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans, Prepared by CDM Smith, Inc. for the County of San Bernardino Areawide Stormwater Program, dated June 7, 2013.

Dibblee, T.W. Jr., 2002, Geologic Map of the San Dimas and Ontario Quadrangles, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation Map No. DF-91.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2015, Flood Insurance Rate Map, City of Ontario, Map Number 06071C8620H, dated August 8, 2008.

Jennings, C.W., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6, map scale 1:750,000.

Morton D.M., and Miller, F.K., 2006, Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana, 30’ x 60’ Quadrangles, California, USGS Open File Report 2006-1217.

Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR), 2021, Historic Aerials by NETR Online, website: http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.

United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2018, Ontario Quadrangle, California, 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, map scale 1:24,000.
, 2008a, Unified Hazard Tool for Deaggregations,
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/
, 2008b, National Seismic Hazard Maps – Fault Parameters, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/hazfaults_2008_search/query_main.cfm , 2021a, Interactive Fault Map, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/map/ , 2021b, Interactive Geologic Map, http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/MapView/ Wildermuth Environmental, Inc., 2009, Chino Basin Optimum Basin Management Program, 2008 State of the Basin Report, Final Report, Prepared for Chino Basin Watermaster, dated November, 2009.

3333

FIGURES
3334
³ 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
Scale:1 " = 2,000 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F01_SLM_2022-04-19.mxd on 4/14/2022 2:00:06 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: May 2022

SITE LOCATION MAP
Proposed Euclid and
Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
Approximate
Site Boundary
FIGURE 1
Reference: © 2022 Microsoft Corporation ©
2022 Maxar ©CNES (2022) Distribution Airbus
3335
&<
&<
&<
&<
&< &(
!(#
!(#
!(#
!(#
/3
7'

$IX

4\I#

3HUF7HVW
,QWHUYDO

&37
7'

&377'
&37$
7'

/%7'
$IX
4\I#

/%7'

/3/%7'
$IX
4\I#
3HUF7HVW,QWHUYDO

Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F02_GM_2022-04-20.mxd on 4/19/2022 11:14:24 AM Author: KVM (btran)

GEOTECHNICAL MAP
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
³
0 100 200
Feet
Scale:

Base Map: Option A Site Plan, Euclid and Walnut Mixed UseSheet 01, Dated: 03/10/2022by AO Architecture Design Relationships 1 " = 100 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Date: May 2022
),*85(
/%
/3
&37
/(*(1'
&<
Approximate location of hollow-stem auger boringshowing total depth (T.D.) and depth to earth unitsin feet below ground surface. &(
Approximate location of percolation test wellshowing percolation test interval in feetbelow ground surface. !(# Approximate location of cone penetrometer test sounding showing total depth (T.D.) in feet below ground surface Approximate Site Boundary
Artificial Fill
Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits
$IX
4\I

W A L N U T S T R E E T

EUCLID AVENUE
3336
?zE
?¼E
Qyf3
Qyf
Scale:

Basemap: USGS Topo Map Service from Esri, 2021
Reference: USGS Geologic Map of the Sotuthern
California GIS Compilation by CGS, Lancaster, et al., 2012 1 " = 2,000 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F03_RGM_2022-04-19.mxd on 4/14/2022 2:02:07 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: May 2022

REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP
Approximate
Site Location
LEGEND
Qyf, Young Alluvial Fan Deposits
Proposed Euclid and
Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
FIGURE 3
³ 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
3337
³ 0 510
Miles
Scale:

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2022
Reference: maps.conservation.ca.gov
1 " = 5 miles
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F04_RFHSM_2022-04-19.mxd on 4/14/2022 2:03:52 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: May 2022

REGIONAL FAULTS AND

HISTORIC SEISMICITY MAP
Proposed Euclid and Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
Approximate
Site Location
LEGEND
Fault activity
Recency of Movement
Historic (<200 years)
Holocene (<11,700 years)
Late Quaternary (last 700,000 years)
Quaternary (<1.6M years)
Historical Earthquakes (≥M3.5)
! 3.5 - 3.99
! 4.0 - 4.99
! 5.0 - 5.99
! 6.0 - 6.99
FIGURE 4
3338
Scale:

Base Map: San Bernardino County Land Use Plan
General Plan, Geologic Hazard Overlays, FH27 C Ontario
1 " = 5,000 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F05_SHM_2022-04-20.mxd on 4/20/2022 1:12:49 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: May 2022

SEISMIC HAZARD MAP
Proposed Euclid and
Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
Approximate
Site Location
FIGURE 5
³ 0 5,000 10,000
Feet
3339
?zE
³ 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
Scale:

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2022
Reference: FEMA, DWR
1 " = 2,000 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F06_FHM_2022-04-19.mxd on 4/14/2022 2:10:26 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: May 2022

FLOOD HAZARD ZONE MAP
Approximate
Site Location
LEGEND
100-Year Floodplains
500-Year Floodplains
Proposed Euclid and
Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
FIGURE 6
3340
!"`$
?zE
³ 0 4,000 8,000
Feet
Scale:

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2022
Reference: FEMA, DWR
1 " = 4,000 '
Project: 13493.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/EMH
Map Saved as J:\Drafting\13493\001\Maps\13493-001_F07_DIM_2022-04-19.mxd on 4/14/2022 2:17:09 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date:May 2022

DAM INUNDATION MAP
Approximate
Site Location
LEGEND
San Antonio 1986 Revision
Proposed Euclid and
Walnut Mixed-Use Development
2502 and 2530 S. Euclid Avenue
Ontario, California
FIGURE 7
3341

RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL

WITH PROPER

SURFACE DRAINAGE
SLOPE

OR LEVEL
CLASS 2 PERMEABLE

WEEP HOLE

WATERPROOFING
(SEE GENERAL NOTES)

LEVEL OR
SLOPE
12"

FILTER MATERIAL
NATIVE
¼ TO 1½ INCH SIZE GRAVEL

WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC

LEVEL OR
SLOPE

WEEP HOLE
SLOPE

OR LEVEL
12"

WITH PROPER

SURFACE DRAINAGE
4 INCH DIAMETER

PERFORATED PIPE
(SEE NOTE 3)

FILTER FABRIC
OPTION 1: PIPE SURROUNDED WITH
CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED

IN FILTER FABRIC
SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 Sieve Size
1"
3/4"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 30
No. 50
No. 200
Percent Passing
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
0-7
0-3
Class 2 Filter Permeable Material Gradation
Per Caltrans Specifications
(SEE NOTE 5)
12" MINIMUM
(SEE GRADATION)

WATERPROOFING
(SEE GENERAL NOTES)
(SEE NOTE 4)
12" MINIMUM
NATIVE
FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT
(SEE NOTE 5)
WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50
GENERAL NOTES:
* Waterproofing should be provided where moisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirable. * Water proofing of the walls is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer * All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum *Outlet portion of the subdrain should have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project engineer. The subdrain pipe should be accessible for maintenance (rodding) *Other subdrain backfill options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters.

Notes:
1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and may be densified by water jetting. 2) 1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric 3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 inch in diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-inch on center (staggered) 4) Filter fabric should be Mirafi 140NC or approved equivalent. 5) Weephole should be 3-inch minimum diameter and provided at 10-foot maximum intervals. If exposure is permitted, weepholes should be located 12 inches above finished grade. If exposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided.
6) Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. 7) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifications to the above requirements.

V:\DRAFTING\TEMPLATES\STANDARD-FIGURES\ALL-STANDARD-FIGURES.DWG (08-02-21 9:07:35AM) Plotted by: btran FIGURE 8
3342

APPENDIX A

EXPLORATION LOGS
3343
ML-SM
ML/CL
ML-SM
CL-ML
SC
SP
@Surface: 2.5 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 4.5 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.58': Sandy SILT, olive brown, moist, low plasticity, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous; grades to Silty SAND, medium brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, slightly
micaceous @ ~4'
<Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Silty CLAY, stiff, olive brown, moist, low plasticity, iron oxidation staining, slightly micaceous, few fine sand
PP=2.50 TSF )>>
@7.5': Sandy SILT, very stiff, medium olive brown, moist, very fine sand, low plasticity, slightly micaceous, slightly laminated; grades to Clayey SILT with sand, grayish brown, moist, low plasticity, iron oxidation staining, slightly micaceous, few fine sand
@10': Silty CLAY, very stiff, gray, moist, low to medium plasticity, iron oxidation staining/veins, few fine sand, trace subrounded gravel, slightly laminated
PP>4.5 TSF
@15': Silty CLAY, stiff, medium brown, moist, medium plasticity, iron oxidation staining, slightly micaceous; grades to Sandy CLAY, medium brown, moist, medium plasticity, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous, iron oxidation staining
PP=4.25 TSF
@20': Clayey SAND, medium dense, mottled medium brown to orange, low plasticity, predominately fine sand, little medium sand, slightly micaceous, slightly laminated, trace fine subrounded gravel
PP>4.50 TSF
@25': SAND with Silt, medium dense, yellowish brown, slightly moist, predominately fine sand, poorly-graded, little medium sand, slightly micaceous
95 89
112
120
9 31
16 12
B-1
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
R-6
EI, RV
CN
CO
4 7
9 7
11 13
4 9
15 4
8 12
8 18
22 12
16 27
805'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 2 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

Content, %
Logged By
Date Drilled
805
800
795
790
785
780
775
* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * BTM Feet
S (U.S.C.S.)
Log
Type of Tests
Graphic
pcf
Location See Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
Drilling Method
8" Feet
Hole Diameter Moisture Dry Density
N
This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1
3344
@30': SAND with gravel, medium dense, orange brown, slightly moist, fine to coarse sand, few fine subrounded gravel, slightly micaceous
@35': SAND with Silt, Very dense, yellowish brown,
predominately fine sand, little medium to coarse sand, poorly graded, few fine subangular to subrounded gravel
@40': SAND, dense, medium brown, slightly moist,
predominately fine sand, little medium to coarse sand, trace to few fine subangular to subrounded gravel, slightly
micaceous
@45': Very dense, medium brown to orange brown, few fine subrounded gravel
@50': Very dense, little subrounded granitic gravel
Total Depth: 51.5' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Backfilled with soil cuttings
Patched with cold-mix asphalt concrete
115
4 4
2 3
S-7
R-8
S-9
R-10
S-11
CO
9 12
14 11
24 50/4"
8 12
19 47
50/3"
35 39
50/4"
805'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 2 of 2 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

Content, %
Logged By
Date Drilled
775
770
765
760
755
750
745
* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * BTM Feet
S (U.S.C.S.)
Log
Type of Tests
Graphic
pcf
Location See Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
Drilling Method
8" Feet
Hole Diameter Moisture Dry Density
N
This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1
3345
ML-SM
ML-SM
SP
CL/SM
SP-ML
ML-SM
CL-SC
SP
@Surface: 4 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 5 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.75': Sandy SILT, olive brown, moist, low plasticity, very fine sand, slightly micaceous, some debris (asphalt)
<Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Clayey SAND, medium dense, olive gray, very moist, low plasticity, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous, pinhole pores; grades to Silty SAND with gravel, light to medium brown, predominately fine sand, few medium sand, fine
subangular granitic gravel )>>
@7.5': SAND, medium dense, grayish brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous, little iron oxidation staining @10': CLAY, stiff, olive gray, moist, lean, low plasticity, extensive iron oxidation staining, few very fine sand, slightly micaceous; grades to Silty SAND, light orange brown, very fine sand, slightly micaceous
@15': SAND with silt, medium dense, light gray, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, micaceous; interbedded with Clayey SILT, medium brown, moist, low plasticity, laminated, iron oxidation staining
@20': Sandy SILT, very stiff, medium brown, moist, low
plasticity, very fine sand, micaceous; grades to Sandy CLAY, medium brown, moist, low plasticity, very fine to fine sand, trace subrounded gravel
PP = 3.50
@25': Sandy CLAY, very stiff, medium brown, moist, low
plasticity, very fine to fine sand, micaceous, some silt PP > 4.50 TSF
@26': SAND with silt, orange brown, dry to slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, few medium sand, slightly micaceous
Total Depth: 26.5' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Backfilled with soil cuttings
101
103
112
108
3 4
16 10
B-1
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
R-6

DS, MD,
SE
CN
CN, AL
3 8
16 6
11 11
4 8
12 10
10 11
7 11
17 10
15 24
807'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 2 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

Content, %
Logged By
Date Drilled
805
800
795
790
785
780
* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * BTM Feet
S (U.S.C.S.)
Log
Type of Tests
Graphic
pcf
Location See Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
Drilling Method
8" Feet
Hole Diameter Moisture Dry Density
N
This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2
3346
Patched with cold-mix asphalt concrete
807'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 2 of 2 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

Content, %
Logged By
Date Drilled
775
770
765
760
755
750
* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * BTM Feet
S (U.S.C.S.)
Log
Type of Tests
Graphic
pcf
Location See Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
Drilling Method
8" Feet
Hole Diameter Moisture Dry Density
N
This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2
3347
SM
SM
CL-SC
CL
SC
@Surface: 3.5 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 12 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@1.3': Silty SAND, olive brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, few medium sand, trace coarse sand, non-plastic, few debris (asphalt)
<Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Silty SAND, medium dense, medium brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, slightly laminated, slightly micaceous )>> @7.5': Silty SAND, medium dense, olive, slightly moist, fine sand, low plasticity, iron oxidation staining, carbonate veins; grades to SAND, yellowish brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand
@10': Silty CLAY, very stiff, grayish brown, slightly moist, low to medium plasticity, trace very fine sand, iron oxidation staining PP > 4.50 TSF
@15': Very stiff, slightly laminated
PP = 4.25 TSF
@20': Clayey SAND, medium dense, orange brown, slightly moist, low plasticity, fine sand, trace medium to coarse sand, slightly laminated, iron oxidation staining
PP = 4.50 TSF
@25': Medium dense, higher sand content, pinhole pores
PP > 4.50 TSF
Total Depth: 26.5' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Backfilled with soil cuttings
Patched with cold-mix asphalt concrete
111
90 87
122
114
8 26
35 12
14 B-1
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
R-6
CR, MD
DS
7 9
11 7
12 15
10 16
26 5
9 17
12 16
27 7
10 17
808'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 1 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3
3348
SM
SM-ML
ML-SM
CL-ML
SC
@Surface: 5 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 3 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.67': Silty SAND, olive brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, few medium sand, trace coarse sand, trace debris
(asphalt)
<Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Silty SAND, medium dense, medium brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, trace coarse sand, nonplastic, slightly micaceous; grades to Sandy SILT, yellowish brown, slightly moist, very fine sand, no to low plasticity, slightly
micaceous )>>
@7.5': Sandy SILT, very stiff, grayish brown, slightly moist, very fine sand, low plasticity, iron oxidation staining; grades to Sandy SILT, yellowish brown
@10': Silty CLAY, very stiff, grayish brown to tan, moist, low plasticity, slightly laminated, trace very fine sand; grades to SAND, tan to yellowish brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous
@15': Silty CLAY, very stiff, grayish brown, moist, low to medium plasticity, iron oxidation staining, some very fine to fine sand, slightly laminated
@20': Very stiff, few to little very fine to fine sand, slightly laminated
@25': Clayey SAND, dense, olive brown, moist, predominately fine sand, trace to few medium to coarse sand, low plasticity, slightly micaceous; grades to orange, iron oxidation stained Clayey SAND, slightly laminated
Total Depth: 26.5' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Backfilled with soil cuttings
Patched with cold-mix asphalt concrete
B-1
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
R-6
SE
5 7
9 9
16 16
6 11
16 5
10 21
6 9
19 10
18 28
807'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 1 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5
3349
ML-SM
SM-ML
ML-CL
SP
SM
ML-SM
@Surface: 3 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 7 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.83': Sandy SILT, olive brown, moist, low plasticity, very fine sand, slightly micaceous; grades to Silty SAND, medium
brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, trace medium sand, slightly micaceous @ ~4'
Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Silty SAND, very loose, medium brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous, nonplastic
@10': Clayey Sandy SILT, medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, very fine sand, slightly micaceous; grades to Silty CLAY with sand, gray, moist, low to medium plasticity, very fine sand, micaceous, extensive iron oxidation staining
@15': Silty SAND, medium dense, grayish brown, slightly moist, prodominately fine sand, some clay, trace medium to coarse sand, trace fine subrounded gravel, slightly micaceous
@18.5': Sandy SILT, very stiff, olive brown, slightly moist, low plasticity, very fine to fine sand, iron oxidation staining, slightly micaceous
PP > 4.50 TSF
@23.5': Sandy CLAY, stiff to medium dense, orange mottled with brown, low plasticity, very fine to fine sand, slightly micaceous
Total Depth: 25' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Temporary percolation well installed; screened from 17 - 22' bgs Upon completion of percolation testing, boring was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with cold-mix asphalt
104
119
5 12
B-1
S-1
S-2
R-3
R-4
S-5
, SA
, SA
SA
2 2
2 2
3 4
6 9
11 8
13 21
5 6
7 805'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 1 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LP-1
3350
SM-ML
SM
ML/CL
SM
@Surface: 3.5 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 4 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.62': Silty SAND to Sandy SILT, olive brown, slightly moist, very fine to fine sand, low to no plasticity, slightly micaceous <Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Deposits (Qyf)
@5': Silty SAND, very loose, medium to dark brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, trace coarse sand to fine subrounded gravel )>>
@10': Sandy SILT, medium stiff, mottled with gray and light brown, slightly moist, low plasticity, very fine sand, slightly micaceous; grades to Silty CLAY, grayish brown, moist, low to medium plasticity, iron oxidation staining, laminated @15': Silty CLAY, stiff, olive brown, moist, low plasticity, very fine sand, slightly micaceous, laminated, iron oxidation staining
@18.5': Silty SAND, medium dense, olive brown, moist, very fine to fine sand, low to no plasticity, little iron oxidation staining, trace pinhole pores
Total Depth: 20' bgs
No groundwater encountered during drilling
Temporary percolation well installed; screened from 15 - 20' bgs Upon completion of percolation testing, boring was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with cold-mix asphalt
91 115
25 7
B-1
S-1
S-2
R-3
R-4
, SA
, SA
4 2
2 2
2 3
4 6
9 12
16 26
804'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
4-6-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 1 ends

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling, Corp.

Content, %
Logged By
Date Drilled
800
795
790
785
780
775
* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * BTM Feet
S (U.S.C.S.)
Log
Type of Tests
Graphic
pcf
Location See Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
Drilling Method
8" Feet
Hole Diameter Moisture Dry Density
N
This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:
-200
AL
CN
CO
CR
CU
% FINES PASSING

ATTERBERG LIMITS

CONSOLIDATION

COLLAPSE

CORROSION

UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL
DS
EI
H
MD
PP
RV

DIRECT SHEAR

EXPANSION INDEX

HYDROMETER

MAXIMUM DENSITY

POCKET PENETROMETER

R VALUE
SA
SE
SG
UC
Sample No. Bulk Driven

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SAND EQUIVALENT

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LP-2
3351

SUMMARY
OF

CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA
Prepared by:

KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING
5415 Industrial Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1518
Office (714) 901-7270 / Fax (714) 901-7289
www.kehoetesting.com
Project:

Legacy-Ontario
2530 W. Walnut Street
Ontario, CA
April 7, 2022
Prepared for:

Mr. Eric Holliday
Leighton & Associates
17781 Cowan
Irvine, CA 92614-6009
Office (800) 253-4567 / Fax (949) 250-1114
3352

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK

3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES

4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION

APPENDIX
• CPT Plots
• CPT Classification/Soil Behavior Chart
• Summary of Shear Wave Velocities
• CPT Data Files (sent via email)
3353

SUMMARY
OF

CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA

1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a Cone Penetration Test (CPT) program carried out for the Legacy-Ontario project located at 2530 W. Walnut Street in Ontario, California. The work was performed by Kehoe Testing & Engineering (KTE) on April 7, 2022. The scope of work was performed as directed by Leighton & Associates personnel.

2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK
The fieldwork consisted of performing CPT soundings at five locations to determine the soil lithology. A summary is provided in TABLE 2.1.

LOCATION

DEPTH OF
CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES:

CPT-1 50
CPT-2 50
CPT-3 35 Refusal
CPT-3A 50
LB-4 50
TABLE 2.1 - Summary of CPT Soundings

3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES
The CPT soundings were carried out by KTE using an integrated electronic cone system manufactured by Vertek. The CPT soundings were performed in accordance with ASTM standards (D5778). The cone penetrometers were pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig. The cone used during the program was a 15 cm^2 cone with a cone net area ratio of 0.83. The following parameters were recorded at approximately 2.5 cm depth intervals:
• Cone Resistance (qc) • Inclination
• Sleeve Friction (fs) • Penetration Speed
• Dynamic Pore Pressure (u)
3354
At location CPT-1, shear wave measurements were obtained at approximately 5-foot intervals.

The shear wave is generated using an air-actuated hammer, which is located inside the front jack of the CPT rig. The cone has a triaxial geophone, which recorded the shear wave signal generated by the air hammer.

The above parameters were recorded and viewed in real time using a laptop computer. Data is stored at the KTE office for up to 2 years for future analysis and reference. A complete set of baseline readings was taken prior to each sounding to determine temperature shifts and any zero load offsets. Monitoring base line readings ensures that the cone electronics are operating properly.

4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION
The Cone Penetration Test data is presented in graphical form in the attached Appendix. These plots were generated using the CPeT-IT program. Penetration depths are referenced to ground surface. The soil behavior type on the CPT plots is derived from the attached CPT SBT plot (Robertson, “Interpretation of Cone Penetration Test…”, 2009) and presents major soil lithologic changes. The stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone resistance (qc), sleeve friction (fs), and penetration pore pressure (u). The friction ratio (Rf), which is sleeve friction divided by cone resistance, is a calculated parameter that is used along with cone resistance to infer soil behavior type. Generally, cohesive soils (clays) have high friction ratios, low cone resistance and generate excess pore water pressures. Cohesionless soils (sands) have lower friction ratios, high cone bearing and generate little (or negative) excess pore water pressures.

The CPT data files have also been provided. These files can be imported in CPeT-IT (software by GeoLogismiki) and other programs to calculate various geotechnical parameters.

It should be noted that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based on qc, fs and u. In these situations, experience, judgement and an assessment of the pore pressure data should be used to infer the soil behavior type.

If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to call our office at (714) 901-7270.

Sincerely,

KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING
Steven P. Kehoe
President
04/14/22-kd-4039
3355

APPENDIX
3356
Project: Leighton & Associates / Legacy
Kehoe Testing and Engineering
714-901-7270
[email protected]
www.kehoetesting.com
2530 W. Walnut St, Ontario, CA Total depth: 50.40 ft, Date: 4/7/2022 CPT-1
Location:

Cone resistance
Tip resistance (tsf)
1 0 00 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 00
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction
Friction (tsf)
86420 1 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-2 0 -1 0 0 10 2 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio
Rf (%)
876543210
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
1 61 41 21 086420 1 8
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay
Clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Sand
Sand & silty sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/8/2022, 11:45:56 AM 1 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\Leighton-Ontario4-22\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 3357
Project: Leighton & Associates / Legacy
Kehoe Testing and Engineering
714-901-7270
[email protected]
www.kehoetesting.com
2530 W. Walnut St, Ontario, CA Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 4/7/2022 CPT-2
Location:

Cone resistance
Tip resistance (tsf)
1 0 00 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 00
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction
Friction (tsf)
86420 1 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-2 0 -1 0 0 10 2 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio
Rf (%)
876543210
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
1 61 41 21 086420 1 8
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Very dense/stiff soil
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Sand & silty sand
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Silty sand & sandy silt
CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/8/2022, 11:45:57 AM 2 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\Leighton-Ontario4-22\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 3358
Project: Leighton & Associates / Legacy
Kehoe Testing and Engineering
714-901-7270
[email protected]
www.kehoetesting.com
2530 W. Walnut St, Ontario, CA Total depth: 35.84 ft, Date: 4/7/2022 CPT-3
Location:

Cone resistance
Tip resistance (tsf)
1 0 00 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 00
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction
Friction (tsf)
86420 1 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-2 0 -1 0 0 10 2 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio
Rf (%)
876543210
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
1 61 41 21 086420 1 8
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay
Clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Sand & silty sand
CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/8/2022, 11:45:57 AM 3 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\Leighton-Ontario4-22\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 3359
Project: Leighton & Associates / Legacy
Kehoe Testing and Engineering
714-901-7270
[email protected]
www.kehoetesting.com
2530 W. Walnut St, Ontario, CA Total depth: 50.66 ft, Date: 4/7/2022 CPT-3A
Location:

Cone resistance
Tip resistance (tsf)
1 0 00 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 00
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction
Friction (tsf)
86420 1 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-2 0 -1 0 0 10 2 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio
Rf (%)
876543210
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
1 61 41 21 086420 1 8
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Soil Behaviour Type
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Very dense/stiff soil
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/8/2022, 11:45:58 AM 4 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\Leighton-Ontario4-22\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 3360
Project: Leighton & Associates / Legacy
Kehoe Testing and Engineering
714-901-7270
[email protected]
www.kehoetesting.com
2530 W. Walnut St, Ontario, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 4/7/2022 LB-4
Location:

Cone resistance
Tip resistance (tsf)
1 0 00 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 00
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction
Friction (tsf)
86420 1 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u
Pressure (psi)
-2 0 -1 0 0 10 2 0
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio
Rf (%)
876543210
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type
SBT (Robertson, 2010)
1 61 41 21 086420 1 8
Depth (ft)
5 0
48 4 6
4 4
4 2
4 0
3 8
3 6
3 4
3 2
3 0
2 8
2 6
2 4
2 2
2 0
1 8
1 6
1 4
1 2
1 0
8 6
4 2
0 Soil Behaviour Type
Sand
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Clay & silty clay
Sand & silty sand
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Clay & silty clay
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
Sand & silty sand
Silty sand & sandy silt
Silty sand & sandy silt
CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/8/2022, 11:45:58 AM 5 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\Leighton-Ontario4-22\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 3361
3362
Leighton & Associates
Legacy
Ontario, 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-1 5.09 4.09 4.55 4.80 949

10.14 9.14 9.36 10.26 912 880

15.03 14.03 14.17 16.16 877 816

20.01 19.01 19.11 21.42 892 940

25.10 24.10 24.18 26.42 915 1014

30.05 29.05 29.12 31.16 934 1041

35.07 34.07 34.13 36.20 943 994

40.03 39.03 39.08 40.12 974 1263

45.14 44.14 44.19 44.64 990 1129

50.03 49.03 49.07 48.80 1006 1174
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) 3363

APPENDIX B

PERCOLATION TEST DATA
3364
Project Number: 13493.001 Test Hole Number: LP-1
Project Name: Legacy - Collier Date Excavated:

Earth Description: Alluvium Date Tested:

Liquid Description: Tap water Depth of boring (ft): 23.5 Tested By: LFO/KD Radius of boring (in): 4
Time Interval Standard Radius of casing (in): 1
Start Time for Pre-Soak: 8:34 Length of slotted of casing (ft): 5 Start Time for Standard: 9:31 Depth to Initial Water Depth (ft): 16.9 25 Porosity of Annulus Material, n : 0.35
10 Bentonite Plug at Bottom: No
Reading Time Time Interval,
Δt (min.)
Initial/Final
Depth to
Water (ft.)
Initial/Final
Water Height,
H0/Hf
(in.)
Total Water
Drop, Δd (in.)
Percolation
Rate (min./in.)
Infiltration
Rate (in./hr.)
8:34 16.93 78.8
8:59 17.61 70.7
9:04 16.99 78.1
9:29 17.61 70.7
9:31 16.94 78.7
9:41 17.43 72.8
9:43 17.00 78.0
9:53 17.42 73.0
9:55 17.00 78.0
10:05 17.44 72.7
10:06 17.00 78.0
10:16 17.44 72.7
10:18 17.00 78.0
10:28 17.45 72.6
10:30 17.00 78.0
10:40 17.44 72.7
Infiltration Rate, I (Last Reading) = 0.32 in./hr.

Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet
4/6/2022
4/7/2022
Standard Time Interval
Between Readings, mins:

Percolation Data
1 25 8.2 3.06 0.20
2 25 7.4 3.36 0.18
3 10 5.9 1.70 0.35
4 10 5.0 1.98 0.30
5 10 5.3 1.89 0.32
6 10 5.3 1.89 0.32
7 10 5.4 1.85 0.33
8 10 5.3 1.89 0.32
Infiltration Rate (I) = Discharge Volume/Surface Area of Test Section/Time Interval 3365
Project Number: 13493.001 Test Hole Number: LP-2
Project Name: Legacy - Collier Date Excavated:

Earth Description: Alluvium Date Tested:

Liquid Description: Tap water Depth of boring (ft): 20
Tested By: LFO/KD Radius of boring (in): 4
Time Interval Standard Radius of casing (in): 1
Start Time for Pre-Soak: 7:25 Length of slotted of casing (ft): 5 Start Time for Standard: 8:27 Depth to Initial Water Depth (ft): 15.05 25 Porosity of Annulus Material, n : 0.35
10 Bentonite Plug at Bottom: No
Reading Time Time Interval,
Δt (min.)
Initial/Final
Depth to
Water (ft.)
Initial/Final
Water Height,
H0/Hf
(in.)
Total Water
Drop, Δd (in.)
Percolation
Rate (min./in.)
Infiltration
Rate (in./hr.)
7:25 15.05 59.4
7:50 15.06 59.3
7:55 15.20 57.6
8:20 16.55 41.4
8:27 15.08 59.0
8:37 15.75 51.0
8:39 15.05 59.4
8:49 15.78 50.6
8:56 15.08 59.0
9:06 15.75 51.0
9:08 15.08 59.0
9:18 15.50 54.0
9:21 15.08 59.0
9:31 15.78 50.6
9:34 15.08 59.0
9:44 15.78 50.6
Infiltration Rate, I (Last Reading) = 0.69 in./hr.

Percolation Data
Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet
4/6/2022
4/7/2022
Standard Time Interval
Between Readings, mins:
1 25 0.1 208.33 0.00
2 25 16.2 1.54 0.59
3 10 8.0 1.24 0.66
5 10 8.0 1.24 0.66
4 10 8.8 1.14 0.72
6 10 5.0 1.98 0.40
7 10 8.4 1.19 0.69
Infiltration Rate (I) = Discharge Volume/Surface Area of Test Section/Time Interval 8 10 8.4 1.19 0.69
3366

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
3367
Project Name: Tested By: GB/JD Date: 04/13/22
Project No.: Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/26/22
Boring No.: Depth (ft.):

Sample No.: Sample Type:

Soil Identification:

Sample Diameter (in.): 2.415
Sample Thickness (in.): 1.000
Weight of Sample + ring (g): 185.47
Weight of Ring (g): 45.70
Height after consol. (in.): 0.9695
Before Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 169.15
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 153.14
Weight of Container (g): 65.19
Initial Moisture Content (%) 18.2
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 98.3
Initial Saturation (%): 68
Initial Vertical Reading (in.) 0.0773
After Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 254.24
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 229.01
Weight of Container (g): 59.14
Final Moisture Content (%) 20.32
Final Dry Density (pcf): 106.5
Final Saturation (%): 94
Final Vertical Reading (in.) 0.1103
Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.71
Water Density (pcf): 62.43

0.10 0.0777 0.9996 0.00 0.04 0.720 0.04

0.25 0.0812 0.9962 0.03 0.39 0.714 0.36

0.50 0.0834 0.9940 0.08 0.61 0.711 0.53

1.00 0.0869 0.9905 0.15 0.95 0.707 0.80

2.00 0.0905 0.9868 0.25 1.32 0.702 1.07

2.00 0.0917 0.9856 0.25 1.44 0.700 1.19

4.00 0.0982 0.9791 0.36 2.09 0.691 1.73

8.00 0.1092 0.9681 0.49 3.19 0.674 2.70

16.00 0.1274 0.9500 0.64 5.01 0.645 4.37

4.00 0.1222 0.9552 0.47 4.49 0.651 4.02

1.00 0.1172 0.9602 0.34 3.99 0.658 3.65

0.25 0.1103 0.9670 0.25 3.30 0.668 3.05

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
ASTM D 2435
13493.001
Deformation
% of Sample
Thickness Square
Root of
Time
Final
Reading
(in.)
Apparent
Thickness
(in.)
Load
Compliance
(%)
PROPERTIES of SOILS
Ring
Void
Ratio
Olive silty clay (CL-ML)
Time Readings
Elapsed
Time (min)

5.0 Pressure
(p)
(ksf) Dial Rdgs.
(in.) Date
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
LB-1
R-1
Time
Corrected
Deformation (%)

0.640

0.650

0.660

0.670

0.680

0.690

0.700

0.710

0.720

0.730

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.

Void Ratio
Pressure, p (ksf)
Inundate with
Tap water
Consol LB-1, R-1 @ 5
3368
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Soil Identification:

Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(ft.)
Moisture
Content (%)

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
PROPERTIES of SOILS
ASTM D 2435
LB-1 R-1 18.2 20.3 106.5
Olive silty clay (CL-ML)
Project No.:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
04-22
13493.001
Time Readings

98.3 0.668 68 94
Degree of
Saturation (%) Dry Density (pcf)

0.720
Void Ratio
5 0.0000

0.1000

0.2000

0.3000

0.4000

0.5000

0.6000

0.7000

0.8000

0.9000

1.0000

0.1 1.0
Deformation Dial Reading (in.)
Log of Time (min.)

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

3.00 3.50

4.00 4.50

5.00 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Deformation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)

0.0000

0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

0.0 10.0
Square Root of Time (min.1/2)
Inundate with
Tap water
3369
Project Name: Tested By: GB/JD Date: 04/13/22
Project No.: Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/26/22
Boring No.: Depth (ft.):

Sample No.: Sample Type:

Soil Identification:

Sample Diameter (in.): 2.415
Sample Thickness (in.): 1.000
Weight of Sample + ring (g): 199.47
Weight of Ring (g): 44.89
Height after consol. (in.): 0.9819
Before Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 189.19
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 178.43
Weight of Container (g): 59.52
Initial Moisture Content (%) 9.0
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 117.9
Initial Saturation (%): 56
Initial Vertical Reading (in.) 0.0958
After Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 269.21
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 253.05
Weight of Container (g): 66.12
Final Moisture Content (%) 11.38
Final Dry Density (pcf): 120.3
Final Saturation (%): 76
Final Vertical Reading (in.) 0.1178
Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.71
Water Density (pcf): 62.43

0.10 0.0960 0.9998 0.00 0.02 0.435 0.02

0.25 0.0974 0.9984 0.06 0.16 0.434 0.10

0.50 0.0988 0.9970 0.14 0.30 0.433 0.16

1.00 0.1015 0.9943 0.24 0.57 0.430 0.33

2.00 0.1043 0.9916 0.36 0.84 0.428 0.48

2.00 0.1051 0.9907 0.36 0.93 0.427 0.57

4.00 0.1102 0.9856 0.50 1.44 0.422 0.94

8.00 0.1170 0.9788 0.66 2.12 0.414 1.46

16.00 0.1275 0.9684 0.86 3.17 0.402 2.31

4.00 0.1240 0.9718 0.67 2.82 0.404 2.15

1.00 0.1210 0.9748 0.51 2.52 0.406 2.01

0.25 0.1178 0.9780 0.39 2.20 0.409 1.81

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
ASTM D 2435
13493.001
Deformation
% of Sample
Thickness Square
Root of
Time
Final
Reading
(in.)
Apparent
Thickness
(in.)
Load
Compliance
(%)
PROPERTIES of SOILS
Ring
Void
Ratio
Olive gray silty, clayey sand (SC-SM)
Time Readings
Elapsed
Time (min)

5.0 Pressure
(p)
(ksf) Dial Rdgs.
(in.) Date
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
LB-2
R-1
Time
Corrected
Deformation (%)

0.400

0.405

0.410

0.415

0.420

0.425

0.430

0.435

0.440

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.

Void Ratio
Pressure, p (ksf)
Inundate with
Tap water
Consol LB-2, R-1 @ 5
3370
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Soil Identification:

Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(ft.)
Moisture
Content (%)

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
PROPERTIES of SOILS
ASTM D 2435
LB-2 R-1 9.0 11.4 120.3
Olive gray silty, clayey sand (SC-SM)
Project No.:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
04-22
13493.001
Time Readings
117.9 0.409 56 76
Degree of
Saturation (%) Dry Density (pcf)

0.435
Void Ratio
5 0.0000

0.1000

0.2000

0.3000

0.4000

0.5000

0.6000

0.7000

0.8000

0.9000

1.0000

0.1 1.0
Deformation Dial Reading (in.)
Log of Time (min.)

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Deformation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)

0.0000

0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

0.0 10.0
Square Root of Time (min.1/2)
Inundate with
Tap water
3371
Project Name: Tested By: GB/JD Date: 04/13/22
Project No.: Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/26/22
Boring No.: Depth (ft.):

Sample No.: Sample Type:

Soil Identification:

Sample Diameter (in.): 2.415
Sample Thickness (in.): 1.000
Weight of Sample + ring (g): 193.07
Weight of Ring (g): 45.55
Height after consol. (in.): 0.9656
Before Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 263.34
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 214.46
Weight of Container (g): 55.13
Initial Moisture Content (%) 30.7
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 93.9
Initial Saturation (%): 100
Initial Vertical Reading (in.) 0.0902
After Test
Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): 253.11
Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 222.45
Weight of Container (g): 61.21
Final Moisture Content (%) 26.50
Final Dry Density (pcf): 99.6
Final Saturation (%): 99
Final Vertical Reading (in.) 0.1293
Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.79
Water Density (pcf): 62.43

0.10 0.0911 0.9991 0.00 0.09 0.854 0.09

0.25 0.0978 0.9924 0.11 0.76 0.843 0.65

0.50 0.1021 0.9882 0.25 1.19 0.838 0.94

1.00 0.1082 0.9820 0.43 1.80 0.830 1.37

2.00 0.1140 0.9762 0.58 2.38 0.822 1.80

2.00 0.1130 0.9773 0.58 2.28 0.824 1.70

4.00 0.1196 0.9706 0.72 2.94 0.814 2.22

8.00 0.1355 0.9547 0.88 4.53 0.788 3.65

16.00 0.1602 0.9301 1.07 7.00 0.745 5.93

4.00 0.1523 0.9379 0.89 6.21 0.757 5.32

1.00 0.1409 0.9493 0.72 5.07 0.775 4.35

0.25 0.1293 0.9609 0.47 3.91 0.791 3.44

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
ASTM D 2435
13493.001
Deformation
% of Sample
Thickness Square
Root of
Time
Final
Reading
(in.)
Apparent
Thickness
(in.)
Load
Compliance
(%)
PROPERTIES of SOILS
Ring
Void
Ratio
Olive gray lean clay (CL)
Time Readings
Elapsed
Time (min)

10.0 Pressure
(p)
(ksf) Dial Rdgs.
(in.) Date
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
LB-2
R-3
Time
Corrected
Deformation (%)

0.720

0.740

0.760

0.780

0.800

0.820

0.840

0.860

0.880

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.

Void Ratio
Pressure, p (ksf)
Inundate with
Tap water
Consol LB-2, R-3 @ 10
3372
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Soil Identification:

Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(ft.)
Moisture
Content (%)

ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION
PROPERTIES of SOILS
ASTM D 2435
LB-2 R-3 30.7 26.5 99.6
Olive gray lean clay (CL)
Project No.:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
04-22
13493.001
Time Readings

93.9 0.791 100 99
Degree of
Saturation (%) Dry Density (pcf)

0.855
Void Ratio
10 0.0000

0.1000

0.2000

0.3000

0.4000

0.5000

0.6000

0.7000

0.8000

0.9000

1.0000

0.1 1.0
Deformation Dial Reading (in.)
Log of Time (min.)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 5.00

6.00 7.00

0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Deformation (%)
Pressure, p (ksf)

0.0000

0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

0.0 10.0
Square Root of Time (min.1/2)
Inundate with
Tap water
3373
Project Name: Tested By : G. Berdy Date: 04/13/22
Project No. : 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No. LB-3
Sample No. B-1
Sample Depth (ft) 0-5
168.20
168.07

52.00 0.11
100.19
8 3
860
7:15/8:00
45 24.5192

24.5129

0.0063
259.25
260
ml of Extract For Titration (B) 15
ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.4
PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 40
PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 40

7.92 20.3
TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT
CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS
SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II
pH TEST, DOT California Test 643
Furnace Temperature (°C)
Weight of Container (g)
Crucible No.

Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g)
Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g)
Olive brown
(SM)
Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g)
Temperature °C
pH Value
Duration of Combustion (min)
Soil Identification:

Time In / Time Out
Wt. of Residue (g) (A)
CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422
Wt. of Crucible (g)
PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis
PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150
Moisture Content (%)
Beaker No.

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
Weight of Soaked Soil (g)
3374
Project Name: Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario C Tested By : Date:

Project No. : Checked By: A. Santos Date:

Boring No.: Depth (ft.) :

Sample No. :

Soil Identification:*
*California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials.

23.14 1500 Wt. of Container (g)

0.11 168.20
Moisture Content (%) (MCi)
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Specimen
No.
1 2
Water
Added (ml)
(Wa)
30 Adjusted
Moisture
Content
(MC) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)
1500

1.000
Chloride Content
(ohm-cm)

46.18 Moisture Content Sulfate Content
5 Min. Resistivity
DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test 643 (%) (ppm) (ppm)
DOT CA Test 643
4 40
50 60
3 38.50 1350 130.40
1350
1335 34.4 260 40 7.92 20.3

SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST
DOT CA TEST 643
pH Temp. (°C)
Soil pH
1350
1350
168.07

52.00 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100
04/19/22
04/25/22
0-5
13493.001
LB-3
G. Berdy
B-1
Container No.

Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt)
1450 1450 Box Constant
Olive brown (SM)
Resistance
Reading
(ohm)

30.82 Soil
Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0
Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm)
Moisture Content (%)
3375
Project Name: Tested By: G. Bathala Date: 04/18/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: Sample Type: 90% Remold
Sample No.: Depth (ft.): 0-5
Soil Identification:

2.415 2.415 2.415

1.000 1.000 1.000
197.98 198.21 198.62

45.38 45.43 45.60
Before Shearing
169.35 169.35 169.35
155.92 155.92 155.92

56.15 56.15 56.15

0.2545 0.2729 0.0000

0.2651 0.2858 -0.0224
After Shearing
211.09 212.06 191.55
190.82 191.76 171.67

58.12 58.19 38.35

2.70 2.70 2.70

62.43 62.43 62.43
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
LB-2
Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
Sample Diameter(in):

Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):

Vertical Rdg.(in): Final
Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial
Sample Thickness(in.):

Weight of Sample + ring(gm):

B-1

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080
Water Density(pcf):

Specific Gravity (Assumed):

Weight of Container(gm):

Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):

Weight of Ring(gm):

Weight of Container(gm):

Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):

Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):

DS LB-2, B-1 @ 0-5
3376
Normal Stress (kip/ft²)
Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
Deformation Rate (in./min.)
Initial Sample Height (in.)
Diameter (in.)
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
Saturation (%)
Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)
Final Moisture Content (%)
04-22
Project No.: 13493.001
Sample Type:
90% Remold
Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)

71.7 0.9894

15.3 Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080

72.3 0.9776

14.9 1.000

0.893

0.729

0.0017

1.000

2.415

1.000

2.415

2.000

1.405

0.0017

4.000

2.719

0.0017

71.9 0.9871

15.2 Soil Identification: 13.46
112.0

13.46 111.9 112.2

1.000

2.415

13.46 Boring No.

Sample No.

Depth (ft)
LB-2
B-1
0-5

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in.)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
DS LB-2, B-1 @ 0-5
3377
Normal Stress (kip/ft²)
Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
Sample Type: 90% Remold Deformation Rate (in./min.)
Initial Sample Height (in.)
Diameter (in.)
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf)
C (psf)  (o
) Saturation (%)
Peak 236 32 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)
Ultimate 72 34 Final Moisture Content (%)

1.405

1.405
Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
Boring No.

Sample No.

Depth (ft)
LB-2
B-1
0-5

71.9 13.46
112.0

0.0017

4.000

2.719

0.0017

72.3 2.000

0.9776

13.46 14.9

1.000

2.415

0.9871

15.2 112.2

1.000

2.415

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080

1.000

0.893

0.729

0.0017

13.46 111.9

2.415
Soil Identification:
04-22
Project No.: 13493.001

71.7 0.9894

1.000

15.3 Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in.)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
DS LB-2, B-1 @ 0-5
3378
Project Name: Tested By: G. Bathala Date: 04/19/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: Sample Type: Ring
Sample No.: Depth (ft.): 7.5
Soil Identification:

2.415 2.415 2.415

1.000 1.000 1.000
177.41 181.99 182.19

43.72 45.58 45.95
Before Shearing
182.62 182.62 182.62
178.05 178.05 178.05

58.18 58.18 58.18

0.0000 0.2562 0.2637
-0.0126 0.2707 0.2918
After Shearing
208.16 204.29 212.34
188.26 184.44 192.59

66.34 58.11 67.16

2.70 2.70 2.70

62.43 62.43 62.43

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080
Water Density(pcf):

Specific Gravity (Assumed):

Weight of Container(gm):

Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):

Weight of Ring(gm):

Weight of Container(gm):

Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):

Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
LB-3
Olive silty sand (SM)
Sample Diameter(in):

Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):

Vertical Rdg.(in): Final
Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial
Sample Thickness(in.):

Weight of Sample + ring(gm):

R-2
DS LB-3, R-2 @ 7.5
3379
Normal Stress (kip/ft²)
Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
Deformation Rate (in./min.)
Initial Sample Height (in.)
Diameter (in.)
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Dry Density (pcf)
Saturation (%)
Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)
Final Moisture Content (%)
109.1

1.000

2.415

3.81 Boring No.

Sample No.

Depth (ft)
LB-3
R-2

7.5 19.0

0.9855

15.7 Soil Identification: 3.81
109.3

3.81 107.1

1.364

0.0033

4.000

2.858

2.704

0.0033

1.000

0.773

0.688

0.0033

1.000

2.415

1.000

2.415

2.000

1.544

17.9 0.9874

16.3 Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080

18.9 0.9719

15.7 04-22
Project No.: 13493.001
Sample Type:

Ring
Olive silty sand (SM)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in.)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
DS LB-3, R-2 @ 7.5
3380
Normal Stress (kip/ft²)
Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)
Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)
Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.)
Initial Sample Height (in.)
Diameter (in.)
Initial Moisture Content (%)
Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf)
C (psf)  (o
) Saturation (%)
Peak 116 35 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)
Ultimate 18 34 Final Moisture Content (%)
04-22
Project No.: 13493.001

17.9 0.9874

1.000

16.3 Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080

1.000

0.773

0.688

0.0033

3.81 107.1

2.415
Soil Identification:

0.9719

3.81 15.7

1.000

2.415

0.9855

15.7 109.1

1.000

2.415

19.0 3.81
109.3

0.0033

4.000

2.858

2.704

0.0033

18.9 2.000

1.544

1.364
Olive silty sand (SM)
Boring No.

Sample No.

Depth (ft)
LB-3
R-2

7.5 0.00

1.00 2.00

3.00 4.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Shear Stress (ksf)
Horizontal Deformation (in.)

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
Shear Stress (ksf)
Normal Stress (ksf)
DS LB-3, R-2 @ 7.5
3381
Tested By: G. Berdy Date: 04/13/22
Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22
Depth (ft.):

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)
Wt. of Container No. (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil (g)
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve
Percent Passing # 4
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h 1100
Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 18

1.0 0.6030
04/14/22 9:53 1.0 1351 0.6030
04/14/22 5:42 1.0
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
04/13/22 11:59 1.0 37 0.6000
10 04/13/22 11:12 1.0 0 0.5855
04/13/22 11:22 0.5855
Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas] 49.0 96.3
Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time
(min.)
Dial Readings
(in.)
Total Porosity 0.331 0.343
Pore Volume (cc) 68.6 72.2
Dry Density (pcf) 112.7 110.8
Void Ratio 0.496 0.522
Moisture Content (%) 9.00 18.61
Wet Density (pcf) 122.9 131.4
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 751.90 575.77
Wt. of Container (g) 0.00 202.10
Container No. OO
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 819.60 645.30
Wt. of Mold (g) 202.10 0.00
Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0175
Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g) 609.40 443.20
Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01
100.00
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
1000.00

0.00 1000.00

0.00 0-5
Sample No.: B-1
Soil Identification: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
Project No.: 13493.001
Boring No.:

EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name:

LB-1
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
3382
LB-1 7.5 9.3 94.6
LB-1 10.0 31.0 88.6
LB-1 15.0 15.7 111.5
LB-1 20.0 12.2 120.1
LB-1 30.0 3.6
LB-1 40.0 4.4
LB-1 45.0 2.0 114.9
LB-1 50.0 3.2
LB-2 7.5 3.0 101.4
LB-2 15.0 4.0 102.8
LB-2 20.0 15.7 111.9
LB-2 25.0 10.4 108.4
LB-3 5.0 7.7 110.6
LB-3 10.0 26.3 90.1
LB-3 15.0 35.1 87.0
LB-3 20.0 12.5 121.7
LB-3 25.0 13.9 113.8
LP-1 15.0 5.0 104.3
LP-1 18.5 12.4 119.3
LP-2 15.0 25.4 91.0
LP-2 18.5 7.3 115.0
Classification
Water
Content
(%)
Dry
Density
(pcf)
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
Maximum
Size
(mm)
%<#200
Sieve
Saturation
(%)
Void
Ratio Depth
Summary of Laboratory Results
Sheet 1 of 1
Borehole
Figure No. 1
Project Name:

Project Number:

Date:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Residential Development
13493.001
5/4/2022 11:49:57 AM
US_LAB_SUMMARY 13493.001 BORING LOGS.GPJ ROCKLOG2012.GDT 5/4/22 3383
Tested By: J. Gonzalez Date: 04/12/22
Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/13/22
LB-2 Depth (ft.): 0-5
Preparation Method: X Moist Mechanical Ram
Dry Manual Ram
Mold Volume (ft³) 0.03330 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456
3861 3920 3880
1826 1826 1826
2035 2094 2054
462.6 478.9 498.0
423.8 429.5 437.3

37.9 36.3 39.6

10.05 12.56 15.26
134.7 138.6 136.0
122.4 123.2 118.0
123.5 11.5

PROCEDURE USED
X Procedure A
Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve
Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter
Layers : 5 (Five)
Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five)
May be used if +#4 is 20% or less
Procedure B
Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve
Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter
Layers : 5 (Five)
Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five)
Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is
20% or less
Procedure C
Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve
Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter
Layers : 5 (Five)
Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six)
Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in.
is <30%
Particle-Size Distribution:

GR:SA:FI
Atterberg Limits:

LL,PL,PI
Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
13493.001
TEST NO.

Soil Identification:

Sample No.:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA

MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST
ASTM D 1557
Project No.:

Boring No.:

Weight of Container (g)
Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)
Weight of Mold (g)
Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)
B-1
Project Name:

Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%)
Net Weight of Soil (g)
Wet Density (pcf)
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture Content (%)
Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.

Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture Content (%)
SP. GR. = 2.70
SP. GR. = 2.75
SP. GR. = 2.80
XX
MX LB-2, B-1 @ 0-5
3384
Tested By: J. Gonzalez Date: 04/13/22
Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22
LB-3 Depth (ft.): 0-5
Preparation Method: X Moist Mechanical Ram
Dry Manual Ram
Mold Volume (ft³) 0.03330 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456
3839 3913 3850
1826 1826 1826
2013 2087 2024
499.8 520.0 518.3
469.3 477.3 466.0

41.0 39.1 37.8

7.12 9.74 12.21
133.3 138.2 134.0
124.4 125.9 119.4
126.4 9.0

GR:SA:FI
Atterberg Limits:

LL,PL,PI
Olive brown silty sand (SM)
13493.001
TEST NO.

Soil Identification:

Sample No.:

Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA

MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST
ASTM D 1557
Project No.:

Boring No.:

Weight of Container (g)
Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)
Weight of Mold (g)
Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)
B-1
Project Name:

Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%)
Net Weight of Soil (g)
Wet Density (pcf)
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture Content (%)
Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.

Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture Content (%)
SP. GR. = 2.55
SP. GR. = 2.60
SP. GR. = 2.65
XX
MX LB-3, B-1 @ 0-5
3385
Project Name: Tested By: J. Domingo Date: 04/22/22
Project No. : Input By: G. Bathala Date: 04/25/22
Boring No.: Checked By: A. Santos
Sample No.: Depth (ft.) 10.0
Soil Identification:
121234
26 21 16

8.64 8.87 20.09 21.49 20.68

7.38 7.61 14.48 15.38 14.70

1.06 1.07 1.11 1.03 1.00

19.94 19.27 41.96 42.58 43.65
42 20
22 CL
PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 16.06
One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation
LL =Wn(N/25)

PROCEDURES USED
Wet Preparation
Multipoint - Wet
X Dry Preparation
Multipoint - Dry
X Procedure A
Multipoint Test
Procedure B
One-point Test
Olive gray lean clay (CL)

ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D 4318
13493.001
LB-2
R-3
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Onratio CA
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)
Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content (%) [Wn]
TEST
NO.

Liquid Limit
Plastic Limit
Plasticity Index
Classification
Number of Blows [N]
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Plasticity Index (PI)
Liquid Limit (LL)

0.121
CL or OL
ML or OL
MH or OH
For classification of finegrained soils and finegrained fraction of coarsegrained soils "A" Line
7 4
CH or OH
CL- ML
40 41
42 43
44 45
10 100
Moisture Content (%)
Number of Blows
20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
3386
Project Name: Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid &
Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
Project No.: 13493.001
Summary of Pocket Penetrometer Test Results
Tested by: S. Felter Date: 04/19/22
Prepared by: G. Bathala Date: 04/22/22
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Readings Remarks
LB-1 R-2 7.5 2.50
R-3 10 >4.50
R-4 15 4.25
R-5 20 >4.50
R-10 45 3.50
LB-2 R-2 7.5 1.75
R-4 15 3.75
R-5 20 3.50
R-6 25 >4.50
LB-3 R-1 5 >4.50
R-3 10 >4.50
R-4 15 4.25
R-5 20 4.50
R-6 25 >4.50
LP-1 R-3 15 2.75
R-4 18.5 >4.50
LP-2 R-3 15 >4.50
R-4 18.5 >4.50
3387
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: 13493.001
BORING NUMBER: LB-1 DEPTH (FT.): 0-5
SAMPLE NUMBER: B-1 TECHNICIAN: O. Figueroa
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) DATE COMPLETED: 4/13/2022 TEST SPECIMEN a b c
MOISTURE AT COMPACTION % 12.7 13.7 14.6
HEIGHT OF SAMPLE, Inches 2.45 2.50 2.53
DRY DENSITY, pcf 120.2 118.7 116.2
COMPACTOR PRESSURE, psi 325 250 150
EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi 564 302 139
EXPANSION, Inches x 10exp-4 51 35 25
STABILITY Ph 2,000 lbs (160 psi) 28 36 46
TURNS DISPLACEMENT 4.60 5.13 5.45
R-VALUE UNCORRECTED 72 63 53
R-VALUE CORRECTED 72 63 53
DESIGN CALCULATION DATA a b c
GRAVEL EQUIVALENT FACTOR 1.0 1.0 1.0
TRAFFIC INDEX 5.0 5.0 5.0
STABILOMETER THICKNESS, ft. 0.45 0.59 0.75
EXPANSION PRESSURE THICKNESS, ft. 1.70 1.17 0.83

EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART EXUDATION PRESSURE CHART
R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 50
R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 63
EQUILIBRIUM R-VALUE: 50

R-VALUE TEST RESULTS
DOT CA Test 301
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use Ontario CA

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

3.00 3.50

4.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
COVER THICKNESS BY STABILOMETER in feet
COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION in feet
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

R-VALUE
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
3388
Project Name: Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut Mixed-Use, Ontario CA Tested By: A Santos Date: 04/25/22 Project No. : Input By: J. Ward Date: 04/25/22
11:20 11:30 11:33 11:53 13.5 1.2 9
11:24 11:34 11:37 11:57 13.4 1.1 911:28 11:38 11:41 12:01 13.5 1.1 913:40 13:50 13:53 14:13 12.6 1.4 12 13:44 13:54 13:57 14:17 12.6 1.4 12
13:48 13:58 14:01 14:21 12.7 1.3 11
T1 = Starting Time T3 = Settlement Starting Time Sand Equivalent = R2 / R1 * 100 T2 = ( T1 + 10 min) Begin Agitation T4 = ( T3 + 20 min) Take Clay Reading (R1) Record SE as Next Higher Integer (131 cycles in 45 sec) and Sand Reading (R2) Olive brown silty sand
(SM) LB-5
R2

SAND EQUIVALENT TEST
DOT CA Test 217
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.)
12 13493.001
Average
SE
Olive brown sandy silt
s(ML) B-1
B-1
Soil Type R1 SE
0-5
LB-2 0-5 9
T1 T2 T3 T4
SE LB-2 & LB-5, B-1 @ 0-5
3389
Project Name: Tested By: S. Felter Date: 04/20/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: LP-1 Depth (feet): 15.0
Sample No.: R-3
Soil Identification: Grayish brown silty sand (SM)
2 0.0
712.3 0.0
110.0 1.0
602.3 0.0
2 582.3
110.0
472.3
(in.) (mm.)
1 1/2" 37.5
1" 25.0
3/4" 19.0
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75
#8 2.36
#16 1.18
#30 0.600
#50 0.300
#100 0.150
#200 0.075
GRAVEL: 0%
SAND: 77 %
FINES: 23 %
GROUP SYMBOL: SM
Remarks:

After Wet Sieve
Cumulative Weight
Dry Soil Retained (g)

17.0 22.9
343.0 43.1
100.0

99.8 97.2

99.4 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Container No.
464.2

72.3 54.5
PAN
Cc = (D30)²/(D60*D10) =

0.0 1.2
166.8
Cu = D60/D10 =

3.6 91.0
Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content of Total Air - Dry Soil
Wt. of Container No._____ (g)
Wt. of Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g)
U. S. Sieve Size Percent Passing (%)
Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Moisture Content (%)
Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g)
Wt. of Container (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil (g)
Container No.:

PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION (GRADATION)
of SOILS USING SIEVE ANALYSIS
ASTM D 6913
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
3390
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER

15.0 COARSE COARSE MEDIUM FINE CLAY
Project No.: 13493.001
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA Project Name:

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING
SAND

FINE SILT

HYDROMETER

3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200

GRAVEL FINES
LP-1 Sample No.:

PARTICLE - SIZE

DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D 6913
Soil Identification: Grayish brown silty sand (SM)
SM
GR:SA:FI : (%)
Boring No.:Depth (feet): Soil Type :
0 : 77 : 23
R-3
0 102030405060708090
100
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
"
Sieve LP-1, R-3 @ 15
3391
Project Name: Tested By: S. Felter Date: 04/20/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: LP-1 Depth (feet): 18.5
Sample No.: R-4
Soil Identification: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
9545 0.0
774.5 0.0
106.2 1.0
668.3 0.0
9545
426.4
106.2
320.2
(in.) (mm.)
1 1/2" 37.5
1" 25.0
3/4" 19.0
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75
#8 2.36
#16 1.18
#30 0.600
#50 0.300
#100 0.150
#200 0.075
GRAVEL: 0%
SAND: 47 %
FINES: 53 %
GROUP SYMBOL: s(ML)
Remarks:

Container No.:

PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION (GRADATION)
of SOILS USING SIEVE ANALYSIS
ASTM D 6913
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed Use, Ontario CA
Moisture Content (%)
Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g)
Wt. of Container (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil (g)

93.8 Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content of Total Air - Dry Soil
Wt. of Container No._____ (g)
Wt. of Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g)
U. S. Sieve Size Percent Passing (%)
Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
PAN
Cc = (D30)²/(D60*D10) =

0.0 2.9
106.5
Cu = D60/D10 =

8.0 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Container No.
315.8

84.1 41.7

15.3 52.7
206.4 69.1
100.0

99.6 97.7

98.8 After Wet Sieve
Cumulative Weight
Dry Soil Retained (g)
3392
0 : 47 : 53
R-4
Depth (feet): Soil Type :

PARTICLE - SIZE

DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D 6913
Soil Identification: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML)
s(ML)
GR:SA:FI : (%)
Boring No.:

GRAVEL FINES
LP-1 Sample No.: Project Name:

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING
SAND

FINE SILT

HYDROMETER

3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER

18.5 COARSE COARSE MEDIUM FINE CLAY
Project No.: 13493.001
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed Use, Ontario CA
0 102030405060708090
100
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
"
Sieve LP-1, R-4 @ 18.5
3393
Project Name: Tested By: S. Felter Date: 04/19/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: LP-1 Depth (feet): 23.5
Sample No.: S-5
Soil Identification: Brown sandy lean clay s(CL)
969 0.0
538.7 0.0
109.4 1.0
429.3 0.0
969
344.3
109.4
234.9
(in.) (mm.)
1 1/2" 37.5
1" 25.0
3/4" 19.0
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75
#8 2.36
#16 1.18
#30 0.600
#50 0.300
#100 0.150
#200 0.075
GRAVEL: 0%
SAND: 51 %
FINES: 49 %
GROUP SYMBOL: s(CL)
Remarks:

Container No.:

PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION (GRADATION)
of SOILS USING SIEVE ANALYSIS
ASTM D 6913
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
Moisture Content (%)
Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g)
Wt. of Container (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g)
Dry Wt. of Soil (g)

91.6 Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content of Total Air - Dry Soil
Wt. of Container No._____ (g)
Wt. of Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g)
U. S. Sieve Size Percent Passing (%)
Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
PAN
Cc = (D30)²/(D60*D10) =

0.0 1.1

83.7 Cu = D60/D10 =

4.2 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Container No.
220.7

80.5 36.0

12.8 48.6
148.7 65.4
100.0

99.7 97.0

99.0 After Wet Sieve
Cumulative Weight
Dry Soil Retained (g)
3394
0 : 51 : 49
S-5
Depth (feet): Soil Type :

PARTICLE - SIZE

DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D 6913
Soil Identification: Brown sandy lean clay s(CL)
s(CL)
GR:SA:FI : (%)
Boring No.:

GRAVEL FINES
LP-1 Sample No.: Project Name:

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING
SAND

FINE SILT

HYDROMETER

3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER

23.5 COARSE COARSE MEDIUM FINE CLAY
Project No.: 13493.001
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
0 102030405060708090
100
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
"
Sieve LP-1, S-5 @ 23.5
3395
Project Name: Tested By: S. Felter Date: 04/19/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: LP-2 Depth (feet): 15.0
Sample No.: R-3
Soil Identification: Olive brown silty clay (CL-ML)
V-1 0.0
635.6 0.0
108.7 1.0
526.9 0.0
V-1
139.2
108.7

30.5 (in.) (mm.)
1 1/2" 37.5
1" 25.0
3/4" 19.0
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75
#8 2.36
#16 1.18
#30 0.600
#50 0.300
#100 0.150
#200 0.075
GRAVEL: 0%
SAND: 5%
FINES: 95 %
GROUP SYMBOL: CL-ML
Remarks:

Container No.:

99.9 Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content of Total Air - Dry Soil
Wt. of Container No._____ (g)
Wt. of Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g)
U. S. Sieve Size Percent Passing (%)
Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
PAN
Cc = (D30)²/(D60*D10) =

4.4 Cu = D60/D10 =
Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Container No.

28.4 99.2

0.4 0.0

94.6 12.6 97.6
100.0
After Wet Sieve
Cumulative Weight
Dry Soil Retained (g)
3396
0 : 5 : 95
R-3
Depth (feet): Soil Type :

PARTICLE - SIZE

DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D 6913
Soil Identification: Olive brown silty clay (CL-ML)
CL-ML
GR:SA:FI : (%)
Boring No.:

GRAVEL FINES
LP-2 Sample No.: Project Name:

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING
SAND

FINE SILT

HYDROMETER

3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER

15.0 COARSE COARSE MEDIUM FINE CLAY
Project No.: 13493.001
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed-Use, Ontario CA
0 102030405060708090
100
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
"
Sieve LP-2, R-3 @ 15
3397
Project Name: Tested By: S. Felter Date: 04/20/22
Project No.: 13493.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/25/22 Boring No.: LP-2 Depth (feet): 18.5
Sample No.: R-4
Soil Identification: Olive brown silty sand (SM)
R-2 0.0
799.6 0.0
107.7 1.0
691.9 0.0
R-2
576.0
107.7
468.3
(in.) (mm.)
1 1/2" 37.5
1" 25.0
3/4" 19.0
1/2" 12.5
3/8" 9.5
#4 4.75
#8 2.36
#16 1.18
#30 0.600
#50 0.300
#100 0.150
#200 0.075
GRAVEL: 0%
SAND: 67 %
FINES: 33 %
GROUP SYMBOL: SM
Remarks:

Container No.:

93.7 Wt. of Container (g)
Moisture Content of Total Air - Dry Soil
Wt. of Container No._____ (g)
Wt. of Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g)
U. S. Sieve Size Percent Passing (%)
Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
PAN
Cc = (D30)²/(D60*D10) =

0.0 0.9
150.5
Cu = D60/D10 =

3.8 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g)
Container No.
464.3

78.2 43.5

13.1 32.9
340.6 50.8
100.0

99.9 98.1

99.5 After Wet Sieve
Cumulative Weight
Dry Soil Retained (g)
3398
0 : 67 : 33
R-4
Depth (feet): Soil Type :

PARTICLE - SIZE

DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D 6913
Soil Identification: Olive brown silty sand (SM)
SM
GR:SA:FI : (%)
Boring No.:

GRAVEL FINES
LP-2 Sample No.: Project Name:

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING
SAND

FINE SILT

HYDROMETER

3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER

18.5 COARSE COARSE MEDIUM FINE CLAY
Project No.: 13493.001
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut
Mixed Use, Ontario CA
0 102030405060708090
100
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)
"
Sieve LP-2, R-4 @ 18.5
3399
Project Name: Tested By: G. Bathala Date: 04/18/22
Project No.: Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/26/22
Boring No.: LB-1 Sample Type: Ring
Sample No.: R-6 Depth (ft.) 25.0
Sample Description: Yellowish brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Initial Dry Density (pcf): 104.9 Final Dry Density (pcf): 107.0 Initial Moisture (%): 3.61 Final Moisture (%) : 18.2
Initial Length (in.): 1.0000 Initial Void Ratio: 0.6072 Initial Dial Reading: 0.3076 Specific Gravity(assumed): 2.70 Diameter(in): 2.415 Initial Saturation (%) 16.0

0.100 0.9999 0.00 -0.01 -0.01

3.000 0.9814 0.52 -1.86 -1.34
H2O 0.9751 0.52 -2.49 -1.97
Percent Swell (+) / Settlement (-) After Inundation = -0.64 Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA Pressure (p)
(ksf)

0.6070

0.5856
Final Reading
(in) Void Ratio
Swell (+)
Settlement (-)
% of Sample
Thickness
Load
Compliance
(%)
Apparent
Thickness
(in)

ONE-DIMENSIONAL SWELL OR SETTLEMENT

POTENTIAL OF COHESIVE SOILS
ASTM D 4546
13493.001

0.5755

0.3075

0.2890

0.2827
Corrected
Deformation
(%)

0.5700

0.5750

0.5800

0.5850

0.5900

0.5950

0.6000

0.6050

0.6100

0.100 1.000 10.000
Void Ratio
Log Pressure (ksf)
Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve
Inundate with
Tap water
Swell or Settlement LB-1, R-6 @ 25 3400
Project Name: Tested By: G. Bathala Date: 04/18/22
Project No.: Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/26/22
Boring No.: LB-1 Sample Type: Ring
Sample No.: R-8 Depth (ft.) 35.0
Sample Description: Yellowish brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Initial Dry Density (pcf): 110.6 Final Dry Density (pcf): 112.3 Initial Moisture (%): 3.30 Final Moisture (%) : 15.9
Initial Length (in.): 1.0000 Initial Void Ratio: 0.5246 Initial Dial Reading: 0.3373 Specific Gravity(assumed): 2.70 Diameter(in): 2.415 Initial Saturation (%) 17.0

0.100 0.9999 0.00 -0.01 -0.01

4.000 0.9847 0.18 -1.53 -1.35
H2O 0.9825 0.18 -1.75 -1.57
Percent Swell (+) / Settlement (-) After Inundation = -0.22

ONE-DIMENSIONAL SWELL OR SETTLEMENT

POTENTIAL OF COHESIVE SOILS
ASTM D 4546
13493.001

0.5007

0.3372

0.3220

0.3198
Corrected
Deformation
(%)
Legacy-Collier, Proposed Euclid & Walnut MixedUse, Ontario CA Pressure (p)
(ksf)

0.5244

0.5040
Final Reading
(in) Void Ratio
Swell (+)
Settlement (-)
% of Sample
Thickness
Load
Compliance
(%)
Apparent
Thickness
(in)

0.4950

0.5000

0.5050

0.5100

0.5150

0.5200

0.5250

0.5300

0.100 1.000 10.000
Void Ratio
Log Pressure (ksf)
Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve
Inundate with
Tap water
Swell or Settlement LB-1, R-8 @ 35 3401

APPENDIX D

GENERAL EARTHWORKS AND GRADING

RECOMMENDATIONS
3402
i

APPENDIX D
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Appendix D Page

1.0 GENERAL ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Intent.......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record .................................................... 1

1.3 The Earthwork Contractor.......................................................................... 2

2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED........................................................ 2

2.1 Clearing and Grubbing............................................................................... 2

2.2 Processing................................................................................................. 3

2.3 Overexcavation.......................................................................................... 3

2.4 Benching.................................................................................................... 3

2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas .......................................................... 4

3.0 FILL MATERIAL ................................................................................................... 4

3.1 General...................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Oversize ..................................................................................................... 4

3.3 Import......................................................................................................... 4

4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION.............................................................. 5

4.1 Fill Layers .................................................................................................. 5

4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning........................................................................... 5

4.3 Compaction of Fill ...................................................................................... 5

4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes .......................................................................... 5

4.5 Compaction Testing................................................................................... 5

4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing ............................................................. 6

4.7 Compaction Test Locations ....................................................................... 6

5.0 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION ................................................................................. 6

6.0 EXCAVATION ...................................................................................................... 6

7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS .......................................................................................... 7

7.1 Safety......................................................................................................... 7

7.2 Bedding and Backfill .................................................................................. 7

7.3 Lift Thickness............................................................................................. 7

7.4 Observation and Testing............................................................................ 7 3403
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D)

ATTACHMENTS
Standard Details
A - Keying and Benching Rear of Text
B - Oversize Rock Disposal Rear of Text
C - Canyon Subdrains Rear of Text
D - Buttress or Replacement Fill Subdrains Rear of Text E - Transition Lot Fills and Side Hill Fills Rear of Text 3404
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-1

1.0 GENERAL

1.1 Intent
These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s).

1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record
Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading.

Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing.

During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill.

The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. 3405
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-2
The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis.

1.3 The Earthwork Contractor
The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications.

The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished.

The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations.

The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified.

2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED

2.1 Clearing and Grubbing
Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant.
3406
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-3
The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed.

If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area.

As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed.

2.2 Processing
Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction.

2.3 Overexcavation
In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading.

2.4 Benching
Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched.

Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant.

Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical 3407
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-4
Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill.

2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas
All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches.

3.0 FILL MATERIAL

3.1 General
Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material.

3.2 Oversize
Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill.

Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction.

3.3 Import
If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed.
3408
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-5

4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION

4.1 Fill Layers
Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout.

4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning
Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557).

4.3 Compaction of Fill
After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity.

4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes
In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant.

Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557.

4.5 Compaction Testing
Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify 3409
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-6
adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches).

4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing
Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant.

The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met.

4.7 Compaction Test Locations
The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided.

5.0 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION
Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial.

Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys.

6.0 EXCAVATION
Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of 3410
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
D-7
the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant.

7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS

7.1 Safety
The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations.

7.2 Bedding and Backfill
All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be performed in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface.

The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill.

7.3 Lift Thickness
Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method.

7.4 Observation and Testing
The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant.
3411

FILL SLOPE
PROJECTED PLANE 1: 1
(HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL)

MAXIMUM FROM TOE

OF SLOPE TO

APPROVED GROUND

EXISTING

GROUND SURFACE

FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE
-

CUT-OVER-ALL SLOPE

PROJECTED PLANE
1 TO 1 MAXIMUM

FROM TOE OF SLOPE

TO APPROVED GROUND

KEYING AND BENCHING
REMOVE

UNSUITABLE

MATERIAL
REMOVE

UNSUITABLE

MATERIAL

UT FACE SHALL BE

CONSTRUCTED PRIOR

TO FILL PLACEMENT
REMOVE

UNSUITABLE

MATERIAL

BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPE'S
ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5: 1.

MINIMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET
AND MINIMUM FILL WIDTH SHALL BE 9 FEET.

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING

SPECIFICATIONS

STANDARD DETAILS A
�Leighton
3412

FINISH GRADE
_ - - - - - - ·10•- - - - COMPACTEDFILL:.__- _- _- _- _- _: - MIN. -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �--------------- _-_-_-_-_-_ � - �----_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ - --
-----7- ------ ------- �
-------v------o.-------o-
--------- -----� ------- _-_ - _
-_
-__ /--_-_
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ - _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
---- ·
_-
7----------------------- ------ -------- --- 7---------v------ ---- ----- u---- -
-_-_-_-_-,e_-_-_
o
-_-_-_ -
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-: er----_
- - 10·- - . -7"'- - - - 0 -I-a-- - - - - - - - - - -
__- _- -r:1J:N.:....
__
_ ...-:_- - -__- _- _- _- __ 4' - MIN. _ -t� _ 15'MIN._-_.-l -
-_- - -
-------p 7=�----n*-------�-
------- -- ------ - --- ��
------- -- ------ ---
- - - -,,,,�- - -_-..::__- -_OVERSIZE --__- _- _- _- _- -_ - - - -
-
- - - - /"" - - - - _ _ _ _ WINDROW ___ _ �---7-------------- • Oversize rock is larger than 8 inches
in largest dimension.
• Backfill with approved soil jetted or
flooded in place to fill all the voids.
• Do not bury rock within 10 feet of
finish grade.
• Windrow of buried rock shall be
parallel to the finished slope face.

PROFILE ALONG WINDROW

SECTION A-A'

JETTED OR FLOODED

APPROVED SOIL
-
_ -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_ A' :-::::-
-
-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-� ---
-
-
-
-
-
_

JETTED OR FLOODED

APPROVED SOIL
�
l
.�
�----------------------.---------------.----------,!

OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING

SPECIFICATIONS

STANDARD DETAILS B
L_ ____________ _j_ ________ ____JL__ _____ ___J
�
I
a.

E
�
g
Cl 3413 a:

NATURAL
GROUND
/
�----------::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-- "'�" -
-
-��-----
-
-
-_:COMPACTED FILL:._-_-_-
-
-�-----
- - -
-�

TYPICAL

BENCHING
----------------- �---.----..o..._-_
-�_-_-_-_-_-_�---_-�----,,.........
----�----------::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::0

SUBDRAIN
(See Alternates A and B)

FILTER MATERIAL SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A

PERFORATED PIPE SURROUNDED
WITH FILTER MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL PER STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD SPECIFICATION, OR APPROVED ALTERNATE.

FILTER MATERIAL (9FT 3/FT) CLASS 2 GRADING AS FOLLOWS:

Sieve Size
1"
3/4"
3/8"
No.4
No.8
No. 30
No. 50
No.200
Percent Passing
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
0-7
0-3
SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-1 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-2
ALTERNATE B-1

PERFORATED PIPE
6" 0 MIN.

SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE B
3/4" MAX. GRAVEL OR

APPROVED EQUIVALENT
(9FT3 /FT)
ALTERNATE B-2
0 PERFORATED PIPE IS OPTIONAL PER

GOVERNING AGENCY'S REQUIREMENTS

DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL
DESIGN

FINISHED GRADE
10' MIN. BACKFILL
r-15' MIN.---i---i--20' MIN.
5' MIN PERFORATED
6"0MIN.
· • 6"0 MIN.----i I

NON-PERFORATED

FILTER FABRIC
(MIRAFI 140N OR

APPROVED EQUIVALENT)
�
t
:g
·e
1------------------,,------------------------,------------g CANYON

SUBDRAIN

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPECIFICATIONS a.

E
�
g

STANDARD DETAILS C
L...-----------------''------------------------1--------------' c.:
3414
I .15' MIN�
�-
I
��,,,..-��
OUTLET PIPES 4"1> NON-PERFORATED PIPE,
100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY
30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY
,,,/ / I
/ �,---------J
,,,
,,, / I
/ ,..r ,,, / ., I
·�
/
/
/ /� ,,, , I � / --2% MIN. �� BACKCUT
/I
/ /
,,, \ / I BENCHING
// \ /i
,,,// \ /�
1'± / \ ,--_J
J (! �/ _2% MIN. \ Jo1
. 2% MIN.--- / I SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE B
r•-----15' MIN.----·-1

KEY DEPTH KEY WIDTH
2' MIN.

SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A POSillVE SEAL SHOULD BE PROVIDED ----....

AT THE JOINT
CAL TRANS CLASS 2
,,o��, ;rr��:,��:
��""MIN

OUTLET PIPE
(NON-PERFORATED)
3/4" ROCK (3FT.3
/FT)-----

WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC

T-CONNECTION FROM

COLLECTION PIPE TO OUTLET PIPE
• SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain collector pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot. Perforation shall •
•
be 1/4" to 1/2" if drilled holes are used. All subdrain pipes shall have a gradient at least 2% towards the outlet.

SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751, ASTM D1527 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 ABS pipe or ASTM D3034 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 PVC pipe.

All outlet pipe shall be placed in a trench and, after fill is placed above it, rodded to verify integrity.

FILTER FABRIC
(MIRAFI 140 OR

APPROVED

EQUIVALENT)
�
I
.ci
::,
"'1
1-----------------""T"'"------------------.--------------tl

BUTTRESS OR

REPLACEMENT FILL

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING

SPECIFICATIONS

STANDARD DETAILS D SUBDRAINS
�
g
.__ _______________ _._ _______________ __._ _________ __,a: 3415

OVERBURDEN

OR UNSUITABLE

MATERIAL

CUT-FILL TRANSITION LOT OVEREXCAVATION
REMOVE

UNSUITABLE
GROUND \. \_..- ----

SIDE HILL FILL FOR CUT PAD

OVEREXCAVATE

AND RECOMPACT
(REPLACEMENT FILL)
/
/
/
----
/
/
/
/
4' MIN. <'\(/'

NATURAL
GROUND�__-
__-
---
/
/
/
/
/

FINISHED CUT PAD
L...=��.,......-.J.J-------- SEE STANDARD DETAIL FOR SUBDRAINS

WHEN REQUIRED BY GEOTECHNICAL CONSUL TANT
KEY
2'MIN. �

DEPTH UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR MATERIAL APPROVED

BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
�
t
.!!!
ii=
51 1------------------------.---------------"T"""-------------1!!! ·�

TRANSITION LOT FILLS

AND SIDE HILL FILLS

GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING

SPECIFICATIONS

STANDARD DETAILS E
a.

E
�
g
Leighton
.__ ___________________ __,_ ______________ _.__ _________ ____.a: 3416 November 29, 2022
Project No. 13493.002
Legacy/Collier Residential, LLC
5154 California Avenue
Irvine, California 92617
Attention: Mr. David Pinto
Subject: Addendum to Geotechnical Exploration Report
Infiltration Testing
Proposed “Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use” Development
112 Walnut Street, 2502 and 2530 Euclid Avenue
Ontario, San Bernardino County, California
Reference: Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2022, Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed “Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use” Development, 112 Walnut Street, 2502 and 2530 Euclid Avenue, Ontario, California, Project No. 13493.001, dated May 13, 2022.

Introduction
Per your request, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) performed supplemental infiltration testing for the subject mixed use development. Additional field infiltration testing was performed in coordination with Mr. Steve Ellis of Fuscoe Engineering, Inc. (project civil engineer) to target the locations and depths planned for infiltration. While official infiltration plans were not available, we understand that stormwater infiltration is intended to be achieved utilizing a drywell system to be located in the southern portion of the site extending to approximate depths of no greater than 45 feet below ground surface (bgs).

Purpose and Scope
Purpose of our exploration was to perform field infiltration tests at the proposed device locations and invert depths. The test locations and depths were selected by the project civil engineer. Our Scope of Work included the following:
• Pre-Field Exploration Activities – Site reconnaissance performed by a professional geologist to mark the proposed infiltration test locations. Underground Service Alert 3417
Addendum Letter No. 1 Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use-Supplemental Infiltration Testing 13493.002 2 (USA) was notified to locate and mark existing underground utilities prior to our subsurface exploration.
• Field Exploration – Our supplemental subsurface exploration was performed on August 24, 2022 and included drilling, logging, and sampling of two (2) hollow-stem auger borings (designated LP-3 and LP-4) to depths ranging from approximately 40 to 45 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of these explorations are shown on Figure 1, Geotechnical Map. The corresponding boring logs are presented in Appendix A, Exploration Logs.

During drilling of the hollow-stem auger borings drive samples were obtained from the borings for geotechnical laboratory testing. Sample collection was performed by conducting the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) within the borings in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1586. Samples were collected within the proposed test infiltration zone at 5-foot intervals. During sampling, the sampler was driven below the bottom of the borehole by a 140-pound weight (hammer) free-falling 30 inches. The drilling rig was equipped with an automatic hammer to provide greater consistency in the drop height and striking frequency. The number of blows to drive the sampler the final 12 inches of the 18-inch drive interval is termed the “blowcount” or SPT N-value.

N-values provide a measure of relative density in granular (non-cohesive) soils and comparative consistency in cohesive soils. Number of blows per 6 inches of penetration was recorded on the boring logs included in Appendix A.

The borings were logged in the field by a geologist from our firm. Each soil sample collected was reviewed and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory for testing. After completion of drilling, the borings were converted to percolation wells for subsequent testing. • Percolation Testing – Borings LP-3 and LP-4 (Figure 1) were converted to temporary percolation test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling. The test wells consisted of 2-inch diameter slotted (0.020-inch) PVC well casing screened within the proposed test zone. In-situ percolation testing was performed in general accordance with the County of San Bernardino guidelines Upon completion of the percolation testing, the well casing was removed from each boring and the borings were backfilled with soil cuttings and patched at the surface to match existing site conditions. • Laboratory Testing – Selected soil samples obtained from our hollow-stem-auger borings were tested at our in-house geotechnical laboratory. This laboratory testing 3418
Addendum Letter No. 1 Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use-Supplemental Infiltration Testing 13493.002 3 program was designed to evaluate the fines content of the soils within the tested zone (i.e. soil particles finer than the No. 200 sieve). . Results are included in Appendix C. • Report Preparation – This report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the proposed infiltration devices.

Infiltration Testing
Percolation testing was performed in temporary wells installed within borings LP-3 and LP4 located in the southern region of the site with test zone at depths of 25 to 45 feet bgs and 25 to 40 feet bgs, respectively. The percolation tests were conducted in general accordance with the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for Water Quality Management Plans (2013). Results of the percolation testing are presented in Appendix B. The test locations and tested depth intervals are shown on Plate 1.

The volume of discharge was calculated by adding the total volume of water that dropped within the PVC pipe and within the annulus, and incorporating a porosity reduction factor to account for the porosity of the annulus material. The flow area was based on the average water height within the test well.

Detailed results of the field testing data and measured infiltration rate for the test well are presented in Appendix B. The test results are summarized in the table below:

Table 1 – Measured (Unfactored) Infiltration Rate
Test Well
Designation
Approximate Depth of
Test Zone (feet bgs)
Measured
Infiltration Rate
(inches per hour)
LB-3 25 to 45 0.14
LP-4 25 to 40 0.47
3419
Addendum Letter No. 1 Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use-Supplemental Infiltration Testing 13493.002 4 Based on the results of our field percolation testing that was performed at the site, the measured (unfactored) infiltration rates for the two (2) tests performed were 0.14 inches per hour (LP-3) and 0.47 inches per hour (LP-2), respectively. According to the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for Water Quality Management Plans (2013), the measured infiltration rate at the LP-4 well location technically exceeds the minimum feasibility criteria of 0.3 inch per hour. However, implementation of a minimum factor of safety of 2.0 as required for the design infiltration rate indicates the depth and location tested for both wells are considered infeasible for infiltration.

Closure
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us directly at the phone extensions and/or e-mail addresses listed below.

Respectfully submitted,
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

Eric M. Holliday, PG, 9219
Senior Project Geologist
Ext 4252, [email protected]
John E. Haertle, PE, GE 2352
Principal Engineer
Ext: 4268, [email protected]
EMH/JEH/lr
Attachments: Figure 1 – Geotechnical Map
Appendix A - Exploration Logs
Appendix B - Percolation Test Data
Appendix C - Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Distribution: (1) Addressee
3420
&<
&<
&<&<
&<
&(
!(#
!(#
!(#
!(#
&(
&(
LB-2
T.D.26.5'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
LB-1
T.D.51.5'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
LB-5
T.D.26.5'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
LB-3
T.D.26.5'
LP-1/LB-4
T.D.25'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
PercTest
Interval17-22'
LP-3
T.D.45'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
PercTest
Interval25-45'
LP-4
T.D.40'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
PercTest
Interval25-40'
CPT-2
T.D.50.2'
CPT-1
T.D.50.4'
CPT-4
T.D.50.1'
CPT-3/3A
T.D.35.8/50.7'
LP-2
T.D.20'
Afu0-5'
Qyf@5'
PercTest
Interval15-20'
MapSavedasJ:\Drafting\13493\002\Maps\13493-002_F01_GM_2022-11-18.mxdon11/18/202210:57:40AMAuthor:KVM(btran)

GEOTECHNICALMAP
ProposedEuclidandWalnutMixed-UseDevelopment
2502and2530S.EuclidAvenue
Ontario,California
³
0100200
Feet
Scale:

BaseMap:OptionASitePlan,EuclidandWalnutMixedUse
Sheet01,Dated:03/10/2022
byAOArchitectureDesignRelationships
1"=100'
Project:13493.002
Eng/Geol:JEH/EMH
Date:November2022
FIGURE1
LB-5
LP-2
CPT-4
LEGEND
&<
Approximatelocationofprevioushollow-stemaugerboring
showingtotaldepth(T.D.)anddepthtoearthunits
infeetbelowgroundsurface.(Leighton,2022)
&(
Approximatelocationofpreviouspercolationtestwell
showingpercolationtestintervalinfeet
belowgroundsurface.(Leighton,2022)
!(#
Approximatelocationofpreviousconepenetrometertestsounding showingtotaldepth(T.D.)infeetbelowgroundsurface
(Leighton,2022)
ApproximateSiteBoundary
ArtificialFill
QuaternaryYoungAlluvialFanDeposits
Afu
Qyf
LP-4
Approximatelocationofcurrentpercolationtestwell
showingpercolationtestintervalinfeet
&(
belowgroundsurface.
3421

APPENDIX A
Exploration Logs
3422
SM
SM-ML
SM
@Surface: 3 -inches Asphalt Concrete over 6 -inches Base Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)
@0.75': Silty SAND, brown, slightly moist, very fine sand, trace medium to coarse sand and fine subrounded gravel
Quaternary-Aged Young Alluvial Valley Deposits (Qyf)
@20': Clayey Sandy SILT to Clayey Silty SAND, medium
dense/very stiff, olive brown, slightly moist, very fine sand, low plasticity, slightly micaceous, friable, pockets of higher clay content
@25': Silty SAND, medium dense, mottled reddish brown and grayish brown, slightly moist, very fine sand, nonplastic, slightly micaceous, friable, grading slightly finer toward bottom
S-1
S-2 -200
3 7
11 4
8 9
'

BULK SAMPLE

CORE SAMPLE

GRAB SAMPLE

RING SAMPLE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE

TUBE SAMPLE
B
C
G
R
S
T
BTM
Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Soil Class.
8-24-22

SOIL DESCRIPTION
Sampled By
Drilling Co.Drilling Co.

Project
Project No.

Ground Elevation
Depth Blows Elevation Per 6 Inches

Page 1 of 2 ends

Ontario City CouncilOctober 17, 2023

Ontario City Council
October 17, 2023