Attachment 5k - PC Report-E_Prelim Geotechnical Report_Part-3

I
I-a..
w~
O~ o o
C.H.J. Inc
Location
Job Number
Riverside Community Hospital Operator
07881-3 Cone Number
Hole Number CPT-02 Date and Time
Water Table Depth 0.00 ft
TIP
TSF

FRICTION

CPT DATA
MUJH
DSG1047
12/20/20079:16:17 AM
Fs/Qt
Filename
GPS
Maximum Depth
Elevation
SPTN
1° ~1 i ll 1 1 1 f$;::= I I 1 1 1 1 : ~f" i H 1II--+-1 <;a= 1 1 I SDF(503).cpt

54.30 ft
839 ft
20 I I I I I I I < I I -+ - -+-f--I If------+----j--t----t---t- 30 f--4-I ~+-t__--+-__+-+-__j --1---+ -
40 w
50 1 I I I +=-PI I I I II I I I I ~ I ~I I I I I $=+= 1 I I I I I I I ~I I I 12t:13~ 11 1 1 60 • 1 - sensitive fine grained • 4 - silty clay to clay • 2 - organic material • 5 - clayey silt to silty clay
. 3- clay • 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt
• 7 - silty sand to sandy silt
• 8 - sand to silty sand
. 9 - sand
• 10 - gravelly sand to sand
• 11 - very stiff fine grained (*)
. 12 - sand to clayey sand (*)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices I
t
w~
o!!::.- TIP
C.H.J. Inc
Location Riverside Community Hospital Operator MUJH
Job Number 07881-3 Cone Number DSG1047
Hole Number CPT -03 Date and Time 12/20/200710:07:56 AM Water Table Depth 0.00 ft

FRICTION
TSF

CPT DATA
Fs/Qt
Filename
GPS
Maximum Depth
Elevation
SPTN
SDF(504).cpt

55.12 ft
837 ft
201 1 $ t Iii I 1 1 1 1 I : :;Et 1 I I 1 : i ~m 1 1 t2LL -<---! +- 30 I I 4 I F3> f---+------I-
40 50 1-1 --+_-I--+-~
60 • 1 - sensitive fine grained
• 2 - organic material
. 3 - clay
• 4 - silty clay to clay
• 5 - clayey silt to silty clay
. 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt
• 7 - silty sand to sandy silt
• 8 - sand to silty sand
. 9 - sand
. 10 - gravelly sand to sand
• 11 - very stiff fine grained (")
. 12 - sand to clayey sand (")
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices ~
C.H.J. Inc
Location Riverside Communi t~ Hos ~ital Operator MUJH Filename SDF{5051·c~t Job Number 07881-3 Cone Number DSG1047 GPS
Hole Number CPT-04 Date and Time 12/20/200711:43:15 AM Maximum Depth 16.73 ft Water Table Depth 0.00 ft Elevation 797 ft
0:::

CPT DATA 0 I :> I- ...J«w CL -ICL w - TIP FRICTION Fs/Qt SPTN OW>-O~ 0 TSF 500 0 TSF 10 0 % 10 0 300 0 CJ)1Il1-
o '--1---- r--.

I
'-- j ~
~ ,I ! I -s; !
l:t
I ::.r
1= ~
~
W-~ <I==;; ~ P I ' ,
I ~
V--
rr
1- -k I
I I
11 I ' 1 I
D I 10 ~ i I.,
I "
I
2 1
I
L I 1 1
'--.. ( I
=::> ~
~- 1 '
I --- " n ! -==:
1 I I iii I I
I
I I
I ~
20 I
1 I ! I
I
1 I I I I

II I I I
I
I !
I
I I
I i
I
I
I
I
30 I
i I
I
--c---- I r
I
i i I I 1 I I I I I I I
I
I I
1 i 40 1- .. .- -- -- .. . . -.1- I '. - I
i I 1
I

I I I I
I I 1
I
1 I
I
J
I
I I I
I
I I 50 I I

I I I I
I i
I
I

I I I I I I I I
I
I
I I
i
I
I J
I
I
I I
I
i 60 i I I I I I I I
• 1 - s ensitive fine grained . 4- silty clay to clay • 7 - silty sand to sandy silt . 10 - gravelly sand to sand . 2 - organic material • 5 - clayey silt to silty clay . 8- sand to silty sand • 11 - very stiff fine grained (*) . 3- clay • 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt . 9- sand . 12 - sand to clayey sand (*) Depth Increment *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices ~
C.H.J. Inc
Location Riverside Community: Hos ~ital Operator MLlJH Filename SDF(506l·c~t Job Number 07881·3 Cone Number DSG1047 GPS
Hole Number CPT·05 Date and Time 12/20/200712:28:45 PM Maximum Depth 24.28 ft Water Table Depth 0.00 ft Elevation 798 ft
a::

CPT DATA 0 I :> I- ...J«W a. -Ia. w ....... TIP FRICTION Fs/Qt SPTN OW>-o E.- 0 TSF 500 0 TSF 10 0 % 10 0 300 0 cnCOI-
12 O ~ I<=. I ~ t-- i I
! I
~
I _I
F~~
~
12i- i
\ I
1 J-- P I
I
~
P- '" II D I
I
P I
1 V-
I
i i> ; I 10 ( ! 1
~
i : I ~
I
I
h ~ i )i I
I
1 = 1 ,
-------> ~
! I
I I i -{'-h ~ .. ~
~
i
I
I I
! I 1 I
tLL~ ~~ 20 "2 I» I 1 I I ~ 1
I<- I ~ I 1
.~
I \... ' ~ ~:. :! .
"",-4.- '. I
E::- ! :

I I I i I I
I I
1 I I I 1
I I 30 .

I
. . . . . -+ I +-I 1 I
I !
I
i
I 1 1 1 I I
I
I
1 1
I
1 1 I I I 40 1-. - .. .. . _ .
. +.1 .. . -- I I
I
1 i
I
I 1
I
I
1 I ! 1 1
I
I
,
I
I
I
1 1 1 1
I
I
I
! I 1 I I
50 1 I I
I I I I I I I I I i I 1
I
I I
I
I
1 II
i
I
I I I I 60 1 I I
• 1· sensitive fin e graine d . 4· silty clay to clay • 7 · silty sand to sandy silt . 10· gravelly sand to sand . 2· organic material • 5 · clayey silt to silty clay . 8 · sand to silty sand • 11 • very stiff fine grained (*) . 3· clay • 6· sandy silt to clayey silt . 9 · sand • 12 · sand to clayey sand (*) Depth Increment *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC·1983 .-
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices ~
C.H.J. Inc
Location Riverside Communit:t Hos~ital Operator MUJH Filename SDF!507l·c~t Job Number 07881·3 Cone Number DSG1047 GPS
Hole Number CPT·06 Date and Time 12/20/2007 1 :04: 18 PM Maximum Depth 4.43 ft Water Table Depth 0.00 ft Elevation 797 ft
0:::

CPT DATA 0 I :> I- ....J<CW e. -Ie. W~
TIP FRICTION Fs/Qt SPTN OW~ O~ 0 TSF 500 0 TSF 10 0 % 10 0 300 0 (f)1ll
01-
V- I --- E? I -1 -
~ I?- I _I ,-> ~ I- < p-
I ~
, I I
I
I 10 I i
! -t-
I I I
I
I
i
I
i I
I
I

I I I I
I

I I I I
I I I
I I I 20 I I I
I I I
i
I ! I I
I i I I I I I
I II I
I
I I
I 30
t + - .. - - . .- - --
I I !
I I I
I
i I I
1 I
I I I
I I
I
I
I
I I I ! I
I
~ I I I I
! 40 1-. -- .- - - . - . - . -+ - - . I
I
I I !
I
I
I
I
I
I I I
I I
I I I
50 I I I
I
I I I
I
I I I I i
I I I
I
I I I

I I I I I
I
i
60 I I I I i
• 1· sensitive fine grained . 4· silty clay to clay • 7· silty sand to sandy silt . 10· gravelly sand to sand . 2· organic material • 5· clayey silt to silty clay . 8· sand to silty sand • 11 • very stiff fine grained (') . 3· clay . 6· sandy silt to clayey silt . 9· sand • 12· sand to clayey sand (*) Depth Increment 'Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC.1983 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

!!"
"#

$
%$

#

%$
#

$"&'()

*+,--
.
/0

12 0 $

"
"
#

$
#

$
%$"!

*
"
!*

&
3

4."

#
!5
#1

#
"
!*

&
6
4.
%%

&
(

4.

! *

/0

12 0 $

12 70

#
"$"

#

$"!

*
"!*

&
6
4.

!*

%%
&
8-

4.
1

%%

&
'

4.
9 89
9(
'
::;'
<
<,
8-
8,:
8,-
8,-
88
=

=
/

=
88+
,+'
+
9+9
9+<
8:+:
89+
9 8,
89 <;88
:;'
:-;:
'';:
20

&
!.

>/>?
@
&%
$
;!.
=5
0
>+

A

#88",-8
2
#/

:

02

0B
0C?5=0
?0B
D>
0 =0
02&+.B
0 07
>B9<'@@
7
?0

+50+
0

=>
?20
&)! #$+.

>1>E>21

8-;:;,-8,&>
?0>E>

>/1E1?20.
5FB<:
8
---8
9<:
9<-
9(:
9(-
99:
99-
9':
9'-
:
8-
8:
,-
,:
-
:
-

D20>2 20 >
0
02520

>>E??2E 0>
>

D00G5
>2
>
>
>+

?0
>1
?0>E>21
>
>
D>/>
>1 20 552>G=
0H20E02
>5
>
5
E>2=>20 ?2
0
>
>E>2=
>+??2E 0>
>
>
D02
>
>

>
D02
=0= EE02+
02E 00
/00
2 20 552>G=
0+
2
>0
/00
2 = 012 ?
+
05
D&!.

E*B
8+8

05
D&!.
0 07
>&!.

E

B 2
5

#B
D
#B
8,>
I2

&0=
I0

0.
BJ9-8810>
0DJ1
/J
2 2 =0A?0,-8,+1

5BJ<:10>
0DJ,-8
52>AJ8---827020> ==?
D>5J+,

E0
>
0J 8---8+15A,;,(;8
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

#
"$"
*%$"! *
"
*
!
*
/0

12 0 $12 70

#
"$"
*%$"
!

*
"
%%

&
:

4.
%%

&
:

4.

"
%%

#
!5
#1

0>E>21
:-E00

>
0B

*
*

+=
!

*

!!+/

!8+:!
!

*

!8+!
8:

+*%
!

$
%*
@%!%
$

8,

*
8-

!

*-
+
@@0

%

#
0

,+8
!

8;,,;-(%#+D+A+

+
:,;'
:-;:

=
/

9;'
20

&
!.

>/>?
@
&%
$
;!.
=5
0
>+
!
"
A

#88",-8
2
#/

:

02

0B
0C?5=0
?0B
D>
0 =0
02&+.B
0 07
>B9<'@@
7
?0

+50+
0

=>
?20
&)! #$+.

>1>E>21

8-;:;,-8,
5FB<:
8
---8
9::
9:-
9:
9-
9:
9-
9,:
9,-
:
:-
::
'-
':
9-
9:
(-

D20>2 20 >
0
02520

>>E??2E 0>
>

D00G5
>2
>
>
>+

?0
>1
?0>E>21
>
>
D>/>
>1 20 552>G=
0H20E02
>5
>
5
E>2=>20 ?2
0
>
>E>2=
>+??2E 0>
>
>
D02
>
>

>
D02
=0= EE02+
02E 00
/00
2 20 552>G=
0+
2
>0
/00
2 = 012 ?
+
05
D&!.

E*B
8+8%

05
D&!.
0 07
>&!.

E

B 2
5

#B
D
#B
8,>
I2

&0=
I0

0.
BJ9-8810>
0DJ1
/J
2 2 =0A?0,-8,+1

5BJ<:10>
0DJ,-8
52>AJ8---827020> ==?
D>5J+,

E0
>
0J 8---8+15A,;,(;8
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

"
"#

$
%$"!

*
"

!*

&
K
4.
/0

12 0

"
"
#

$
*
%$
*
#"!

*
"
*

5>>2
12 0

"
"
#

$

%$"!

*
"
!*

&
3
4.
5>>2
12 0 $

#
"
"

%$"! "
!*

&
3
4.
%%

"

!

*

&
6
4.

"
%%

/0

12 0 $12 70

#
"
"

#

$
*%$
*
#"!

*
"*

!
*
"!

*

&
,

4.

"

#

%
<
9(
:-;'
(:
:';'
8-
888
8-

88:
88'
=
/
5
5

=
/
8<+-
8+9
8<+(

8-+,
88+-
88 ,8
:-
-;-
9:;'
(:
:;'
20

&
!.

>/>?
@
&%
$
;!.
=5
0
>+
#
A

#88",-8
2
#/

:

02

0B
0C?5=0
?0B
D>
0 =0
02&+.B
0 07
>B9<@@
7
?0

+50+
0

=>
?20
&)! #$+.

>1>E>21

8-;:;,-8,&>
?0>E>

>/1E1?20.
5FB<:
8
---8
9<-
9(:
9(-
99:
99-
9':
9'-
9::
:
8-
8:
,-
,:
-
:
-

D20>2 20 >
0
02520

>>E??2E 0>
>

D00G5
>2
>
>
>+

?0
>1
?0>E>21
>
>
D>/>
>1 20 552>G=
0H20E02
>5
>
5
E>2=>20 ?2
0
>
>E>2=
>+??2E 0>
>
>
D02
>
>

>
D02
=0= EE02+
02E 00
/00
2 20 552>G=
0+
2
>0
/00
2 = 012 ?
+
05
D&!.

E*B
8+,

05
D&!.
0 07
>&!.

E

B 2
5

#B
D
#B
8,>
I2

&0=
I0

0.
BJ9-8810>
0DJ1
/J
2 2 =0A?0,-8,+1

5BJ<:10>
0DJ,-8
52>AJ8---827020> ==?
D>5J+,

E0
>
0J 8---8+15A,;,(;8
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices %%

&
(

4.

"*

"*
!
*
0>E>21
<3E00

>
0B

* %
$

!,<!
!

*
+?
%

$

+*%
!

$

%*+
<9;<
8-'
/
,,+ ';'
20

&
!.

>/>?
@
&%
$
;!.
=5
0
>+
#!
"
A

#88",-8
2
#/

:

02

0B
0C?5=0
?0B
D>
0 =0
02&+.B
0 07
>B9<@@
7
?0

+50+
0

=>
?20
&)! #$+.

>1>E>21

8-;:;,-8,
5FB<:
8
---8
9:-
9:
9-
9:
9-
9,:
9,-
98:
:
:-
::
'-
':
9-
9:
(-

D20>2 20 >
0
02520

>>E??2E 0>
>

D00G5
>2
>
>
>+

?0
>1
?0>E>21
>
>
D>/>
>1 20 552>G=
0H20E02
>5
>
5
E>2=>20 ?2
0
>
>E>2=
>+??2E 0>
>
>
D02
>
>

>
D02
=0= EE02+
02E 00
/00
2 20 552>G=
0+
2
>0
/00
2 = 012 ?
+
05
D&!.

E*B
8+,%

05
D&!.
0 07
>&!.

E

B 2
5

#B
D
#B
8,>
I2

&0=
I0

0.
BJ9-8810>
0DJ1
/J
2 2 =0A?0,-8,+1

5BJ<:10>
0DJ,-8
52>AJ8---827020> ==?
D>5J+,

E0
>
0J 8---8+15A,;,(;8
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory testing was conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results, or the conclusions derived f rom these tests. Wh ere a specific laboratory test method has been referenced, such as ASTM or Caltrans, the reference only applies to the specified laboratory test method , which has be en u sed only as a g uidance doc ument for the general performance of the test and not as a “Test Standard”. A brief test description follows.

Classification: Soils were visually classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System as established by the American Society of Civil Engineers per ASTM D2487. The soil classifications are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A.

Particle Size Analysis: Particle size analyses were performed in accordance with ASTM D422 and were us ed to suppleme nt the visual soil classifications. The test results and assoc iated so il classifications are summarized in Figures B-1.1 through B-1.12.

Atterberg Limits: ASTM D4318 was used to determine the liquid and plastic limits, and plasticity index of a selected clayey soil sample. The results are shown in selected Figures B-1.1 to B-1.12.

Expansion Index: The expansion potentials of selected soil samples were estimated in general accordance with the laborat ory procedures ou tlined in ASTM D4829. The test results are summarized in Figure B-2, along with common criteria for evaluating the expansion potential.

pH and Resistivity: To assess the potential for reactivity with buried metals, selected soil samples were t ested f or pH and minimum saturated resistivity using Cal trans test method 643. The corrosivity test results are summarized in Figure B-3.

Sulfate Content: To assess the potential for reactivity with concrete, selected soil samples were tested for water soluble sulfate. The sulfate was extracted from the soil under vacuum using a 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio, and then tested for water soluble sulfate using ASTM D516. These test results are also shown in Figure B-3, along with criteria for evaluating soluble sulfate content.

Chloride Content: Soil samples were also tested for water soluble chloride. The chloride was extracted from the soil under vacuum using the 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio described above. The extracted solutions were then tested for water soluble chloride using a calibrated ion specific electronic probe. These test results are also shown in Figure B-3.

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING (Continued)

Consolidation: The one-dimensional consolidation properties of selected samples were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D2435. The samples were inundated with water under a nominal seating load, allowed to swell, and then subjected to controlled stress increments while restrained laterally and drained axially. The test results are presented in Figures B-4.1 and B-4.2.

Direct Shear: The shear strengths of selected materials were assessed using direct shear testing conducted on relatively undisturbed soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D3080. The shear test results are shown in Figures B-5.1 to B-5.4. The tests are summarized in Figure B-5.5.

R-Value: R-Value tests were performed on selected samples of the subgrade soils collected from the site in general accordance with CTM 301. The test results are shown in Figure B-6.1 and B-6.2.

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

SILT AND
CLAY
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM ATTERBERG LIMITS EXPLORATION ID: LIQUID LIMIT: ---
SAMPLE DEPTH: DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT: --- PLASTICITY INDEX: ---
Document No. 24-0011
SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-1.1
FINE

GRAVEL SAND
B-1
0' - 5'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 99 97
91 81
70 58
50 39
1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
39% Fines→←1% Gravel 60% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

SILT AND
CLAY
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS EXPLORATION ID: LIQUID LIMIT: 37
SAMPLE DEPTH: DESCRIPTION: LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 19
PLASTICITY INDEX: 18
Document No. 24-0011
SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-1.2
FINE

GRAVEL SAND
B-1
20' - 21½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 99 97 95
89 70
61 54
43 37
33 28
23 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200 Hydrometer 89% Fines→←0% Gravel 11% Sand
26 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-2
10' - 11½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 97
79 50
33 26
21 18
14 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
14% Fines→←3% Gravel 83% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

SILT AND
CLAY
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS EXPLORATION ID: LIQUID LIMIT: 46
SAMPLE DEPTH: DESCRIPTION: LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 22
PLASTICITY INDEX: 24
Document No. 24-0011
SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-1.4
FINE

GRAVEL SAND
B-2
20' - 21½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 99 99 99 97
95 88
81 65
57 50
39 31
1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200 Hydrometer 97% Fines→←0% Gravel 3% Sand
35 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-3
½' - 5'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100
97 96 95
91 84
75 65
58 47
1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
47% Fines→←4% Gravel 49% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-4
5' - 6½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100
97 88
74 61
51 44
35 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
35% Fines→←0% Gravel 65% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

SILT AND
CLAY
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: ML ATTERBERG LIMITS EXPLORATION ID: LIQUID LIMIT: ---
SAMPLE DEPTH: DESCRIPTION: SANDY SILT PLASTIC LIMIT: --- PLASTICITY INDEX: ---
Document No. 24-0011
SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-1.7
FINE

GRAVEL SAND
B-5
5' - 6½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 99
95 90
86 82
77 67
1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
67% Fines→←0% Gravel 33% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

SILT AND
CLAY
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SC ATTERBERG LIMITS EXPLORATION ID: LIQUID LIMIT: ---
SAMPLE DEPTH: DESCRIPTION: CLAYEY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT: --- PLASTICITY INDEX: ---
Document No. 24-0011
SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-1.8
FINE

GRAVEL SAND
B-6
½' - 5'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100
95 87
77 68
60 54
45 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
45% Fines→←0% Gravel 55% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-7
10' - 11½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 99
94 84
77 73
70 67
60 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
60% Fines→←1% Gravel 39% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-8
0' - 5'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100
92 86
79 71
65 60
54 50
42 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
42% Fines→←14% Gravel 44% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-9
10' - 11½'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100 98
92 88
84 80
77 69
1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
69% Fines→←0% Gravel 31% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

GRAVEL SAND
B-10
1' - 5'

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
100
97 92
87 83
79 75
67 1½'' 3/4'' 3/8'' #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #140 #200
67% Fines→←0% Gravel 33% Sand
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100

0.0010.010.1110100
Grain Size in Millimeters
U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Percent Finer by Weight
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

Document No. 24-0011
Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-2

EXPANSION TEST RESULTS
(ASTM D4829)

SAMPLE ID

DESCRIPTION

EXPANSION
INDEX
B-3 @ ½’ – 5’ Fill: Yellowish brown silty sand (SM). 0 B-6 @ ½’ – 5’ Fill: Dark yellowish brown silty sand (SM). 1 B-8 @ 0’ – 5’ Fill: Brown silty sand (SM). 0
B-10 @ 1’ – 5’ Fill: Yellowish brown sandy silt (ML). 1

EXPANSION INDEX

POTENTIAL EXPANSION

0 to 20

Very low

21 to 50

Low

51 to 90

Medium

91 to 130

High

Above 130

Very High

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

Document No. 24-0011
Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-3

CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS
(ASTM D516)

SAMPLE ID pH RESISTIVITY
[OHM-CM]

SULFATE
CONTENT [%]

CHLORIDE
CONTENT [%]
B-3 @ ½’ – 5’ 7.7 4,230 < 0.01 < 0.01
B-6 @ ½’ – 5’ 8.4 3,220 < 0.01 < 0.01
B-8 @ 0’ – 5’ 8.2 3,610 < 0.01 < 0.01
B-10 @ 1’ – 5’ 7.7 2,460 < 0.01 < 0.01

SULFATE CONTENT [%] SULFATE EXPOSURE CEMENT TYPE

0.00 to 0.10 Negligible -

0.10 to 0.20 Moderate II, IP(MS), IS(MS)

0.20 to 2.00 Severe V
Above 2.00 Very Severe V plus pozzolan

SOIL RESISTIVITY
[OHM-CM]

GENERAL DEGREE OF CORROSIVITY

TO FERROUS METALS
0 to 1,000 Very Corrosive
1,000 to 2,000 Corrosive
2,000 to 5,000 Moderately Corrosive
5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive
Above 10,000 Slightly Corrosive

CHLORIDE (Cl)
CONTENT [%]

GENERAL DEGREE OF

CORROSIVITY TO METALS

0.00 to 0.03 Negligible

0.03 to 0.15 Corrosive
Above 0.15 Severely Corrosive

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Sample: Results Initial Final
B-1 @ 20' - 21½' Po: 2507 [psf] Height: 1.0000 0.9434 [in] (Water added at seating load) Pc: 6600 [psf] Dry Density: 102.4 108.5 [pcf] Description: OCR: 2.6 Void Ratio (e): 0.676 0.574
Yellow brown lean clay (CL) Cc: 0.214 Water Content: 22.4 21.0 [%] (Estimated field curve in RED) Cs: 0.044 Saturation: 91 100 [%] Note: To find the traditional compression (Cc) and swell (Cs) indices, the values in strain domain were multiplied by 1.68 (or 1+e) Document No. 24-0011
CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-4.1
Pc ~ 6600 [psf]
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
100 1000 10000 100000
Strain [%]
Stress [psf]
Cc~0.128Cs~0.026
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Sample: Results Initial Final
B-2 @ 20' - 21½' Po: 2587 [psf] Height: 1.0000 0.9831 [in] (Water added at seating load) Pc: 7800 [psf] Dry Density: 105.6 107.4 [pcf] Description: OCR: 3.0 Void Ratio (e): 0.710 0.648
Cc: 0.195 Water Content: 22.6 22.9 [%]
(Estimated field curve in RED) Cs: 0.053 Saturation: 90 100 [%] Note: To find the traditional compression (Cc) and swell (Cs) indices, the values in strain domain were multiplied by 1.71 (or 1+e) Document No. 24-0011
CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-4.2
Dark yellow brown lean clay (CL)
Pc ~ 7800 [psf]
-2%
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
100 1000 10000 100000
Strain [%]
Stress [psf]
Cc~0.114Cs~0.031
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE: B-2 @ 10' - 11½' PEAK ULTIMATE
Young Alluvium (Qya): ' 38 o 38 o
C' 300 PSF 200 PSF

IN-SITU AS-TESTED
STRAIN RATE: 0.0030 IN/MIN d 108.6 PCF 108.6 PCF
(Sample was consolidated and drained) wc 3.2 % 15.4 %
Document No. 24-0011
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-5.1
Dark yellowish brown silty sand (SM)
0 1000
2000
3000
4000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
STRAIN [%]
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
NORMAL STRESS [PSF]
Peak Strength Test Results
38 Degrees, 300 PSF Cohesion
Ultimate Strength Test Results
38 Degrees, 200 PSF Cohesion
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE: B-4 @ 5' - 6½' PEAK ULTIMATE
Young Alluvium (Qya): ' 39 o 39 o
C' 200 PSF 100 PSF

IN-SITU AS-TESTED
STRAIN RATE: 0.0030 IN/MIN d 112.3 PCF 112.3 PCF
(Sample was consolidated and drained) wc 9.4 % 15.7 %
Document No. 24-0011
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-5.2
Yellowish brown silty sand (SM)
0 1000
2000
3000
4000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
STRAIN [%]
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
NORMAL STRESS [PSF]
Peak Strength Test Results
39 Degrees, 200 PSF Cohesion
Ultimate Strength Test Results
39 Degrees, 100 PSF Cohesion
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE: B-10 @ 10' - 11½' PEAK ULTIMATE
Artificial Fill (Qya): ' 37 o 37 o
C' 200 PSF 100 PSF

IN-SITU AS-TESTED
STRAIN RATE: 0.0030 IN/MIN d 98.5 PCF 98.5 PCF
(Sample was consolidated and drained) wc 5.8 % 26.3 %
Document No. 24-0011
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-5.3
Yellowish brown silty sand (SM)
0 1000
2000
3000
4000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
STRAIN [%]
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
NORMAL STRESS [PSF]
Peak Strength Test Results
37 Degrees, 200 PSF Cohesion
Ultimate Strength Test Results
37 Degrees, 100 PSF Cohesion
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE: B-10 @ 20' - 21½' PEAK ULTIMATE
Artificial Fill (Qya): ' 30 o 30 o
C' 400 PSF 300 PSF

IN-SITU AS-TESTED
STRAIN RATE: 0.0002 IN/MIN d 98.5 PCF 98.5 PCF
(Sample was consolidated and drained) wc 11.2 % 26.3 %
Document No. 24-0011
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-5.4
Brownish yellow sandy silt (ML)
0 1000
2000
3000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
STRAIN [%]
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
NORMAL STRESS [PSF]
Peak Strength Test Results
30 Degrees, 400 PSF Cohesion
Ultimate Strength Test Results
30 Degrees, 300 PSF Cohesion
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

DESCRIPTION
A summary of direct shear tests conducted PEAK ULTIMATE on samples of the sandy fill and alluvium ESTIMATE ESTIMATE collected from the Garage and Tower sites ' 37 o 36 o
at the Riverside Community Hospital. C' 200 PSF 150 PSF Document No. 24-0011
DIRECT SHEAR TEST SUMMARY Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-5.5
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
SHEAR STRESS [PSF]
NORMAL STRESS [PSF]
Ultimate Values
Peak Values
Ultimate Strength
Peak Strength
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DATE: 4/3/24
SAMPLE LOCATION: TEST DATE: 4/12/24
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:

LABORATORY TEST DATA
TEST SPECIMEN 12345
A COMPACTOR PRESSURE 350 350 350 [PSI]
B INITIAL MOISTURE 2.5 2.5 2.5 [%]
C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT 1200 1200 1200 [G]
D WATER ADDED 75 85 102 [ML]
E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)/C) 6.4 7.3 8.7 [%]
F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) 8.9 9.8 11.2 [%]
G MOLD WEIGHT 2009.7 2016.1 2009.1 [G]
H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT 3083.5 3170.7 3160.9 [G]
I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) 1073.8 1154.6 1151.8 [G]
J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT 2.38 2.43 2.55 [IN]
K DRY DENSITY (30.3*I/((100+F)*J)) 125.5 131.2 123.1 [PCF] L EXUDATION LOAD 7490 5459 3109 [LB]
M EXUDATION PRESSURE (L/12.54) 597 435 248 [PSI]
N STABILOMETER AT 1000 LBS 14 20 39 [PSI]
O STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS 24 33 73 [PSI]
P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI 4.33 5.04 6.93 [Turns]
Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER 77 66 30
R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) 75 64 30
S EXPANSION DIAL READING 0.0016 0.0007 0.0002 [IN]
T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) 69 30 9 [PSF]
U COVER BY STABILOMETER 0.23 0.34 0.65 [FT]
V COVER BY EXPANSION 0.53 0.23 0.07 [FT]
TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0
GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.72
UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130
R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 40
R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 68
R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 40
*Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301, Section C, Part b.

REV. 2, DATED 1/31/15
B-6
½' - 5'
Dark yellowish brown clayey sand (SC)

R-VALUE TEST RESULTS
CT301
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92126
Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-6.1a
Document No. 24-0011
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Sample: B-6 @ ½' - 5' R-Value at Equilibrium: 40
COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS Project No. SD809
Document No. 24-0011
FIGURE B-6.1b
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92126
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0100200300400500600700800
R-Value
Exudation Pressure [psi]

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Cover Thickness by Stabilometer [FT]
Cover Thickness by Expansion [FT]
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DATE: 4/1/24
SAMPLE LOCATION: TEST DATE: 4/12/24
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:

LABORATORY TEST DATA
TEST SPECIMEN 12345
A COMPACTOR PRESSURE 290 250 210 [PSI]
B INITIAL MOISTURE 2.2 2.2 2.2 [%]
C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT 1200 1200 1200 [G]
D WATER ADDED 90 100 105 [ML]
E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)/C) 7.7 8.5 8.9 [%]
F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) 9.9 10.7 11.1 [%]
G MOLD WEIGHT 2004.8 2007.6 2074.3 [G]
H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT 3155.6 3197.7 3202.9 [G]
I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) 1150.8 1190.1 1128.6 [G]
J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT 2.57 2.62 2.53 [IN]
K DRY DENSITY (30.3*I/((100+F)*J)) 123.5 124.3 121.6 [PCF] L EXUDATION LOAD 4172 3211 2450 [LB]
M EXUDATION PRESSURE (L/12.54) 333 256 195 [PSI]
N STABILOMETER AT 1000 LBS 39 45 46 [PSI]
O STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS 76 96 97 [PSI]
P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI 6.55 6.74 7.18 [Turns]
Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER 30 20 18
R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) 31 22 18
S EXPANSION DIAL READING 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 [IN]
T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) 0 0 0 [PSF]
U COVER BY STABILOMETER 0.70 0.79 0.83 [FT]
V COVER BY EXPANSION 0.00 0.00 0.00 [FT]
TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0
GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.58
UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130
R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 27
R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 100
R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 27
*Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301, Section C, Part b.

REV. 2, DATED 1/31/15
B-8
0' - 5'
Dark yellowish brown silty sand (SM)

R-VALUE TEST RESULTS
CT301
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92126
Project No. SD809
FIGURE B-6.2a
Document No. 24-0011
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Sample: B-8 @ 0' - 5' R-Value at Equilibrium: 27
COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS Project No. SD809
Document No. 24-0011
FIGURE B-6.2b
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92126
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0100200300400500600700800
R-Value
Exudation Pressure [psi]

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Cover Thickness by Stabilometer [FT]
Cover Thickness by Expansion [FT]
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

APPENDIX C

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011R.docx

APPENDIX C

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSES

Liquefaction analys es w ere performed using the data gathered from the CPT sounding s. The results are summarized in the following Figures C -1 t o C-5. The analyses were based on the procedures originally developed by Seed and Idriss , and were conducted in general accordance with the recommended procedures for liquefaction analyses described in Section C4.4 of ASCE 61-14 (ASCE, 2014). The tip resistance (qt) was normalized for overburden pressure and corrected for fines content (Youd et al., 2001). The fines correction was based on the Soil Behavior Type Index Ic (Robertson, 2010).

For each CPT sounding, the uncorrected Cone Resistance, Normalized Cone Resistance, the Soil Behavior Type (SBT), Factor of Safety against liquefaction, and estimated vertical settlement are plotted versus depth. A high groundwater elevation corresponding to a depth of 25 -feet below grade was assumed for the analyses based on available historic data from the site vicinity as well as the groundwater levels we encountered during our recent subsurface explorations. The seismic demand used for the liquefaction analyses was equal to the Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean acceleration adjusted for site effects (PGA M) for both the Garage and Tower sites of 0.615g, based on the requirements of Section 11.8.3 of ASCE 7-16 for a Seismic Design Category D. A Maximum Considered Earthquake Magnitude of Mw 8.1 was also used for these analyses, corresponding to a large earthquake occurring on the San Bernardino segment of the San Jacinto fault zone roughly 13 km southwest of the site.

The vertical settlement plots for each CPT sounding show the estimated range of dynamic settlement resulting from a moment Magnitude of Mw 8.1 and seismic demand equal to the PGAM acceleration. At depths where the seismically induced shear stress exceeds the stress required to cause liquefaction, the Factor of Safety is less than 1.0 , and seismic settlement may occur. Fine- grained soils with an Ic value greater than 2.6 are considered too clayey to liquefy , and granular soils with a normalized tip resistance greater than 160 are considered too dense to liquefy. Only soils that are both loose enough and sandy enough to liquefy contribute to the post-liquefaction settlement. Dry sand settlement above groundwater accounted for most of the estimated seismic settlement (Pradel, 1998). We assumed that a 10-foot-deep over-excavation below grade would be co nducted for the new Tower pad, and that the new Garage basement excavation would also extend approximately 10-feet below existing grades.

Each of the CPT analyses were conducted using three different assumptions. In the first figure for each CPT sounding (Case A), a spreadsheet was used to estimate seismic settlement with no data averaging. These analyses were then compared to results from a commercially available program CLiq V3.3.1.14, with the CPT data averaged across 3 depth increments (Case B), and with a thin layer correction applied (Case C).

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011R.docx

APPENDIX C

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSES (Continued)

The results of the parametric liquefaction analyses are tabulated below, along with the average settlement f rom the three different methods. The analyses indicate that t he total seismic settlement may range from less than ½ inch to slightly more than 3 inches across the site .

According to state guidelines, a differential settlement equal to one -half of the total settlement may be conservatively assumed for structural design (SCEC, 1999). Therefore, we estimate a differential settlement from the combined effects of seismic compaction of dry soil above groundwater and post-liquefaction settlement below groundwater of up to approximately 1½ inches across a distance of 40 feet.

Exploration
No.

A) Settlement
(Raw CPT Data)
B) Settlement
(Data Averaging)
C) Settlement
(Thin Layer)
Average
Settlement
Figure
No.

CPT-1 1.0 Inches 0.7 Inches 0.7 Inches 0.8 Inches C-1
CPT-2 1.8 Inches 1.3 Inches 1.3 Inches 1.5 Inches C-2
CPT-3 0.0 Inches 0.0 Inches 0.0 Inches 0.0 Inches C-3
CPT-4 3.4 Inches 3.1 Inches 3.1 Inches 3.2 Inches C-4
CPT-5 0.4 Inches 0.9 Inches 0.8 Inches 0.7 Inches C-5

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices DEPTH [FEET]
Document No. 24-0011
DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-1) Project No. SD809
(Seismic Demand ~ 0.615g) FIGURE C-1a

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Post-Liquefaction Settlement [IN]
Total Settlement = 1 [IN]
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 0 100 200 300 400
Qc1N(CS)
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 01234
Soil Type (Ic)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 33.99 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-1
Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
8006004002000
Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Corrected norm. cone resistanc e SBT Plot
Ic(SBT)
4321
Depth (ft)
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
SBT Plot FS Plot
Factor of safety

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

10.50 Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:33:46 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-1b
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 33.99 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-1
Location:

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

1.210.8 0.6 0.4 0.20
Depth (ft)
34 33
32 31
30 29
28 27
26 25
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:35:41 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-1c
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices DEPTH [FEET]
Document No. 24-0011
DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-2) Project No. SD809
(Seismic Demand ~ 0.615g) FIGURE C-2a

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Post-Liquefaction Settlement [IN]
Total Settlement = 1.8 [IN]
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 0 100 200 300 400
Qc1N(CS)
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 01234
Soil Type (Ic)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 37.54 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-2
Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
800600400200
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Corrected norm. cone resistanc e SBT Plot
Ic(SBT)
4321
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
SBT Plot FS Plot
Factor of safety

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

2.521.510.50
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:37:05 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-2b
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 37.54 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-2
Location:

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

2.521.510.50
Depth (ft)
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:37:50 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-2c
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices DEPTH [FEET]
Document No. 24-0011
DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-3) Project No. SD809
(Seismic Demand ~ 0.615g) FIGURE C-3a

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Post-Liquefaction Settlement [IN]
Total Settlement = 0 [IN]
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 0 100 200 300 400
Qc1N(CS)
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 01234
Soil Type (Ic)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 20.67 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
800600400200
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
Corrected norm. cone resistan c SBT Plot
Ic(SBT)
4321
Depth (ft)
20 19.5
19 18.5
18 17.5
17 16.5
16 15.5
15 14.5
14 13.5
13 12.5
12 11.5
11 10.5
10 9.5
9 8.5
8 7.5
7 6.5
6 5.5
5 4.5
4 3.5
3 2.5
2 1.5
1 0.5
0 SBT Plot FS Plot
Factor of safety

21.510.50
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
FS Plot Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

0.80.60.40.20 Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:38:43 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq CPT-3
FIGURE C-3b
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 20.67 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-3
Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
800600400200
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

21.510.50
Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
FS Plot Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

0.80.60.40.20 Depth (ft)

20.5 20

19.5 19

18.5 18

17.5 17

16.5 16

15.5 15

14.5 14

13.5 13

12.5 12

11.5 11

10.5 10

9.5 9

8.5 8

7.5 7

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4

3.5 3

2.5 2

1.5 1

0.5 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:39:46 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-3c
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices DEPTH [FEET]
Document No. 24-0011
DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-4) Project No. SD809
(Seismic Demand ~ 0.615g) FIGURE C-4a

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Post-Liquefaction Settlement [IN]
Total Settlement = 3.4 [IN]
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 0 100 200 300 400
Qc1N(CS)
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 01234
Soil Type (Ic)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 25.01 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-4
Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
800600400200
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Corrected norm. cone resistanc e SBT Plot
Ic(SBT)
4321
Depth (ft)
24 23
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 SBT Plot FS Plot
Factor of safety

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
4 3 2 1 0
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:41:14 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-4b
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 25.01 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-4
Location:

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
4 3 2 1 0
Depth (ft)
25 24
23 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
11 10
9 8
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:42:03 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-4c
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices DEPTH [FEET]
Document No. 24-0011
DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-5) Project No. SD809
(Seismic Demand ~ 0.615g) FIGURE C-5a

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Post-Liquefaction Settlement [IN]
Total Settlement = 0.4 [IN]
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 0 100 200 300 400
Qc1N(CS)
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 01234
Soil Type (Ic)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 54.73 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-5
Location:

Cone resistance
qt (tsf)
600400200
Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
Cone resistance Corrected norm. cone resistance
Qtn,cs
200150100500
Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
Corrected norm. cone resistanc e SBT Plot
Ic(SBT)
4321
Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
SBT Plot FS Plot
Factor of safety

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

0.80.60.40.20 Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:43:53 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-5b
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project: Riverside Community Hospital
Group Delta Consultants
9245 Activity Road, Suite 103
San Diego, California 92126
http://www.GroupDelta.com
Total depth: 54.73 ftSoutheast of 14th Street and Brockton Avenue CPT-5
Location:

21.510.50
Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
FS Plot
During earthq.

Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)

0.80.60.40.20 Depth (ft)
54 52
50 48
46 44
42 40
38 36
34 32
30 28
26 24
22 20
18 16
14 12
10 8
6 4
2 0
Vertical settlements
Analysis method:

Fines correction method:

Points to test:

Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:

NCEER (1998)
NCEER (1998)
Based on Ic value

8.10 0.61
G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

30.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
Use fill:

Fill height:

Fill weight:

Trans. detect. applied:

Kσ applied:

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

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

Sands only
No
N/A
Method based
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/16/2024, 3:42:46 PM Project file: N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\Appendix A\CPT\SD809 Liquefaction.clq FIGURE C-5c
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

APPENDIX D

INFILTRATION ASSESSMENT
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc

APPENDIX D

INFILTRATION ASSESSMENT

We understand that various detention basins, swales or pervious pavements will be incorporated into the development to help promote on -site infiltration. To aid in BMP design, the vertical infiltration rates were estimated at the six test locations provided in the RFP. T he standard borehole percolation test method was used . The test configuration is depicted schematically below. The borehole percolation test method requires filling the borehole repeatedly to maintain a relatively constant water head throughout the test duration, while measuring the volume of water the percolates into the ground at specific time intervals. The approximate infiltration test locations are shown on the Exploration Plan, Figure 3 A. The test results are presented in detail in the attached Figures D-1.1a through D-6.2b.

Per the County of Riverside BMP Design Manual , the
borehole percolation test may be used for both planning level screening and BMP design purposes. Per the
standards of practice , the percolation test s should be conducted at approximately the same depth and the
same material as the base of the proposed storm water
BMP. The Storm Water Manual also requires that two
infiltration tests be conducted within 50 -feet of each proposed BMP. We conducted t wo infiltration tests at
each of the 6 BMP locations shown on the overall site
Exploration Plan, Figure 3A.

The field infiltration tests were conducted in general
accordance with the C ounty of Riverside requirements.

The borehole infiltration test wells were drilled to depths ranging from 3 to 8 feet below the ground surface. Prior to testing, each well was presoaked with water and
allowed to drain. Water was then infiltrated into the soil with flow measurements taken at selected time intervals.

Each infiltration test was continued until a relatively constant infiltration rate was attained for 60 minutes.

The field testing indicated preliminary factored infiltration rates that ranged widely from 0.02 to 1.32 inches per
hour as shown in Figures D-1.1a through D-6.2b. A Factor of Safety of 2.0 is recommended for BMP design. Note that a factored infiltration rate above 0.50 inches per hour is commonly considered the minimum rate for effective “Full Infiltration” measures. An infiltration rate less than 0.05 inches per hour is commonly considered a “No Infiltration” condition.

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐1A Tested By: CRJ/DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 75 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
25 2.0 80 3.53 3.73 19.4 10.1*r 2.4 1.85
26 2.0 82 3.73 3.92 17.1 8.7*r 2.3 1.98
27 2.0 84 3.92 4.08 15.0 7.4*r 1.9 1.89
28 2.0 86 4.08 4.23 13.1 6.3*r 1.8 2.01
29 2.0 88 4.23 4.33 11.6 5.3*r 1.2 1.50
30 2.0 90 4.33 4.44 10.4 4.6*r 1.3 1.83
31 2.0 92 4.44 4.54 9.1 3.8*r 1.2 1.88
32 2.0 94 2.75 3.09 28.0 15.4*r 4.1 2.21
33 2.0 96 3.09 3.35 24.4 13.1*r 3.1 1.93
34 2.0 98 3.35 3.57 21.5 11.3*r 2.6 1.85
35 2.0 100 3.57 3.76 19.0 9.8*r 2.3 1.79
36 2.0 102 3.76 3.93 16.9 8.5*r 2.0 1.80
37 2.0 104 3.93 4.07 15.0 7.3*r 1.7 1.66
38 2.0 106 4.07 4.18 13.5 6.4*r 1.3 1.44
39 2.0 108 4.18 4.31 12.1 5.6*r 1.6 1.89
40 2.0 110 4.31 4.42 10.6 4.7*r 1.3 1.80
41 2.0 112 4.42 4.51 9.4 4*r 1.1 1.64
42 2.0 114 2.85 3.15 27.0 14.7*r 3.6 2.02
43 2.0 116 3.15 3.38 23.8 12.7*r 2.8 1.75
44 2.0 118 3.38 3.59 21.2 11.1*r 2.5 1.79
45 2.0 120 3.59 3.73 19.1 9.7*r 1.7 1.32
46 2.0 122 3.73 3.89 17.3 8.7*r 1.9 1.65
47 2.0 124 3.89 4.01 15.6 7.6*r 1.4 1.37
48 2.0 126 4.01 4.14 14.1 6.8*r 1.6 1.63
49 2.0 128 4.14 4.24 12.7 5.9*r 1.2 1.38
50 2.0 130 4.24 4.34 11.5 5.2*r 1.2 1.51
51 2.0 132 4.34 4.44 10.3 4.5*r 1.2 1.68
52 2.0 134 4.44 4.52 9.2 3.8*r 1.0 1.48
53 3.0 137 2.81 3.17 27.1 15*r 4.3 1.61
54 2.0 139 3.17 3.34 23.9 12.5*r 2.0 1.29
55 2.0 141 3.34 3.50 22.0 11.4*r 1.9 1.32
56 2.0 143 3.50 3.65 20.1 10.3*r 1.8 1.34
57 2.0 145 3.65 3.80 18.3 9.3*r 1.8 1.47
58 2.0 147 3.80 3.90 16.8 8.2*r 1.2 1.06
59 2.0 149 3.90 4.02 15.5 7.5*r 1.4 1.38
60 2.0 151 4.02 4.14 14.0 6.7*r 1.4 1.51

17.2 0.8 23.6

0.7 21.5

2.4 72.9

1.9 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

55.8 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐1.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐1AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 1.57 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

1.4 42.9

1.1 32.2

1.4 40.8

1.1 34.3

0.7 21.5

1.4 40.8

0.6 19.3

0.9 1.6 47.2

1.2 36.5

1.0 30.0

0.8 23.6

21.5 0.9 27.9

0.8 23.6

2.1 64.4

1.6 49.3

1.5 45.1

25.7 0.9

0.7 0.6

21.5 25.7

1.0 30.0

1.1 34.3

0.9 25.7

27.9 0.7 21.5

0.7 21.5

2.6 51.5

1.2 36.5

1.1 1.1

1.1 0.7

0.9 34.3

32.2 32.2
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐1A Tested By: CRJ/DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 75 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

Temperature Correction Factor2,3:
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate. 1: Rate Factored by Factor of Safety and Temperature Correction Factor. 2: Reference: Riverside Design Handbook for Low Impact Developmnet BMP (2011). 3: Factor based on as‐tested water temperature of 75 F and rainfall temperature of 60 F.

BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.64 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
3½ to 4½ ftTemperature3:

Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐1A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐1.1bRiverside, California

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.82 HCA Design and Construction
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 1.57 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐1B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 77 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
25 2.0 70 4.25 4.40 10.1 4.6*r 1.8 2.56
26 2.0 72 4.40 4.55 8.3 3.6*r 1.8 3.06
27 2.0 74 2.96 3.45 23.6 13.4*r 5.9 3.76
28 2.0 76 3.45 3.76 18.8 10.1*r 3.7 2.96
29 2.0 78 3.76 4.02 15.4 8*r 3.1 3.01
30 2.0 80 4.02 4.31 12.1 6.2*r 3.5 4.21
31 2.0 82 4.25 4.38 10.3 4.6*r 1.6 2.19
32 2.0 84 2.76 3.28 25.8 14.8*r 6.2 3.66
33 2.0 86 3.28 3.61 20.7 11.2*r 4.0 2.87
34 2.0 88 3.61 3.83 17.4 9*r 2.6 2.26
35 2.0 90 3.83 4.07 14.6 7.5*r 2.9 2.90
36 2.0 92 4.07 4.24 12.2 5.8*r 2.0 2.44
37 2.0 94 4.24 4.38 10.3 4.7*r 1.7 2.35
38 2.0 96 4.38 4.51 8.7 3.7*r 1.6 2.55
39 2.0 98 2.74 3.14 26.8 14.9*r 4.8 2.72
40 2.0 100 3.14 3.52 22.1 12.2*r 4.6 3.11
41 2.0 102 3.52 3.77 18.3 9.6*r 3.0 2.45
42 2.0 104 3.77 4.01 15.4 7.9*r 2.9 2.77
43 2.0 106 4.01 4.15 13.1 6.2*r 1.7 1.88
44 2.0 108 4.15 4.33 11.2 5.3*r 2.2 2.81
45 2.0 110 4.33 4.46 9.3 4*r 1.6 2.40
46 2.0 112 2.76 3.23 26.1 14.8*r 5.6 3.27
47 2.0 114 3.23 3.61 21.0 11.6*r 4.5 3.22
48 2.0 116 3.61 3.87 17.2 9*r 3.1 2.71
49 2.0 118 3.87 4.09 14.3 7.2*r 2.6 2.72
50 2.0 120 4.09 4.24 12.1 5.7*r 1.8 2.18
51 2.0 122 4.24 4.38 10.3 4.7*r 1.7 2.35
52 2.0 124 4.38 4.56 8.4 3.7*r 2.2 3.64
53 2.0 126 2.83 3.24 25.6 14.3*r 4.9 2.90
54 2.0 128 3.24 3.56 21.2 11.5*r 3.8 2.72
55 2.0 130 3.56 3.83 17.7 9.3*r 3.2 2.73
56 2.0 132 3.83 3.97 15.2 7.5*r 1.7 1.63
57 2.0 134 3.97 4.15 13.3 6.5*r 2.2 2.38
58 2.0 136 4.15 4.32 11.2 5.3*r 2.0 2.64
59 2.0 138 4.32 4.44 9.5 4.1*r 1.4 2.18
60 2.0 140 2.76 3.15 26.6 14.8*r 4.7 2.67

25.7 0.9 27.9

3.4 100.8

2.8 83.7

55.8 1.6 47.2

1.1 32.2

2.9 88.0

2.3 68.6

1.9 1.0

1.3 1.2

0.9 57.9

30.0 38.6

1.6 47.2

1.2 36.5

1.0 30.0

0.9 27.9

36.5 2.9 85.8

2.7 81.5

1.7 51.5

1.0 30.0

1.3 38.6

80.7 1.9

1.0 1.3

30.0 *Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 2.69 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

1.1 32.2

2.2 66.5

1.1 32.2

3.5 105.1

1.9 55.8

1.7 51.5

1.8 53.6

2.7 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐1.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐1BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

38.6 2.1 62.2

0.9 27.9

3.7 111.6

2.4 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.2 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

70.8 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐1B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 77 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.8 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐1B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐1.2bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

1.08 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.2 ft
3½ to 4½ ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 2.69 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/1/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐2A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger 65 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
61 . 0 6 6.50 6.88 15.8 4*r 4.6 16.9
71 . 0 7 6.88 7.11 12.1 2.9*r 2.8 12.9
81 . 0 8 7.11 7.53 8.2 2.2*r 5.0 32.6
91 . 0 9 3.78 4.34 47.3 12.2*r 6.7 8.99
10 1.0 10 4.34 4.68 41.9 10.5*r 4.1 6.13
11 1.0 11 4.68 4.93 38.4 9.5*r 3.0 4.90
12 1.0 12 5.22 5.62 31.0 7.9*r 4.8 9.60
13 1.0 13 5.62 6.21 25.1 6.7*r 7.1 17.27
14 1.0 14 6.21 6.40 20.4 4.9*r 2.3 6.72
15 2.0 16 3.72 4.37 47.5 12.4*r 7.8 5.20
16 2.0 18 4.37 4.41 43.4 10.4*r 0.5 0.35
17 2.0 20 4.41 4.65 41.7 10.3*r 2.9 2.18
18 2.0 22 4.65 4.78 39.5 9.6*r 1.6 1.24
19 2.0 24 4.78 4.97 37.5 9.2*r 2.3 1.90
20 2.0 26 4.97 5.13 35.4 8.6*r 1.9 1.69
21 2.0 28 5.13 5.61 31.6 8.1*r 5.8 5.66
22 2.0 30 5.61 6.13 25.6 6.7*r 6.2 7.46
23 2.0 32 6.13 6.33 21.3 5.1*r 2.4 3.40
24 5.0 37 3.79 4.37 47.1 12.1*r 7.0 1.87
25 5.0 42 4.37 4.76 41.3 10.4*r 4.7 1.43
26 5.0 47 4.76 5.13 36.7 9.2*r 4.4 1.51
27 5.0 52 5.13 6.19 28.1 8.1*r 12.7 5.57
28 5.0 57 3.83 4.37 46.8 12*r 6.5 1.75
29 5.0 62 4.37 4.76 41.3 10.4*r 4.7 1.43
30 5.0 67 4.76 5.17 36.5 9.2*r 4.9 1.69
31 5.0 72 5.17 6.29 27.3 8*r 13.4 6.06
32 5.0 77 3.97 4.50 45.2 11.6*r 6.4 1.78
33 5.0 82 4.50 4.90 39.6 10*r 4.8 1.52
34 5.0 87 4.90 5.70 32.4 8.8*r 9.6 3.68
35 5.0 92 5.70 6.55 22.5 6.4*r 10.2 5.49
36 5.0 97 4.05 4.56 44.4 11.4*r 6.1 1.74
37 5.0 102 4.56 4.96 38.9 9.8*r 4.8 1.55
38 5.0 107 4.96 6.01 30.2 8.6*r 12.6 5.16
39 5.0 112 6.01 6.51 20.9 5.5*r 6.0 3.46
40 5.0 117 4.05 4.52 44.6 11.4*r 5.6 1.60
41 5.0 122 4.52 4.88 39.6 10*r 4.3 1.37

37.2 2.4 29.3

7.0 84.0

2.4 28.5

30.9 2.7 32.5

7.4 88.7

5.3 63.4

5.6 67.3

3.4 2.6

6.9 3.3

3.1 40.4

31.7 83.2

4.3 128.7

1.6 47.5

0.9 25.7

1.3 37.6

39.6 1.1 31.7

3.2 95.0

1.3 39.6

3.8 45.9

2.6 30.9

42.8 2.6

3.5 2.6

42.0 *Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 2.92 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

2.5 150.5

3.7 221.8

1.5 91.1

2.8 166.3

2.2 134.6

0.3 7.9

3.4 103.0

3.6 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐2.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐2AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

31.7 1.7 99.0

2.6 158.4

3.9 233.6

1.3 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
4 in.
4 in.

8.0 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
2 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

75.2 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/1/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐2A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger 65 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.93 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐2A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐2.1bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

1.36 in/hr

2.0 4 in.
4 in.

8.0 ft
7½ to 8½ ftTemperature3:
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 2.92 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/1/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐2B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger 60 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
11 . 0 1 4.19 4.77 42.3 10.9*r 7.0 10.4
21 . 0 2 4.77 5.65 33.5 9.2*r 10.6 19.6
82 . 0 4 3.69 4.21 48.6 12.4*r 6.2 4.07
92 . 0 6 4.21 4.57 43.4 10.9*r 4.3 3.14
10 2.0 8 4.57 5.13 37.8 9.8*r 6.7 5.57
11 2.0 10 5.13 5.65 31.4 8.1*r 6.2 6.17
12 2.0 12 5.65 5.98 26.3 6.6*r 4.0 4.62
13 2.0 14 5.98 6.21 22.9 5.6*r 2.8 3.66
14 5.0 19 3.67 4.42 47.5 12.5*r 9.0 2.40
15 5.0 24 4.42 5.51 36.5 10.3*r 13.1 4.49
16 5.0 29 5.51 6.03 26.8 7*r 6.2 2.86
17 5.0 34 6.03 6.47 21.0 5.4*r 5.3 3.03
18 5.0 39 3.66 4.32 48.2 12.5*r 7.9 2.08
19 5.0 44 4.32 5.19 39.0 10.6*r 10.4 3.36
20 5.0 49 5.19 5.83 29.9 7.9*r 7.7 3.18
21 5.0 54 5.83 6.25 23.6 6*r 5.0 2.60
22 5.0 59 3.77 4.31 47.6 12.2*r 6.5 1.73
23 5.0 64 4.31 5.09 39.6 10.6*r 9.4 2.97
24 5.0 69 5.09 5.81 30.6 8.2*r 8.6 3.49
25 5.0 74 5.81 6.22 23.9 6.1*r 4.9 2.51
26 5.0 79 3.88 4.34 46.7 11.9*r 5.5 1.50
27 5.0 84 4.34 5.06 39.6 10.5*r 8.6 2.74
28 5.0 89 5.06 5.72 31.4 8.3*r 7.9 3.13
29 5.0 94 5.72 6.14 24.9 6.4*r 5.0 2.48
30 5.0 99 6.14 6.43 20.6 5.1*r 3.5 2.03

3.0 36.4

4.8 57.0

33.3 1.9 23.0

7.2 86.3

2.9 34.8

4.4 52.3

5.7 68.9

4.2 50.7

2.8 33.3

5.1 61.8

4.8 57.0

2.7 32.5

52.3 2.8
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 2.63 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

3.8 229.7

2.4 71.3

5.8 348.5

3.4 103.0

3.7 110.9

3.4 41.2

3.6 42.8

4.4 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐2.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐2BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

3.4 103.0

2.2 65.3

1.5 45.5

5.0 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
4 in.
4 in.

8.0 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
2 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

59.4 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/1/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐2B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger 60 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2
1 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐2B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐2.2bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

1.32 in/hr

2.0 4 in.
4 in.

8.0 ft
7½ to 8½ ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 2.63 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/3/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐3A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
1 24.0 24 1.80 2.30 38.4 22*r 6.0 0.20
2 25.0 49 2.30 2.75 32.7 18.5*r 5.4 0.20
3 10.0 59 2.75 2.94 28.9 15.5*r 2.3 0.24
4 10.0 69 2.94 3.06 27.0 14.1*r 1.4 0.16
5 10.0 79 3.06 3.24 25.2 13.3*r 2.2 0.26
6 10.0 89 3.24 3.38 23.3 12.1*r 1.7 0.22
7 10.0 99 3.38 3.44 22.1 11.1*r 0.7 0.10
8 10.0 109 3.44 3.55 21.1 10.7*r 1.3 0.19
9 10.0 119 3.55 3.68 19.7 10*r 1.6 0.24
10 10.0 129 3.68 3.74 18.5 9.1*r 0.7 0.12 0.4 2.6
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.19 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

3.6 8.9

0.9 5.1

3.2 7.7

1.4 8.2

1.3 7.7
INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐3.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐3AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

1.0 6.0

0.4 2.6

0.8 4.7

0.9 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

5.6 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/3/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐3A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.87 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐3A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐3.1bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.08 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
2½ to 3½ ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.19 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/3/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐3B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
1 25.0 25 2.98 3.03 27.0 13.9*r 0.6 0.03
2 25.0 50 3.03 3.15 26.0 13.5*r 1.4 0.07
3 10.0 60 3.15 3.17 25.1 12.7*r 0.2 0.03
4 10.0 70 3.17 3.21 24.8 12.6*r 0.5 0.06
5 10.0 80 3.21 3.22 24.5 12.3*r 0.1 0.01
6 10.0 90 3.22 3.26 24.2 12.2*r 0.5 0.06
7 10.0 100 3.26 3.27 23.9 12*r 0.1 0.02
8 10.0 110 3.27 3.28 23.7 11.9*r 0.1 0.02
9 10.0 120 3.28 3.30 23.6 11.8*r 0.2 0.03
10 10.0 130 3.30 3.34 23.2 11.7*r 0.5 0.06

0.3 1.7

0.1 0.4

0.1 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

0.9 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐3.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐3BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.04 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

0.4 0.9

0.3 1.7

0.9 2.1

0.1 0.9

0.1 0.4

0.3 1.7
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/3/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/4/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐3B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.02 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
3 to 3½ ftTemperature3:

Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐3B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐3.2bRiverside, California

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.87 HCA Design and Construction
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.04 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐4A Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
1 23.0 23 0.85 1.35 43.8 25*r 6.0 0.18
2 24.0 47 1.35 1.85 37.8 21.6*r 6.0 0.20
3 10.0 57 2.29 2.40 28.9 15.2*r 1.3 0.14
4 10.0 67 2.40 2.58 27.1 14.4*r 2.2 0.24
5 10.0 77 2.58 2.74 25.1 13.2*r 1.9 0.23
6 10.0 87 2.58 2.72 25.2 13.2*r 1.7 0.20
7 10.0 97 2.56 2.67 25.6 13.3*r 1.3 0.16
8 10.0 107 2.55 2.67 25.7 13.4*r 1.4 0.17
9 10.0 117 2.52 2.64 26.0 13.6*r 1.4 0.17
10 10.0 127 2.54 2.67 25.7 13.4*r 1.6 0.18
11 10.0 137 2.50 2.66 26.0 13.7*r 1.9 0.22
12 10.0 147 2.55 2.68 25.6 13.4*r 1.6 0.18
13 10.0 157 2.53 2.64 26.0 13.5*r 1.3 0.15
14 10.0 167 2.53 2.66 25.9 13.5*r 1.6 0.18

1.0 6.0

0.8 4.7

0.9 5.1

0.9 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

4.8 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

5.1 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐4.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐4AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.19 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

3.6 9.3

1.3 7.7

3.6 8.9

0.8 4.7

1.1 6.9

0.9 5.6

0.8 4.7

0.9 5.6
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐4A Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.08 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

4.8 ft
2½ to 3½ ftTemperature3:

Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐4A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐4.1bRiverside, California

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.87 HCA Design and Construction
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.19 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐4B Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
16 . 0 6 0.97 1.47 45.4 26.5*r 6.0 0.68
26 . 0 12 1.07 1.62 43.9 25.8*r 6.6 0.77
3 10.0 22 2.47 3.02 27.1 16.2*r 6.6 0.74
4 10.0 32 2.72 3.11 25.1 14.5*r 4.7 0.56
5 10.0 42 2.62 2.98 26.4 15.2*r 4.3 0.49
6 10.0 52 2.64 3.01 26.1 15.1*r 4.4 0.51
7 10.0 62 2.52 2.87 27.7 15.9*r 4.2 0.46
8 10.0 72 2.73 3.17 24.6 14.4*r 5.3 0.65
9 10.0 82 2.77 3.17 24.4 14.2*r 4.8 0.59
10 10.0 92 2.78 3.21 24.1 14.1*r 5.2 0.65
11 10.0 102 2.58 2.87 27.3 15.5*r 3.5 0.39
12 10.0 112 2.69 3.09 25.4 14.7*r 4.8 0.57
13 10.0 122 2.67 2.97 26.2 14.9*r 3.6 0.42
14 10.0 132 2.71 3.10 25.2 14.6*r 4.7 0.56

3.1 18.4

2.9 17.2

2.1 12.9

2.8 16.7
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.54 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

3.6 35.8

2.8 16.7

3.9 39.3

3.9 23.6

2.6 15.4

2.1 12.4
INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐4.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐4BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

2.6 15.9

2.5 15.0

3.1 18.9

2.9 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.0 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
2 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

17.2 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐4B Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 70 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.87 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐4B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐4.2bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.23 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.0 ft
2½ to 3½ ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.54 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/5/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐5A Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 64 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
1 10.0 10 1.38 1.42 20.2 10.5*r 0.5 0.07
2 10.0 20 1.42 1.52 19.4 10.3*r 1.2 0.19
3 10.0 30 1.52 1.58 18.4 9.6*r 0.7 0.12
4 10.0 40 1.53 1.55 18.5 9.5*r 0.2 0.04
5 10.0 50 1.55 1.60 18.1 9.4*r 0.6 0.10
6 10.0 60 1.50 1.53 18.8 9.7*r 0.4 0.06
7 10.0 70 1.53 1.58 18.3 9.5*r 0.6 0.10
8 10.0 80 1.48 1.50 19.1 9.9*r 0.2 0.04
9 10.0 90 1.50 1.53 18.8 9.7*r 0.4 0.06
10 10.0 100 1.53 1.59 18.3 9.5*r 0.7 0.12
11 10.0 110 1.50 1.52 18.9 9.7*r 0.2 0.04
12 10.0 120 1.52 1.57 18.5 9.6*r 0.6 0.10

0.4 2.6

0.4 2.1
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.08 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

0.3 1.7

0.1 0.9

0.7 4.3

0.4 2.6

0.4 2.1

0.1 0.9
INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐5.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐5AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

0.2 1.3

0.4 2.1

0.1 0.9

0.2 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

3.1 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
2 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

1.3 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/5/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐5A Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 64 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.95 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐5A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐5.1bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.04 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

3.1 ft
2 to 3 ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.08 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/5/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐5B Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 64 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
1 10.0 10 0.93 0.94 24.7 12.5*r 0.1 0.01
2 10.0 20 0.94 0.96 24.6 12.4*r 0.2 0.03
3 10.0 30 0.96 0.97 24.4 12.3*r 0.1 0.01
4 10.0 40 0.97 0.99 24.2 12.2*r 0.2 0.03
5 10.0 50 0.99 1.02 23.9 12*r 0.4 0.05
6 10.0 60 1.02 1.05 23.5 11.8*r 0.4 0.05
7 10.0 70 1.05 1.07 23.2 11.6*r 0.2 0.03
8 10.0 80 0.97 0.99 24.2 12.2*r 0.2 0.03
9 10.0 90 0.99 1.01 24.0 12*r 0.2 0.03
10 10.0 100 1.00 1.02 23.8 12*r 0.2 0.03
11 10.0 110 1.02 1.04 23.6 11.8*r 0.2 0.03
12 10.0 120 1.04 1.06 23.4 11.7*r 0.2 0.03

0.1 0.9

0.1 0.9
*Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 0.03 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

0.1 0.4

0.1 0.9

0.1 0.4

0.2 1.3

0.1 0.9
INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐5.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐5BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

0.2 1.3

0.1 0.9

0.1 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

3.0 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
3 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

0.9 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/5/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐5B Tested By: JWJ Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 64 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.95 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐5B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐5.2bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.02 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

3.0 ft
2 to 3 ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 0.03 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐6A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 71 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
10 2.0 23 3.35 3.66 19.9 11.3*r 3.7 2.80
11 2.0 25 3.66 3.93 16.5 9.2*r 3.2 2.92
12 2.0 27 3.93 4.12 13.7 7.3*r 2.3 2.45
13 2.0 29 4.12 4.27 11.7 6*r 1.8 2.25
14 2.0 31 2.60 2.96 28.6 16.5*r 4.3 2.29
15 2.0 33 2.96 3.32 24.3 14*r 4.3 2.68
16 2.0 35 3.32 3.59 20.5 11.5*r 3.2 2.37
17 2.0 37 3.59 3.86 17.3 9.7*r 3.2 2.79
18 2.0 39 3.86 4.04 14.6 7.8*r 2.2 2.18
19 2.0 41 4.04 4.20 12.6 6.6*r 1.9 2.24
20 2.0 43 2.88 3.24 25.3 14.5*r 4.3 2.58
21 2.0 45 3.24 3.49 21.6 12.1*r 3.0 2.09
22 2.0 47 3.49 3.70 18.9 10.4*r 2.5 2.00
23 2.0 49 3.70 3.87 16.6 8.9*r 2.0 1.83
24 2.0 51 3.87 4.04 14.5 7.7*r 2.0 2.07
25 2.0 53 4.04 4.17 12.7 6.6*r 1.6 1.79
26 2.0 55 4.17 4.29 11.2 5.7*r 1.4 1.86
27 2.0 57 2.80 3.20 26.0 15.1*r 4.8 2.79
28 2.0 59 3.20 3.42 22.3 12.3*r 2.6 1.78
29 2.0 61 3.42 3.64 19.6 10.8*r 2.6 2.01
30 2.0 63 3.64 3.81 17.3 9.3*r 2.0 1.76
31 2.0 65 3.81 3.95 15.4 8.2*r 1.7 1.61
32 2.0 67 3.95 4.13 13.5 7.2*r 2.2 2.35
33 2.0 69 4.13 4.22 11.9 6*r 1.1 1.32
34 2.0 71 4.22 4.35 10.6 5.3*r 1.6 2.13
35 5.0 76 2.85 3.48 24.0 14.7*r 7.6 1.90
36 5.0 81 3.48 3.85 18.0 10.4*r 4.4 1.47
37 5.0 86 3.85 4.18 13.8 7.9*r 4.0 1.69
38 5.0 91 4.18 4.41 10.5 5.6*r 2.8 1.52
39 5.0 96 2.74 3.36 25.4 15.5*r 7.4 1.77
40 5.0 101 3.36 3.79 19.1 11.2*r 5.2 1.62
41 5.0 106 3.79 4.09 14.7 8.3*r 3.6 1.44
42 5.0 111 4.09 4.35 11.4 6.2*r 3.1 1.60
43 5.0 116 2.87 3.42 24.3 14.6*r 6.6 1.64
44 5.0 121 3.42 3.83 18.5 10.8*r 4.9 1.59
45 5.0 126 3.83 4.11 14.4 8*r 3.4 1.38

35.2 1.2 36.5

1.0 30.0

2.0 24.0

19.3 0.9 27.9

4.5 54.1

1.6 19.7

4.4 53.2

3.1 2.1

1.9 3.9

2.9 36.9

25.7 22.3

1.1 34.3

1.8 53.6

1.5 45.1

1.2 36.5

47.2 1.2 36.5

0.9 27.9

2.9 85.8

1.6 47.2

38.6 0.6

2.6 2.4

31.8 *Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 1.60 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

2.2 66.5

1.1 32.2

1.9 57.9

1.4 40.8

2.6 77.2

0.9 25.7

1.3 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐6.1a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐6AHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

28.3 2.6 77.2

1.9 57.9

1.3 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.2 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
2 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]

38.6 PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐6A Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 71 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.86 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐6A INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐6.1bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.69 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.2 ft
7½ to 8½ ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 1.6 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐6B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 72 F Gravel Base Thickness:

Initial Depth
to Water
Final Depth
to Water
Measured
Drop in Water
Level
Unfactored
Infiltration
Rate*
(ft.) (ft.) (in.) (in./hour)
ΔtT Havg Hint ΔH It
62 . 0 15 4.02 4.27 14.3 6.7*r 3.0 3.09
72 . 0 17 4.27 4.46 11.7 5*r 2.3 2.85
82 . 0 19 2.90 3.31 26.8 14.4*r 4.9 2.78
92 . 0 21 3.31 3.62 22.5 11.6*r 3.7 2.49
10 2.0 23 3.62 3.91 18.9 9.5*r 3.5 2.76
11 2.0 25 3.91 4.13 15.8 7.5*r 2.6 2.48
12 2.0 27 4.13 4.38 13.0 6*r 3.0 3.39
13 2.0 29 4.38 4.57 10.3 4.3*r 2.3 3.18
14 2.0 31 3.08 3.55 24.3 13.2*r 5.6 3.51
15 2.0 33 3.55 3.78 20.1 10*r 2.8 2.06
16 2.0 35 3.78 4.07 16.9 8.4*r 3.5 3.06
17 2.0 37 4.07 4.26 14.1 6.4*r 2.3 2.39
18 2.0 39 4.26 4.43 11.9 5.1*r 2.0 2.50
19 2.0 41 3.04 3.42 25.3 13.5*r 4.6 2.73
20 2.0 43 3.42 3.70 21.3 10.9*r 3.4 2.37
21 2.0 45 3.70 3.93 18.3 8.9*r 2.8 2.26
22 2.0 47 3.93 4.12 15.7 7.4*r 2.3 2.15
23 2.0 49 4.12 4.31 13.5 6.1*r 2.3 2.49
24 2.0 51 2.87 3.23 27.4 14.6*r 4.3 2.39
25 2.0 53 3.23 3.55 23.4 12.2*r 3.8 2.48
26 2.0 55 3.55 3.79 20.0 10*r 2.9 2.16
27 5.0 60 3.79 4.29 15.6 8.3*r 6.0 2.28
28 5.0 65 4.29 4.66 10.3 4.9*r 4.4 2.48
29 5.0 70 2.96 3.70 24.1 14*r 8.9 2.23
30 5.0 75 3.70 4.18 16.8 8.9*r 5.8 2.04
31 5.0 80 4.18 4.55 11.7 5.6*r 4.4 2.22
32 5.0 85 2.92 3.64 24.7 14.3*r 8.6 2.12
33 5.0 90 3.64 4.10 17.6 9.3*r 5.5 1.87
34 5.0 95 4.10 4.47 12.6 6.2*r 4.4 2.06
35 5.0 100 2.94 3.62 24.7 14.1*r 8.2 2.00
36 5.0 105 3.62 4.08 17.8 9.5*r 5.5 1.85
37 5.0 110 4.08 4.43 13.0 6.3*r 4.2 1.90
38 5.0 120 2.92 3.62 24.8 14.3*r 8.4 2.05
39 5.0 125 3.62 4.08 17.8 9.5*r 5.5 1.85
40 5.0 130 4.08 4.39 13.2 6.3*r 3.7 1.65 26.6

1.7 51.5

3.6 42.9

63.5 3.4 41.2

2.6 31.8

4.9 58.4

3.3 2.5

5.0 3.3

2.2 39.5

30.0 60.1

1.6 49.3

1.4 40.8

1.2 36.5

2.7 81.5

39.5 2.0 60.1

1.6 49.3

1.4 40.8

2.6 77.2

2.3 68.6

31.8 5.3

5.1 3.3

61.8 *Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate.

Stabilized, Unfactored
Infiltration Rate*: 1.95 inch/hour
1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water.

Corrected
Percolation
Rate1
ΔHc/Δt
Reading
Number
Time
Interval
(min.)

1.8 53.6

2.2 66.5

1.4 40.8

2.9 88.0

2.1 62.2

1.4 40.8

2.6 INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
SD809
FIGURE NUMBER
D‐6.2a
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐6BHCA Design and Construction Riverside Community Hospital
Riverside, California

39.5 1.6 47.2

1.8 53.6

1.4 40.8

3.4 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
DATA SHEET
Avg. Height of
Water above
Gravel Base
Corrected
Drop in Water
Level1
ΔHc
2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
Cumulative
Time (min.)
(in.) (in.) (in./hour)
4 in.Temperature:
[from ground surface]
100.8
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Project Name: Riverside Hospital Date Drilled: 4/2/2024 Borehole Radius (*r):

Project Number: SD809 Date Tested: 4/3/2024 Casing Diameter:

Test Hole Number: I‐6B Tested By: DMG Depth of Hole:

Drilling Method: Hand Auger 72 F Test Depth:

Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate1:

Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.2:

0.05 to 0.50
Design Condition2

0.85 HCA Design and Construction
Riverside Community Hospital BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST I‐6B INFILTRATION RATE
PROJECT NUMBER
Full Infiltration
No Infiltration
FIGURE NUMBER
SD809 D ‐6.2bRiverside, California
BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST
UNFACTORED INFILTRATION RATES* DURING TEST
Above 0.50
Factored Infiltration Rate2
Below 0.05
Partial Infiltration

0.83 in/hr

2.0 2 in.
2 in.

5.3 ft
3 to 4 ftTemperature3:
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Duration of Test (min)
Unfactored Infiltration Rate*
Stabilized Unfactored Infiltration Rate*: 1.95 in/hr
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

APPENDIX E

SITE-SPECIFIC SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Report of Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD809 Riverside Community Hospital April 19, 2024
HCA Design and Construction Page E-2

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc

APPENDIX B

SITE-SPECIFIC SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION
E.1 INTRODUCTION
This section presents the results of the site-specific seismic hazard analysis per the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) and ASCE 7 -16 (ASCE/SEI 7-16) for the project site . The subsurface soil conditions used in this study were obtained from our field exploration program including, hollow stem auger borings and seismic cone penetration tests ( CPT), as well as prior downhole geophysical testing performed at the site to determine shear wave velocities.

Horizontal Acceleration Response Spectra (ARS) for 5 -percent damping were developed for the Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) as defined in Chapter 21.2 of ASCE 7-16.

We performed both probabilistic and deterministic seismic hazard analyses. Site -specific probabilistic seismic hazard analyses were performed using the computer program OpenSHA (Field, 2003), with the seismic source model from the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) Version 3 ( Field et a l, 2013 ). Development of the horizontal ARS was also performed using the ground motion models for the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) – West 2 research project. The site coordinates used in our seismic hazard analyses are summarized below:

Garage: 33.9776 (latitude), -117.3834 (longitude)
Tower: 33.9765 (latitude), -117.3825 (longitude)
E.2 SEISMIC SETTING
The Riverside Community Hospital site is located in an area with high seismic activity. The approximate locations of nearby active faults are shown on the Regional Fault Map, Figure 5A.

Table E-1 below lists the active faults that are closest to the site, and summarizes the Fault Type, Maximum Magnitude (Mw) and Site -To-Source Rupture Distance (R rup). Note that t he fault models we used generally follow UCERF3, which is the seismic source model developed by the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) in 2013. The UCERF3 model was subsequently adopted by the 2014 U.S. Nation al Seismic Hazard Mapping Program (NSHM) to develop probabilistic seismic hazard maps (Petersen et al., 2014).

The maximum magnitudes and scenarios adopted for our analyses are generally consistent with the published Building Seismic Safety Council 2014 Event Set, the adopted deterministic ruptures used for the 2014 USGS NSHM (BSSC, 2015). For multi -segment faults such as the Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults, where different earthquake scenarios are considered, the model producing the largest magnitude was reported in Table E-1 along with the combined segments.

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Report of Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD809 Riverside Community Hospital April 19, 2024
HCA Design and Construction Page E-3

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc Table E-1. Significant Active Faults Near the Site
Fault Fault
Type
Maximum
Magnitude
MW
Site-to-Source
Distance
Rrup (km)
San Jacinto (S an Bernardino + San Jacinto Valley +
Anza + Stepovers Combined + Coyote Creek +
Borrego + Superstition Mountain)
Strike-Slip 7.8 13.0
Fontana (seismicity) Strike-Slip (1) 6.8 14.4
Elsinore (Whittier + Glen Ivy + Temecula +
Stepovers Combined + Julian + Coyote Mountains) Strike-Slip 7.8 23.8 San Andreas (P arkfield + Cholame + Carrizo + B ig
Bend + North Mojave + South Mojave + North San
Bernardino + South San Bernardino + San Gorgonio
Pass - Garnet Hill + Coachella)
Strike-Slip 8.2 23.9
Chino (Alt 1 / Alt 2) Strike-Slip 6.6 / 6.8 (2) 24.2 / 23.9 Cucamonga Thrust 6.9 22.7
San Jose Strike-Slip 6.7 32.1
Notes: (1) Faulting in Fontana was previously considered undetermined as it is based on seismicity. However, the latest edition of the recently released NSHM (2023) now considers this fault to be strike-slip. (2) Magnitudes presented are for the Chino fault alternatives (Alt 1 / Alt 2) respectively.

As shown in Table E-1, the closest known active seismic sources to the site include the San Jacinto fault zone and the San Andreas fault zone . These are some of the most active fault zones in California and are capable of producing some of the largest earthquakes. The closest active faults are discussed in more detail below.

The San Jacinto fault zone is located about 13.0 kilometers (km) northeast of the site. The San Jacinto fault zone is a right-lateral strike slip fault with a total length of about 210 km, extending from San Bernardino down south to Superstition Mountain. The northern end of the fault connects with the San Andreas fault zone. This fault is believed to be capable of producing earthquakes with a maximum moment magnitude (M W) of 7.8 when all of the fault segments rupture in combination from San Bernardino to Superstition Mountain. The San Jacinto fault has a typical recurrence interval for ground rupture of 100 to 300 years.

The Fontana fault has recently been identified based on frequent micro-seismicity in the area. It was not included in the 2008 edition of the NSHM but was added in 2014. Although initially the fault mechanism was not well understood, it is currently believed to be a strike-slip fault capable of producing earthquakes with magnitudes up to 6.8 . According to UCERF3, this fault is “likely a structure that actively transfers slip from the San Jacinto to the San Andreas.” (Field, 2013).

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc The San Andreas fault zone is a right-lateral strike slip fault system that extends a total length of 315 miles (1,200 km) through out California. This fault system forms the boundary between the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate. The Southern San Andreas section of the fault system extends from Parkfield down to its termination at the Salton Sea, with a length of 550 km. The Southern San Andreas section is estimated to be capable of producing earthquakes with a maximum magnitude (MW) of 8.2. In the area of Redlands and Yucaipa, the structure of the San Andreas fault becomes very complex due to interaction with other faults over the millennia, resulting in fractured segments and discontinuous branches. Recurrence intervals between ground-rupturing earthquakes vary on the San Andreas fault system depending on location. Near Los Angeles, this interval is estimated to be 175 to 200 years (USGS, 2017).

E.2 HISTORIC SIESMICITY
There have been numerous moderate to large earthquakes located near the subject site over the last few centuries . A historical earthquake search was performed using the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog (USGS, 2023). This search included earthquakes with magnitudes of 5.0 or higher and epicentral distances within 100 km of the center of the project site. The results are summarized below.

Time Period (1700 to April 2024) 324 years
Maximum Magnitude Mw ~ 7.5
Number of Earthquakes with both
Mw > 5.0 and RRUP < 100 km 71

The earthquakes with epicenters closest to the site include the 1923 MW 6.2 south San Bernardino earthquake which was located about 16.9 kilometers to the northeast of the site in the Santa Ana River, the 1858 MW 6.0 earthquake north of San Bernardino, the 1990 MW 5.5 Upland earthquake northwest of the site, and the 2008 MW 5.4 Chino Hill earthquake west of the site. The se earthquake epicenters are shown on the Regional Fault Map, Figure 5A. Other large earthquakes within 100 km of the site include the 1812 MW 7.5 Wrightwood earthquake on the San Andreas fault northwest of the site, the 1992 MW 7.3 Landers earthquake northeast of the site, and the 1899 MW 6.7 San Jacinto earthquake southeast of the site.

E.3 SITE CHARACTERIZATION
In developing site-specific ground motions, the characteristics of the soils underlying the site are an important input to evaluate the site response. In particular, the average shear wave velocity in the upper 30 meters (Vs30) is a necessary parameter to perform seismic hazard analyses. Group Delta engaged a subcontractor to advance seismic CPT soundings at the project site to obtain shear wave velocity in the upper 30 meters or 100 feet. Three seismic CPTs were performed across the site, two within the propo sed Garage site (CPT-1 and CPT-2), and one within the proposed Tower site (CPT-5). The CPT locations are shown on the Exploration Plans, Figures 3B and 3C.

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc In addition to the current measurements of shear wave velocity, prior geophysical studies at the site were reviewed and used to supplement the current measurements and data, particularly with respect to the shear wave velocity of the very dense Old Alluvium . All explorations at the site encountered refusal shallower than 100 feet in depth due to very dense granular soils in the Old Alluvium (N60>30). The available data form the prior investigations was used to extrapolate shear wave velocity to depths of 100 feet to develop the Vs30 values for use our analyses (CHJ, 2008).

Based on the available data, including boring logs and soil samples, the shear wave velocity values were plotted based on their corresponding geology ( i.e. existing fill, Young Alluvium, and Old Alluvium). Shear wave velocity measurements with depth are presented in Figure E-1 with respect to both exploration ID and interpreted geology. Within the Young Alluvium, the measured shear wave velocity values were generally between about 480 and 850 feet per second (ft/ s), with a trend of low values near the surface , and increasing values with depth. The prior downhole geophysical study did interpret very low shear waves within the upper 5 feet . Ho wever, this measurement was taken prior to remedial grading. The existing fill soils have relatively high shear wave velocities ranging from about 760 to over 1,800 ft/s.

Below the surficial fill and Young Alluvium, the dense to very dense granular soils designated as Old Alluvium were observed to have much higher shear wave velocity values varying from about 1100 to over 2,500 ft/s (CHJ, 2008). Several measurements from our current seismic CPTs, as well as the prior downhole study all indicate that once embedded 10 to 15 feet in the Old Alluvium, the shear wave velocity values are generally 1,940 ft/s or greater. The deepest geophysical study at the site extended nearly 70 feet below grade and indicated shear wave velocities of 2,560 ft/s below a depth of 42 feet. Based on a review of all of the data, Vs30 values for the proposed Garage and Tower sites were developed by extrapolating the Old Alluvium to a depth of 100 feet using a conservative lower bound of 1,940 ft/s for the Old Alluvium below refusal depth.

Based on the shear velocity profile measurements, the average shear wave velocity in the upper 100 feet ( Vs30) ranged from about 1,389 ft/s to 1,393 ft/s for CPT -1 and CPT -2, respectively.

Therefore, a value of 1,390 ft/s or 424 meters per second [m/s] was adopted for the proposed Garage site. Based on CPT-5, a Vs30 value of 1,598 ft/s or 487 m/s was adopted for the proposed Tower site. Both sites classify as Site Class C per ASCE 7-16.

E.4 GROUND MOTION PREDICTION EQUATIONS
Site-specific ground motions are influenced by type of faulting, magnitude of characteristic earthquakes, and local soil conditions. Many ground motion models, also referred to as Ground Motion Prediction Equations (GMPEs) have been developed to estimate the variation of spectral acceleration with earthquake magnitude and source -to-site distance, among other parameters.

The Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) coordinated a large multidisciplinary project entitled “NGA (Next Generation Attenuation)-West 2 Research Project” (Bozorgnia et al., 2014), referred to as NGA-West2.

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc In NGA-West2, five teams developed and presented horizontal ground motion models for shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions including Western North America. These teams were Abrahamson et al. (2014), Boore et al. (2014), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2014), Choiu and Youngs (2014), and Idriss (2014) . All of the GMPEs were used in our analyses . However, as the Idriss (2014) model is only applicable to Vs30 values over 450 m/s, it was used only for the Tower site. Where all five models were used, weights of 0.22 were assigned to all models but Idriss which was assigned a weight of 0.12. Where four were used, equal weight (0.25) was assigned.

The NGA -West2 relationships use measured values of shear wave velocity (V S,30) as input. As previously discussed, we adopted an average Vs30 of 424 m/s at the proposed Garage and 487 m/s at the proposed Tower site to represent the underlying soil conditions. In addition, some of the ground motion models require input for Z1.0 (defined as the depth in meters to a shear wave velocity of 1 km/s) and Z 2.5 (defined as the depth in km to a shear wave velocity of 2.5 km/s).

These two parameters are used to capture the basin effect on site response. The SCEC Community Velocity Model (CVM) Version 4 was reviewed for selection of Z1.0 and Z2.5 values. A Z1.0 value of 150 m and a Z2.5 of 0.35 km were selected.

E.5 PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSES
Site-specific Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses (PSHA) were performed using the computer program OpenSHA (Fields, 2003), with the UCERF3 seismic source model and the updated NGA - West2 ground motion models. Uniform hazard horizontal ARS were developed up to a period of 10 seconds. The 5-percent damping hazard spectra are presented in Figures E-2a and E-2b.

Supplementary probabilistic seismic hazard analyses were performed using the USGS Unified Hazard Tool (https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/) for comparison to the OpenSHA analyses. These analyses were performed using the dynamic version of the Conterminous U.S. 2014v4.2.0 at available spectral periods with the Site Class C/D option (Vs30 of 360 m/s) and the Site Class C boundary ( Vs30 of 537 m/s). Results of these supplementary analyses show good agreement with the OpenSHA analyses.

The site-specific probabilistic MCER was developed in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1, for the maximum horizontal component and adjusted for targeted risk of 1-percent probability of collapse in 50 years. The median (RotD50) ground motion was adjusted to the maximum rotated component of ground motion (RotD100) using maximum direction factors recommended by Shahi and Baker (2014). The second adjustment modifies the spectra from a 2-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years to a targeted risk of 1-percent probability of collapse in 50 years, which is performed using Method 1 of ASCE 7-16 (Section 21.2.1), using the risk coefficients CRS and CR1.

The risk coefficients (per ASCE 7-16) were obtained using the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) and Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) Seismic Design Maps website application (SEAOC/OSHPD, 2019). Risk coefficients CRS of 0.941 and CR1 of

0.914 were used. The probabilistic MCER ARS for the site are shown in Figures E-2a and E-2b.

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc E.6 DETERMINISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS
Site-specific Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analyses (DSHA) were performed based on the characteristics of earthquake scenarios identified as predominant contributors to the regional seismic hazard. Pertinent characteristics of the earthquake scenarios include parameters such as distance from the site to the causative fault and the maximum magnitude of earthquake associated with the fault. The effects of local soil conditions (Vs30) and the mechanism of faulting are accounted for in the ground motion models as well.

DSHAs were performed for four of the sources identified in Table E-1 above, the San Jacinto fault, the Fontana seismicity zone, the San Andreas fault, and the Elsinore fault. The NGA West2 GMMs were used to develop a 5 -percent damped spectral ARS for each source. A plot of the DSHA results for the project site is shown in Figure s E-3a and E -3b for each site . Note that the San Jacinto fault controls for spectral periods up to about 7.5 seconds, whereas the San Andreas fault begins to control seismic demand for the longer periods.

According to ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.2, the deterministic MCE R, which corresponds to the 84 th percentile 5 -percent damped spectral response accelerations in the direction of maximum horizontal response at any spectral period, must not be lower than deterministic lower limit.

Therefore, the 84th percentile spectral values obtained from the GMPEs are used to develop the deterministic spectrum. The ground motions were adjusted to the maximum rotated component of ground motion using the ASCE 7-16 default maximum direction factors. Figures E-3a and E-3b shows the results of our DSHA along with ASCE 7-16 deterministic lower limit spectrum . The deterministic lower limit spectrum controls at the sites.

E.7 DETERMINATION OF SITE-SPECIFIC RESPONSE SPECTRA
Development of the site -specific MCE R ARS (as defined by Chapter 21.2 of ASCE 7-16) was performed using the seismic hazard analysis procedure described in the previous sections. In accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.3, the site-specific MCER acceleration response spectra are taken as the lesser of the probabilistic and deterministic MCER spectra. The only exception is that the site -specific MCER ARS may be taken directly as the probabilistic MCER when the peak probabilistic spectrum is less than 1.2 Fa (Section 21.2.3 of Supplement 1 to ASCE 7 -16). In addition, per Section 21.3 of ASCE 7 -16, the site -specific MCER cannot be not less than 150 - percent of the 80-pecent of design spectrum determined in accordance with Section 11.4.6 of ASCE 7-16. The resulting MCER spectra is presented in Figures E-4a and E-4b. For the project site, the deterministic MCER generally governs all spectral periods , with a few limited exceptions where the 150-percent minimum spectrum controls.

The site -specific Design Earthquake spectrum is equal to two -thirds of the site -specific MCE R spectrum. The MCER and the Design Earthquake spectra along with the tabulated values for the project site are presented in Figures E-5a and E-5b.

N:\Projects\SD\SD800\SD809 HCA, Riverside Hospital Investigation\9. Reports\24-0011\24-0011.doc E.8 SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN ACCELERATION PARAMETERS
The short period design spectral acceleration (S DS) and 1 -second period design spectral acceleration (SD1) parameters were determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 21.4. The parameter SDS is taken as 90-percent of the maximum spectral acceleration from the site-specific spectrum at periods between 0.2 and 5 seconds. The parameter SD1 is taken as the maximum of the product between period and spectral acceleration for periods from 1 to 2 seconds for sites with VS,30 greater than or equal to 365 m/s. The parameters SMS and SM1 shall be taken as 1.5 times SDS and S D1 respectively. The values obtained shall not be less than 80 percent of the values determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.3 for S MS and SM1 and Section 11.4.4 for SDS and SD1. Table C-2 presents the site-specific design acceleration parameters.

Maximum Considered Earthquake -Geometric Mean, MCE G, peak ground acceleration adjusted for site effects, PGAM, was calculated in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 21.5. Per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.5, PGAM shall be taken as the lesser of the probabilistic geometric mean peak ground acceleration and the deterministic geometric mean peak ground acceleration and shall not be less than the 80% of PGA M obtained from Equation 11.8 -1 of this code. The summary of MCE R and Design Earthquake Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses is provided in Tables E-3a and E-3b attached to this appendix.

Table E-2: Site-Specific Seismic Design Acceleration Parameters Hazard
Level Parameter Garage Site Tower Site
MCER
PGAM 0.600 0.611
SMS 1.620 1.620
SM1 0.896 0.790
Design
Earthquake
SDS 1.080 1.080
SD1 0.597 0.527

ATTACHMENTS
Tables E-3a to E-3b Summary of MCER and Design Earthquake Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses

FIGURES
Figure E-1 Shear Wave Velocity Plots
Figures E-2a to E-2b Probabilistic MCER Acceleration Response Spectra Figures E-3a to E-3b Deterministic Acceleration Response Spectra Figures E-4a to E-4b ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific MCER Acceleration Response Spectra Figures E-5a to E-5b ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific Design Earthquake and Acceleration Parameters

PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Period
(sec)
Probabilistic
SaRotD50
(g)
SaRotD100 /
SaRotD50
Risk
Coefficient,
CR
Probabilistic
MCER
(g)
Deterministic
84-%ile MCE,
SaRotD100 (g)
Deterministic
Lower Limit
MCE (g)
Deterministic
MCER (g)
Site-Specific
MCER (g)
2/3 Site-
Specific MCER
(g)
ASCE 7-16
Mapped Design
ARS (g)
80% of Mapped
Design ARS (g)
150% of 80%-
Mapped
Design ARS (g)
Final Site-
Specific MCER
(g)
Final Design
ARS
(g)

0.01 0.837 1.19 0.941 0.938 0.695 0.754 0.754 0.754 0.503 0.557 0.446 0.669 0.754 0.503

0.02 0.846 1.19 0.941 0.947 0.702 0.762 0.762 0.762 0.508 0.634 0.507 0.761 0.762 0.508

0.03 0.906 1.19 0.941 1.015 0.743 0.806 0.806 0.806 0.538 0.711 0.569 0.854 0.854 0.569

0.05 1.124 1.19 0.941 1.258 0.878 0.953 0.953 0.953 0.635 0.866 0.693 1.039 1.039 0.693

0.075 1.455 1.19 0.941 1.629 1.084 1.176 1.176 1.176 0.784 1.059 0.847 1.270 1.270 0.847

0.1 1.690 1.19 0.941 1.893 1.243 1.349 1.349 1.349 0.899 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.440 0.960

0.15 1.913 1.2 0.941 2.160 1.475 1.601 1.601 1.601 1.067 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.601 1.067

0.2 1.996 1.21 0.941 2.273 1.605 1.742 1.742 1.742 1.161 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.742 1.161

0.25 1.983 1.22 0.939 2.273 1.659 1.800 1.800 1.800 1.200 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.800 1.200

0.3 1.898 1.22 0.938 2.172 1.653 1.794 1.794 1.794 1.196 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.794 1.196

0.4 1.648 1.23 0.934 1.893 1.545 1.677 1.677 1.677 1.118 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.677 1.118

0.5 1.464 1.23 0.931 1.676 1.409 1.529 1.529 1.529 1.020 1.120 0.896 1.344 1.529 1.020

0.75 1.078 1.24 0.922 1.233 1.074 1.166 1.166 1.166 0.777 0.747 0.597 0.896 1.166 0.777 1 0.809 1.24 0.914 0.916 0.826 0.896 0.896 0.896 0.597 0.560 0.448 0.672 0.896 0.597

1.5 0.521 1.24 0.914 0.591 0.551 0.598 0.598 0.591 0.394 0.373 0.299 0.448 0.591 0.394 2 0.377 1.24 0.914 0.427 0.397 0.430 0.430 0.427 0.285 0.280 0.224 0.336 0.427 0.285 3 0.249 1.25 0.914 0.284 0.263 0.286 0.286 0.284 0.190 0.187 0.149 0.224 0.284 0.190 4 0.187 1.26 0.914 0.215 0.193 0.210 0.210 0.210 0.140 0.140 0.112 0.168 0.210 0.140 5 0.151 1.26 0.914 0.173 0.149 0.161 0.161 0.161 0.108 0.112 0.090 0.134 0.161 0.108

7.5 0.093 1.28 0.914 0.109 0.085 0.092 0.092 0.092 0.061 0.075 0.060 0.090 0.092 0.061 10 0.062 1.29 0.914 0.073 0.054 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.039 0.045 0.036 0.054 0.058 0.039 Column Descriptions
1 Spectral period
2 2% in 50 year, RotD50 Probabilistic ARS
3 Factors to adjust to Maximum Direction (Shahi & Baker, 2014) 4 Risk Coefficients Per Method 1 of ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1, obtained from SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps tool (SEAOC/OSPHD, 2022). 5 Probabilistic MCER ARS, adjusted for maximum direction of horizontal response and targeted risk of 1% probability of collapse in 50 years (columns 2 x 3 x 4) per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1 6 Upper envelop of 84-percentile, Deterministic ARS adjusted for maximum direction for all sources. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 7 Deterministic Lower Limit (Peak Sa must be at least 1.5*Fa) in accordance with Supplement 1 of ASCE 7-16. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 8 Deterministic MCER (greater of columns 6 and 7) per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.2. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 9 Site-Specific MCER (lesser of Deterministic MCERand Probabilistic MCER, or lesser of columns 5 and 8) in accordance with Section 21.2.3 of ASCE 7-16 10 2/3 of Column 9 per Equation 21.3-1 of ASCE 7-16 Section 21.3 11 Mapped Design Earthquake ARS in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.7 as modified by Section 21.3 12 80% of Mapped Design Earthquake ARS (lower limit check) per Section 21.4 13 150% of the 80% of Mapped Design Earthquake ARS (MCE lower limit check per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.3) 14 Final Site-Specific MCER ARS per Section 21.2.3 (greater of columns 9 and 13) 15 Final Design Earthquake ARS per Section 21.3 (greater of columns 10 and 12) Table E-3a: Summary of MCE R and Design Earthquake Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses (Garage Site) PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Period
(sec)
Probabilistic
SaRotD50
(g)
SaRotD100 /
SaRotD50
Risk
Coefficient,
CR
Probabilistic
MCER
(g)
Deterministic
84-%ile MCE,
SaRotD100 (g)
Deterministic
Lower Limit
MCE (g)
Deterministic
MCER (g)
Site-Specific
MCER (g)
2/3 Site-
Specific MCER
(g)
ASCE 7-16
Mapped Design
ARS (g)
80% of Mapped
Design ARS (g)
150% of 80%-
Mapped
Design ARS (g)
Final Site-
Specific MCER
(g)
Final Design
ARS
(g)

0.01 0.822 1.19 0.941 0.921 0.727 0.784 0.784 0.784 0.523 0.557 0.446 0.669 0.784 0.523

0.02 0.833 1.19 0.941 0.932 0.738 0.796 0.796 0.796 0.530 0.634 0.507 0.761 0.796 0.530

0.03 0.899 1.19 0.941 1.007 0.792 0.854 0.854 0.854 0.569 0.711 0.569 0.854 0.854 0.569

0.05 1.134 1.19 0.941 1.270 0.933 1.006 1.006 1.006 0.670 0.866 0.693 1.039 1.039 0.693

0.075 1.478 1.19 0.941 1.655 1.169 1.261 1.261 1.261 0.840 1.059 0.847 1.270 1.270 0.847

0.1 1.711 1.19 0.941 1.916 1.344 1.449 1.449 1.449 0.966 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.449 0.966

0.15 1.922 1.2 0.941 2.170 1.579 1.702 1.702 1.702 1.135 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.702 1.135

0.2 1.979 1.21 0.941 2.254 1.665 1.796 1.796 1.796 1.197 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.796 1.197

0.25 1.936 1.22 0.939 2.218 1.669 1.800 1.800 1.800 1.200 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.800 1.200

0.3 1.790 1.22 0.938 2.047 1.585 1.709 1.709 1.709 1.139 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.709 1.139

0.4 1.547 1.23 0.934 1.777 1.442 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.036 1.200 0.960 1.440 1.555 1.036

0.5 1.358 1.23 0.931 1.555 1.292 1.393 1.393 1.393 0.929 1.120 0.896 1.344 1.393 0.929

0.75 0.994 1.24 0.922 1.136 0.951 1.025 1.025 1.025 0.684 0.747 0.597 0.896 1.025 0.684 1 0.745 1.24 0.914 0.844 0.732 0.789 0.789 0.789 0.526 0.560 0.448 0.672 0.789 0.526

1.5 0.484 1.24 0.914 0.549 0.489 0.527 0.527 0.527 0.351 0.373 0.299 0.448 0.527 0.351 2 0.352 1.24 0.914 0.399 0.358 0.386 0.386 0.386 0.257 0.280 0.224 0.336 0.386 0.257 3 0.234 1.25 0.914 0.268 0.250 0.270 0.270 0.268 0.179 0.187 0.149 0.224 0.268 0.179 4 0.178 1.26 0.914 0.205 0.189 0.203 0.203 0.203 0.136 0.140 0.112 0.168 0.203 0.136 5 0.144 1.26 0.914 0.166 0.150 0.162 0.162 0.162 0.108 0.112 0.090 0.134 0.162 0.108

7.5 0.091 1.28 0.914 0.106 0.091 0.098 0.098 0.098 0.065 0.075 0.060 0.090 0.098 0.065 10 0.061 1.29 0.914 0.072 0.058 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.042 0.045 0.036 0.054 0.063 0.042 Column Descriptions
1 Spectral period
2 2% in 50 year, RotD50 Probabilistic ARS
3 Factors to adjust to Maximum Direction (Shahi & Baker, 2014) 4 Risk Coefficients Per Method 1 of ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1, obtained from SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps tool (SEAOC/OSPHD, 2022). 5 Probabilistic MCER ARS, adjusted for maximum direction of horizontal response and targeted risk of 1% probability of collapse in 50 years (columns 2 x 3 x 4) per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1 6 Upper envelop of 84-percentile, Deterministic ARS adjusted for maximum direction for all sources. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 7 Deterministic Lower Limit (Peak Sa must be at least 1.5*Fa) in accordance with Supplement 1 of ASCE 7-16. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 8 Deterministic MCER (greater of columns 6 and 7) per ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.2. Not required where Peak Sa from Probabilistic MCE R is less than 1.2Fa per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.2.2 9 Site-Specific MCER (lesser of Deterministic MCERand Probabilistic MCER, or lesser of columns 5 and 8) in accordance with Section 21.2.3 of ASCE 7-16 10 2/3 of Column 9 per Equation 21.3-1 of ASCE 7-16 Section 21.3 11 Mapped Design Earthquake ARS in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.7 as modified by Section 21.3 12 80% of Mapped Design Earthquake ARS (lower limit check) per Section 21.4 13 150% of the 80% of Mapped Design Earthquake ARS (MCE lower limit check per ASCE 7-16 Supplement 1 Section 21.3) 14 Final Site-Specific MCER ARS per Section 21.2.3 (greater of columns 9 and 13) 15 Final Design Earthquake ARS per Section 21.3 (greater of columns 10 and 12) Table E-3b: Summary of MCER and Design Earthquake Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses (Tower Site) PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PROJECT NUMBER
445 Magnolia Avenue, Riverside SD809 E‐1
PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
Riverside Community Hospital Shear Wave Velocity Plots FIGURE NUMBER 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Depth (ft)
Shear Wave Velocity (ft/s)
CPT‐1
CPT‐2
CPT‐5
B1 Downhole
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Depth (ft)
Shear Wave Velocity (ft/s)
Existing Fill
Young Alluvium (Qya)
Old Alluvium (Qoa))
B1 (Young Alluvium)
B1 (Old Alluvium)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

PROJECT NUMBER
Response Spectra
Probabilistic Acceleration

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
Riverside Community Hospital - Garage FIGURE NUMBER
4445 Magnolia Avenue SD809 E-2a

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Probabilistic MCER (ASCE 7-16, Section 21.2.1)
5% Damping
Probabilistic MCER
SaRotD50 (2,475-yr return period)

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses
5% Damping
2% / 50 year (SaRotD50)
2% / 50 years (SaRotD100)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

PROJECT NUMBER
Response Spectra
Probabilistic Acceleration

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
Riverside Community Hospital - Tower FIGURE NUMBER
4445 Magnolia Avenue SD809 E-2b

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Probabilistic MCER (ASCE 7-16, Section 21.2.1)
5% Damping
Probabilistic MCER
SaRotD50 (2,475-yr return period)

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

PROJECT NUMBER
4445 Magnolia Avenue Response Spectra SD809 E-3a
Riverside Community Hospital - Garage Deterministic Acceleration FIGURE NUMBER

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Deterministic MCE (84th-percentile, SaRotD50)
5% Damping
San Jacinto
San Andreas
Elsinore
Fontana (Seismicity)

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Deterministic MCER (ASCE 7-16, 21.2.2)
5% Damping
Controlling DSHA (RotD100)

1.5 Fa (peak must be equal to or greater)
Deterministic Lower Limit
Deterministic MCER
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices PROJECT NUMBERRiverside Community Hospital - Tower Deterministic Acceleration FIGURE NUMBER

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
4445 Magnolia Avenue Response Spectra SD809 E-3b

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Deterministic MCE (84th-percentile, SaRotD50)
5% Damping
San Jacinto
San Andreas
Elsinore
Fontana (Seismicity)

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Deterministic MCER (ASCE 7-16, 21.2.2)
5% Damping
Controlling DSHA (RotD100)

1.5 Fa (peak must be equal to or greater)
Deterministic Lower Limit
Deterministic MCER
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

PROJECT NUMBER
4445 Magnolia Avenue Acceleration Response Spectra SD809 E-4a

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
Riverside Community Hospital - Garage ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific MCER FIGURE NUMBER

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Site-Specific Risk-Targeted Horizontal MCER (ASCE 7-16, Section 21.2) 5% Damping
Probabilistic MCER
Deterministic MCER
150% Minimum (80% Design Earthquake per Section 21.3)
Site-Specific MCER
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT NAME FIGURE NAME
Riverside Community Hospital - Tower ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific MCER FIGURE NUMBER 4445 Magnolia Avenue Acceleration Response Spectra SD756 E-4b

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

21.3)
Site-Specific MCER
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Period Design MCER
(sec) Sa (g) Sa (g)

0.01 0.503 0.754

0.02 0.508 0.762

0.03 0.569 0.854

0.05 0.693 1.039

0.075 0.847 1.270

0.1 0.960 1.440

0.15 1.067 1.601

0.2 1.161 1.742

0.25 1.200 1.800

0.3 1.196 1.794

0.4 1.118 1.677

0.5 1.020 1.529

0.75 0.777 1.166
1 0.597 0.896

1.5 0.394 0.591
2 0.285 0.427
3 0.190 0.284
4 0.140 0.210 Site-Specific Design Acceleration Parameters (ASCE 7-16 Section 21.4) 5 0.108 0.161 SDS = 90% of the peak Sa from T =0.2 to 5 s (not less than 80% of mapped SDS)

7.5 0.061 0.092 SD1 = Peak T*Sa between periods of 1 second and 2 seconds (not less than 80% of mapped SD1) 10 0.039 0.058
SDS = 1.080 SD1 = 0.597

PROJECT NUMBER
ASCE 7-16 MCER and
Design Earthquake

FIGURE NAMEPROJECT NAME
Riverside Community Hospital - Garage
4445 Magnolia Avenue SD809

FIGURE NUMBER
E-5a
ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific Design Earthquake and
Site-Specific Design Acceleration Parameters

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

0.01 0.1 1 10
Spectral Acceleration (g)
Period (sec)
Site-Specific Design Earthquake (ASCE 7-16, Section 21.3) 5% Damping
Site-Specific MCER
Site Class C Design Response Spectrum Section (21.3)
80% Site Class C Design Earthquake (lower limit)
Site-Specific Design Response Spectrum (Section 21.3)
PR-2024-001701 (GPA, SPA, RZ, DR) Exhibit 13 - EIR Addendum and appedices Period Design MCER
(sec) Sa (g) Sa (g)

0.01 0.523 0.784

0.02 0.530 0.796

0.03 0.569 0.854

0.05 0.693 1.039

0.075 0.847 1.270

0.1 0.966 1.449

0.15 1.135 1.702

0.2 1.197 1.796

0.25 1.200 1.800

0.3 1.139 1.709

0.4 1.036 1.555

0.5 0.929 1.393

0.75 0.684 1.025
1 0.526 0.789

1.5 0.351 0.527
2 0.257 0.386
3 0.179 0.268
4 0.136 0.203 Site-Specific Design Acceleration Parameters (ASCE 7-16 Section 21.4) 5 0.108 0.162 SDS = 90% of the peak Sa from T =0.2 to 5 s (not less than 80% of mapped SDS)

7.5 0.065 0.098 SD1 = Peak T*Sa between periods of 1 second and 2 seconds (not less than 80% of mapped SD1) 10 0.042 0.063
SDS = 1.080 SD1 = 0.527
PROJECT NUMBERRiverside Community Hospital - Tower
4445 Magnolia Avenue SD809

FIGURE NUMBER
E-5b
ASCE 7-16 Site-Specific Design Earthquake and
Site-Specific Design Acceleration Parameters
ASCE 7-16 MCER and
Design Earthquake

FIGURE NAMEPROJECT NAME

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

1.6 1.8

2.0 2.2

2.4 2.6

Riverside City CouncilMay 20, 2025

Riverside City Council
May 20, 2025