Agenda packet — Wildomar City Council, June 11, 2025 (part 7 of 8)

1968
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources RI-03956 1995 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF

THE WILDOMAR MDP LATERAL E

PROJECT LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY

OF WILDOMAR, UNINCORPORATED

RIVERSIDE COUNTY

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

ASSOCIATES
NADB-R - 1084914; WHITE, ROBERT S. 33-006980
Voided - MF-4327
RI-03986 1996 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF

THE SENIOR LEISURE LIVING
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT: A 10.94 ACRE

PARCEL AS SHOWN ON PLOT PLAN
14543, WILDOMAR, UNINCORPORATED

RIVERSIDE COUNTY

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

ASSOCIATES
NADB-R - 1084961; WHITE, ROBERT S.

Other - PP 14543;
Voided - MF-4357
RI-04142 1989 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF
A 20 ACRETRACT OF LAND DESIGNATED
TENTATIVETRACT #22555 LOCATED IN

THE WILDOMAR AREA, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND

ETHNOGRAPHIC FIELD

ASSOCIATES
NADB-R - 1085333; DE MUNCK, VICTOR C.

Other - TT
22555(1989) TR
29029 (1999)7;
Voided - MF-4618
RI-04259 1999 CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT:

TENTATIVE TRACT 29332, NEAR THE

COMMUNITY OF WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

LOVE, BRUCE, BAI CRM TECH
"TOM" TANG, MICHAEL
HOGAN, and DANIEL

BALLESTER
NADB-R - 1085497;
Submitter - 425;
Voided - MF-4740
RI-04323 2000 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT: APN 367-
300-030, NEAR THE COMMUNITY OF

WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA.

LOVE, BRUCE, BAI CRM TECH
"TOM" TANG, and

MICHAEL HOGAN
NADB-R - 1085593;
Submitter - 544;
Voided - MF-4806
RI-04608 2002 PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES
ASSESSMENT: TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
30917, WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
NADB-R - 1085968 SHEPARD, RICHARD S. BONTERRA CONSULTING 33-012289 RI-04877 2003 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

OF THE PROPOSED TEMECULA VALLEY

REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION

FACILITY EFFLUENT PIPELINE,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

PEAK & ASSOCIATES,
INC.

NADB-R - 1086239 33-010986
RI-04937 2003 A PHASE I CULTURAL REOURCES

SURVEY OF THE DEPASQUALE FAMILY

PARTNERSHIP PROPOERTY (TRACT
30155) IN THE OAK SPRINGS AREA OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

MCKENNA, JEANETTE MCKENNA ET AL.

NADB-R - 1086299;
Submitter - 04-03-06-
748

Page 2 of 6 ends

1969
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources RI-04962 2004 FINAL REPORT FOR THE PAHSE I

ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL
SURVEY TRACT 32859, APN 380-070-018,

15.6-ACRE PROPERTY

L&L ENVIRONMENTAL,
INC.

HOOVER, ANNA M. and

HUGH WAGNER
NADB-R - 1086324;
Submitter - GLH-04-
532
RI-05497 2004 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES

ASSESSMENT OF CORNERSTONE
CHURCH EXPANSION (APN 367-140-008,
367-210-018), +/-48.43 ACRES OF LAND IN

WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
NADB-R - 1086860 KELLER, JEAN A. JEAN KELLER
RI-05750 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT: BEAR

CREEK VILLAGE CENTER, NEAR THE

CITY OF MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
DAHDUL, MARIAM and CRM TECH

DANIEL BALLESTER
NADB-R - 1087113;
Submitter - 1013
RI-05757 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT:

TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 30939, GROSS

RANCH PROJECT NEAR THE CITY OF

MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
NADB-R - 1087120; DAHDUL, MARIAM CRM TECH
Submitter - 998
RI-05758 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT:

TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 30839, DAVIS

RANCH PROJECT, NEAR THE CITY OF

MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
NADB-R - 1087121; DAHDUL, MARIAM CRM TECH
Submitter - 997
RI-05967 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31499, NEAR

THE CITY OF MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH

HOGAN, JOSH
SMALLWOOD, and

DANIEL BALLESTER
NADB-R - 1087330;
Submitter - 1096
RI-06023 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 31331, EA NO.
39030, NEAR THE CITY OF MURRIETA,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH
HOGAN, and MARIAM
DAHDUL
NADB-R - 1087386;
Submitter - 1079

Page 3 of 6 ends

1970
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources RI-06024 2003 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESORUCES SURVEY REPORT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31353 AND
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 369-180-025,

NEAR THE CITY OF MURRIETA,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH

HOGAN, CASEY
TIBBET, and DANIEL

BALLESTER
NADB-R - 1087387;
Submitter - 1095
RI-06171 2004 LETTER REPORT: RECORDS SEARCH

AND SITE VISIT RESULTS FOR SPRINT

TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
CANDIDATE RV54XC511G (CALIFORNIA
LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL), 31970

CENTRAL AVENUE, WILDOMAR,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA

MICHAEL BRANDMAN

ASSOCIATES
NADB-R - 1087534 AISLIN-KAY, MARNIE
RI-06234 2004 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31837, NEAR

THE CITY OF MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH
HOGAN, and JOHN J.

EDDY
NADB-R - 1087597;
Submitter - CRM

TECH CONTRACT
#1288
RI-06249 2004 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Tentative Tract Map No. 32078, Near
the City of Murrieta, Riverisde County,
California
Bai Tang, Michael CRM TECH
Hogan, Casey Tibbet,
and John Eddy
NADB-R - 1087612; 33-006980
Submitter - CRM
TECH Contract #1289
RI-06363 2004 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 376-060-010
AND -013, NEAR THE COMMUNITY OF

WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH

HOGAN, DEIRDRE
ENCARNACION, and
THOMAS J. MELZER
NADB-R - 1087726;
Submitter -
CONTRACT #1429
RI-06493 2004 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25122, NEAR

THE CITY OF MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CA

TANG, BAI, MICHAEL CRM TECH
HOGAN, and MATTHEW

WETHERBEE
NADB-R - 1087860; 33-006980
Submitter -
CONTRACT #1326
RI-06494 2005 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT,
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 376-190-
002, AND 376-108-006, NEAR THE

COMMUNITY OF WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CA

HOGAN, MICHAEL, BAI CRM TECH
TANG, and MATTHEW

WETHERBEE
NADB-R - 1087861;
Submitter -
CONTRACT #1603A

Page 4 of 6 ends

1971
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources RI-06697 2006 ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT FOR

THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
COMPANY: OVERHEAD TO

UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECT,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(WO#6477-7274, AI#6-7212)
NADB-R - 1088064; JORDAN, STACEY C. JONES & STOKES
Other - CONTRACT
NO. 06998.06
RI-06737 2006 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT,

BAXTER PROJECT, AN

UNINCORPORATED AREA OF WILDOMAR,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
NADB-R - 1088104; AUSTERMAN, VIRGINIA LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 33-015306 Submitter - LSA
PROJECT NO.

OKE0601
RI-07598 2007 A Phase I Archaeological Assessment for the Wildomar Square Project, Riverside County,
California, APN 380-230-001
Brian F. Smith and
Associates
Clowery-Moreno, Sara
and Brian F. Smith
RI-07789 2008 Cultural Resource Survey for the Elsinore Valley Municpal Water DistrictT Phase I
Recycled Water System, Riverside County,
California
Carolyn E. Kyle Kyle Consulting
RI-07886 2006 Photo Recordation of Historic Buildings
Rudolph J. Brown Ranch, 22060 Grand Ave.

Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Bai Tang and Michael CRM TECH
Hogan
Submitter - CRM 33-007808
TECH Contract #1927
RI-08769 2011 Letter Report: Proposed Cellular Tower
Project(s) in Riverside County, California, Site
Number(s)/Name(s): LA5647A/ Palomar TMO
Colo TCNS# 76331
Carla Allred EarthTouch, Inc.

RI-08934 2013 Update to Historical/Archaeological
Resources Survey, Assessor's Parcel Nos.
376-410-013, -022, and -023 (Westpark
Project), City of Wildomar, Riverside County,
California
Submitter - Contract Bai "Tom" Tang CRM Tech 33-008173
No. 2717
RI-08939 2013 Update to Historical/Archaeological
Resources Survey, Tentative Tract Map
33840; Assessor's Parcel No. 376-043-027,
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Submitter - Contract Bai "Tom" Tang CRM Tech
No. 2730
RI-09159 2013 Phase 1 Cultural Resources Survey for the Orange Street Project City of Wildomar,
County of Riverside
Brain F Smith and
Associates, Inc.

Jennifer R. Kraft and
Tracy Stropes
RI-09208 2014 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Verizon Wireless Candidate
'Refa', Gruwell Street, Wildomar, Riverside
County, California
Carrie D. Wills First Carbon Solutions

Page 5 of 6 ends

1972
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources RI-09229 2014 Update of an Historical/ Archaeological
Resources Survey Tenative Tract Map
32035; Assessor's Parcel Nos. 380-040-005, -
007, -012, and -025 In the City of Wildomar,
Riverside County, California
Michael Hogan CRM Tech 33-023939
RI-09291 2014 A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of Public Use Permit 778, Revised Permit No. 5
APN 367-210-008, 018, 034, 035, 039, 041,
043 and 367-140-008
Jean A. Keller Jean A. Keller
RI-09418 2015 Paleontological, Archaeological, and Native American Monitoring Report, 34915 Orange
Street (Tract 36519), City of Widomar,
Riverside County, California (APN 367-170-
029)
Brian F. Smith and
Associates Inc.

Brian F. Smith, George L.

Kennedy, and Todd A.

Wirths
RI-09441 2012 Cultural Resources Assessment, Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District, Waite Street
Reservoir and Pipeline Project, Wildomar,
Riverside County, California
David Brunzell BCR Consulting
RI-09524 2012 Cultural Resources Assessment Baxter
Property Wildomar, Riverside County,
California
David Brunzell BCR Consulting
RI-10113 2016 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

FAITH BIBLE CHURCH PROJECT

WILDOMAR RIVERSIDE COUNTY

CALIFORNIA
Other - RBF1610 DAVID BRUNZELL BCRCONSULTING 33-015306
RI-10530 2009 Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of
the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
Wildomar Recycled Water System Phase 1 -
Off-Site Facilities Project, Riverside County
Laura S. White and Arcaheological Associates
Robert S. White
RI-10972 2021 Cultural Resources Assessment of the Tres Lagos Apartments Project, Wildomar,
Riverside County, California
David Brunzell BCR Consulting, LLC

Page 6 of 6 ends

1973
Primary No. Trinomial
Resource List
Other IDs Type Age Attribute codes Recorded by Reports
P-33-004722 CA-RIV-004722 Other - ARU # 1175-1 Historic 1992 (B. Love, Archaeological RI-03458 Research Unit)
P-33-004725 CA-RIV-004725 Other - Tunstall East Prehistoric 1989 (Robert S. White, RI-02888 Archaeological Associates)
P-33-004726 CA-RIV-004726 Other - Tunstall West Prehistoric 1989 (Robert S. White, RI-02888 Archaeological Associates)
P-33-007182 Other - Ser. No. 33-23300-42 Building Historic HP02 1982 (Pat Meredith, Riverside County Historical Commission)
P-33-007783 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007784 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007786 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007805 Other - Robinson House;
Other - Heald Ranch;
Other - Ser. No. 33-2395-7
Building Historic HP02 1982 (Marna O'Brien, Riverside
County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007807 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007808 Historic 1982 (O'Brien, Marna, Riverside RI-07886, RI-08170 County Historical Commission);
2004 (Ostashay, Jan and Peter
Moruzzi, PCR Services Corp.,
Irvine);
2006 (Smallwood, Josh and Thomas
J. Melzer, CRM TECH)
P-33-007809 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-007811 Historic 1982 (M. O'Brien, Riverside County Historical Comm.)
P-33-008173 CA-RIV-006070H Other - CRM TECH 311-1H;
Other - CRM TECH 2717
RI-03341, RI-04390,
RI-08859, RI-08934
Other Historic AH03 1998 (Bruce Love, CRM TECH,
Riverside, CA);
2013 (Daniel Ballester, CRM TECH)
P-33-012289 Other - RBF-156-01 Building Historic HP02 2002 (Richard S. Shepard, Bon RI-04608 Terra Consulting)
P-33-023939 CA-RIV-011760 Other - CRM Tech 2818-1 Site Historic AH06 2014 (Michael Hogan, CRM TECH) RI-09229

Page 1 of 2 ends

1974
Primary No. Trinomial
Resource List
Other IDs Type Age Attribute codes Recorded by Reports
P-33-028131 Other - LSA-JTM1801-S-1 Other Prehistoric AP16 2018 (Riordan Goodwin, LSA Associates, Inc.)

Page 2 of 2 ends

1975
1/30/24, 9:46AM Contact - Riverside County Heritage Association Riuerside County Heritage Association
Home
Riuerside County
Chronicles Journal
2024 Riuerside
County History
Symposium
Downloads
Contact
Contact us:
* Indicates required field
Name *
[ Robert
First
Email *
[ Cunningham
Last
[ [email protected]
Comment *
ECORP Consulting, Inc. has been retained
to assist in the planning of the
development of the project indicated
above. The proposed project consists of
approximately 20 acres located in the
sectioned portions of Township 6 South
Range 4 West, Section 35 as depicted on
the enclosed map. The property is located
northeast of Palomar Street, northwest of
Refa Street, and east of Anne Sullivan
Preschool. Upon request, we can provide a map via email.

Steve Lech
c/o Riverside County Heritage Association
P. 0. Box 21168
Riverside, CA 92516-1168
https://www.riversidecountyheritageassociation.org/contact.html Check us out on Facebook!
>
1/2
1976
1/30/24, 9:46AM Contact - Riverside County Heritage Association Proudly powered by Weebly
https://www.riversidecountyheritageassociation.org/contact.html 2/2 1977
1/30/24, 9:34AM Parks Contact Page - Parks
Home ) Parks Contact Page
Contact Us
Parks District Guest Services
Our Guest Services department is here to help you! If you need assistance booking a camping reservation, want more information about special events or programs, or have any other inquiries, please fill out the form below and someone will be in touch with you shortly. * First name * Last name
[ Robert ] [ Cunningham ,._ _________________ _,
* Email Phone number
[ [email protected] ] [ (909) 747-4679 ,._ _________________ _, Address
[ 215 North 5th Street
Address Line 2
City State
800-234-7275
Office Location/Hours:
4600 Crestmore Road
Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
Monday - Thursday I 8 a.m. - 5
p.m.

Friday I 8 a.m. - 3:30 p.m
Zip
[..__R_e_d_la_n_d_s _______ __,] [ California v I [ 92374 * Location:
[ Other
* Please enter your comment
po
is located northeast of Palomar Street, northwest of Reta Street, and east of Anne Sullivan Preschool as indicated in the attached map. As part of the identification effort, we are seeking information from all https://rivcoextprod.service-now.com/rivcoparks?id=parks_contact_page ....
"'
1/2
1978
1/30/24, 9:34AM
I'm not a robot
Submit
reCAPTCHA
Privacy • Terms
https://rivcoextprod.service-now.com/rivcoparks?id=parks_contact_page Parks Contact Page - Parks
2/2
1979
1/30/24, 9:35AM Parks Contact Confirmation Page - Parks Home ) Parks Contact Confirmation Page
Thank You For Getting In Touch!
Thank you for contacting Riverside County Park and Open-Space District. We have received your inquiry and will get back to you as soon as we can.
https://rivcoextprod.service-now.com/rivcoparks?id=parks_contact_msg 1/1 1980
215 North Fifth Street, Redlands, California 92374 • Tel: (909) 307-0046 • Fax: (909) 307-0056 • Web: www.ecorpconsulting.com January 30, 2024
Wildomar Historical Society
P.O. Box 1685
Wildomar, CA 92595
Sent via email: [email protected]
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the Ronald Reagan Sports Park Project, Riverside County, California
Dear Wildomar Historical Society:

ECORP Consulting, Inc. has been retained to assist in the planning of the development of the project indicated above. The proposed project consists of approximately 20 acres located in the sectioned portions of Township 6 South Range 4 West, Section 35 as depicted on the enclosed map. The property is located northeast of Palomar Street, northwest of Refa Street, and east of Anne Sullivan Preschool as indicated in the attached map. As part of the identification effort, we are seeking information from all parties that may have knowledge of or concerns with historic properties or cultural resources in the project area.

Attached, please find a map showing the project area outlined. We would appreciate input on this undertaking from the historical society with concerns about possible cultural properties or potential impacts within or adjacent to the area of potential effect. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 747- 4679 or [email protected].

Thank you in advance for your assistance in our cultural resource management study.

Sincerely,
Rob Cunningham
Staff Archaeologist/ Staff Coordinator
Attachment(s):

Records Search Map
ECORP Consulting,_In _____ c. __________________ _ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 1981
Riverside County, California
Unsectioned La Laguna (Stearns)
Land Grant
Latitude (NAD83): 33.602727°
Longitude (NAD83): -117 .26591 °
Watershed: Santa Margarita (18070302)
0 1,000 2,000
Wildomar (1997 p.r. 2000, NAO 27),
Murrieta (1953 p.r. 1986, NAO 27)
CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle
US Geological Survey
Map Date: 1/15/2024 Sources: ESR/, USGS
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
..,_,_..."'-!..,. ENVIRONMENTAL CO SULTANTS
Records Search
2022-252.07 Wildomar Passive Park Project
1982

APPENDIX B
Sacred Lands File Coordination and Tribal Outreach
1983
From: Casey LeJeune
To: NAHC@NAHC
Cc: Sonia Sifuentes; Robert Cunningham
Subject: NHAC SLF Request ECORP #2022-252.07
Date: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 8:55:00 AM
Attachments: Sacred-Lands-File-NA-Contact-Form 20-acre Passive Park.pdf image001.png
WPP Records Search 20240115 (V01).pdf
Hello,
ECORP is requesting a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File for the above referenced project.

Please see attached documents for details about the project location.

Sincerely,
Casey LeJeune, M.A., RPA
Staff Archaeologist
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Federal Small Business
California Small Business for Public Works (SB-PW)
215 N 5th St, Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909.307.0046
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ENVIRO MENTAL CONSULTA TS
1984
Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
916-373-3710
916-373-5471 - Fax
[email protected]
Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search P . t Wildomar 20-acre Passive Park roJec: ___________________________ _ Riverside
County: ___________________________ _
Wildomar, CA (1997) USGS Quadrangle Name: _____________________ _ 6S 4W 35
Township: ___ _ Range: ___ _ Section(s): ___ _
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Company/Finn/Agency: ______________________ _
215 North 5th Street
Street Address: --------------------------
Redlands, CA
City: ________________ _
Phone: (909) 307-0046
------------------
(909) 307-0056
Fax: -------------------
. [email protected] Email: ------------------ Project Description:
92374
Zip: ________ _
This project is located in Wildomar, Riverside County and covers approximately 20 acres of land northeast of Palomar Street, northwest of Refa Street, and east of Anne Sullivan Preschool. Please use the project number 2022-252.07 and cc [email protected] on all correspondence. 1985
Riverside County, California
Unsectioned La Laguna (Stearns)
Land Grant
Latitude (NAD83): 33.602727°
Longitude (NAD83): -117 .26591 °
Watershed: Santa Margarita (18070302)
0 1,000 2,000
Wildomar (1997 p.r. 2000, NAO 27),
Murrieta (1953 p.r. 1986, NAO 27)
CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle
US Geological Survey
Map Date: 1/15/2024 Sources: ESR/, USGS
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
..,_,_..."'-!..,. ENVIRONMENTAL CO SULTANTS
Records Search
2022-252.07 Wildomar Passive Park Project
1986
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 1 ends

February 26, 2024
Casey LeJeune
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Wildomar 20-acre Passive Park Project, Riverside County Dear Ms. LeJeune:

A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.

Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: [email protected]. Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

COMMISSIONER
Laurena Bolden
Serrano

COMMISSIONER
Reid Milanovich
Cahuilla

COMMISSIONER
Vacant

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok, Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
1987
Tribe Name Fed (F)
Non-Fed (N)
Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Last Updated Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lacy Padilla, THPO Operations Manager 5401 Dinah Shore Drive Palm Springs, CA, 92264
(760) 333-5222 (760) 699-6919 [email protected] Cahuilla 1/11/2024 Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation - Belardes N Joyce Perry, Cultural Resource Director 4955 Paseo Segovia Irvine, CA, 92603
(949) 293-8522 [email protected] Juaneno 3/17/2023
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 84A N Heidi Lucero, Chairperson, THPO31411-A La Matanza Street San Juan Capistrano, CA, 92675(562) 879-2884 [email protected] Juaneno 3/28/2023 La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians F Norma Contreras, Chairperson 22000 Highway 76 Pauma Valley, CA, 92061
(760) 742-3771 Luiseno Pala Band of Mission Indians F Alexis Wallick, Assistant THPO PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059 (760) 891-3537 [email protected] Cupeno
Luiseno
11/27/2023 Pala Band of Mission Indians F Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059 (760) 891-3515 [email protected] Cupeno
Luiseno
11/27/2023 Pala Band of Mission Indians F Christopher Nejo, Legal Analyst/Researcher
PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059(760) 891-3564 [email protected] Cupeno Luiseno
11/27/2023 Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians F Temet Aguilar, Chairperson P.O. Box 369 Pauma Valley, CA, 92061
(760) 742-1289 (760) 742-3422 [email protected] Luiseno Pechanga Band of Indians F Steve Bodmer, General Counsel for Pechanga Band of Indians P.O. Box 1477 Temecula, CA, 92593 (951) 770-6171 (951) 695-1778 [email protected] Luiseno 8/2/2023 Pechanga Band of Indians F Tuba Ebru Ozdil, Pechanga Cultural Analyst P.O. Box 2183 Temecula, CA, 92593
(951) 770-6313 (951) 695-1778 [email protected] Luiseno 8/2/2023 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jordan Joaquin, President, Quechan Tribal Council P.O.Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (760) 919-3600 executivesecretary@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan 5/16/2023 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Manfred Scott, Acting Chairman - Kw'ts'an Cultural Committee P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 210-8739 culturalcommittee@quechantribe. comQuechan 5/16/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Orange,Riverside,San Diego
Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Orange,Riverside,San Diego
Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Riverside County 2/26/2024 Counties
Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
02/26/2024 09:30 AM 1 of 2 1988
Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Riverside County 2/26/2024 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 261-0254 historicpreservation@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan 5/16/2023 Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Laurie Gonzalez, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 484-4835 [email protected] Luiseno 5/31/2023 Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Cheryl Madrigal, Cultural Resources Manager/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 648-3000 [email protected] Luiseno 5/31/2023 Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Denise Turner Walsh, Attorney General One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 689-5727 [email protected] Luiseno 7/7/2023 Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Linton, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 803-3548 [email protected] Luiseno 5/31/2023 Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539
(951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 [email protected] Cahuilla Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-6261 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno
7/14/2023 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581
(951) 654-5544 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno
7/14/2023 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-5279 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno
7/14/2023
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resour Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Wildomar 20-acre Passive Park Project, Riverside Coun Record: PROJ-2024-001044 Report Type: List of Tribes Counties: Riverside NAHC Group: All Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura
Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San
Bernardino,San Diego
02/26/2024 09:30 AM 2 of 2 1989
- 16) 782- sulting.com
February 26, 2024
Lacy Padilla, THPO Operations Manager
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Padilla:

PlaceWorks, Inc. retained ECORP Consulting, Inc. to conduct a cultural resources inventory of the proposed Project Area located in the City of Wildomar in Riverside County, California. A survey of the property was required to identify potentially eligible cultural resources (i.e., archaeological sites and historic buildings, structures, and objects) that could be affected by the Project.

The purpose of the study is to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation included a records search conducted with the California Historical Resources Information System and a search of the Native American Heritage (NAHC) Sacred Lands File. The search of the Sacred Lands file did not identify any known Native American cultural resources within the immediate project vicinity; however, the NAHC provided us with your name and contact information.

As part of this study, ECORP would like to identify archaeological, historic resources, or locations that are of cultural importance to the local Native American community. We would appreciate any information you may have regarding Native American cultural resources located in or near the proposed project location that could be affected by the proposed development of the parcel. We invite you to offer comments on the project.

We encourage you to participate in this process, so that potential impacts to Native American resources can be proactively addressed and minimized to the greatest extent feasible. We would like to receive a response from you about this project within the next two weeks. We would appreciate receiving your response to this inquiry within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Please note that this data gathering process is not considered formal consultation under Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. ENVIRONMENT AL CONSUL T_A_N_T_S _________________________ _ Commission's
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel : (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (9 9134 • www.ecorpcon 1990
- 16) 782- sulting.com
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ENVIRONMENT AL c o NS UL T_A_N_r"""s-------------------------- -s
Sonia Sifuentes. MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel : (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (9 9134 • www.ecorpcon 1991
- -
February 26, 2024
Heidi Lucero, Chairperson, THPO
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 84A
31411-A La Matanza Street
San Juan Capistrano, CA, 92675
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Lucero:

The purpose of the study is to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation included a records search conducted with the California Historical Resources Information System and a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File. The search of the Sacred Lands file did not identify any known Native American cultural resources within the immediate project vicinity; however, the NAHC provided us with your name and contact information.

ECORP Consulting,_In_c_. __________________ _ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1992
- -
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,-"I=n __ c.;._ ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
Sonia Sifuentes. MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1993
- -
February 26, 2024
Joyce Perry, Cultural Resource Director
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation (Belardes) 4955 Paseo Segovia
Irvine, CA, 92603
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Perry:

The purpose of the study is to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation included a records search conducted with the California Historical Resources Information System and a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File. The search of the Sacred Lands file did not identify any known Native American cultural resources within the immediate project vicinity; however, the NAHC provided us with your name and contact information.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Consulting,,..,.I.,.,.n,,,,c,,.... ____________________ _ MENTAL CONSULTA TS 2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1994
- -
Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_l_n ___ c__ . ____________________ _ TAL CONSULTA TS -s:
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1995
- -
February 26, 2024
Norma Contreras, Chairperson
La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians
22000 Highway 76
Pauma Valley, CA, 92061
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Contreras:

The purpose of the study is to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation included a records search conducted with the California Historical Resources Information System and a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File. The search of the Sacred Lands file did not identify any known Native American cultural resources within the immediate project vicinity; however, the NAHC provided us with your name and contact information.

ECORP Consulting,_In_c_. __________________ _ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1996
- -
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,-"I=n __ c.;._ ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1997
- -
February 26, 2024
Steve Bodmer, General Counsel for Pechanga Band of Indians Pechanga Band of Indians
P.O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA, 92593
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Bodmer:

The Project Area is located northeast of Palomar Street, northwest of Refa Street, and east of Ann Sullivan Preschool and Transitional Kindergarten in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California. As shown on the 1997 U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Wildomar, California topographic quadrangle map, the project area is located in unsectioned La Laguna/Stearns (please see attached map). The purpose of the study is to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation included a records search conducted with the California Historical Resources Information System and a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File. The search of the Sacred Lands file did not identify any known Native American cultural resources within the immediate project vicinity; however, the NAHC provided us with your name and contact information.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. EN VI RON MENTAL CONSUL T_A_N_T_S _________________________ _ 2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1998
- -
Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 1999
- -
February 26, 2024
Tuba Ebru Ozdil, Pechanga Cultural Analyst
Pechanga Band of Indians
P.O. Box 2183
Temecula, CA, 92593
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Ozdil:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
Sonia Sifuentes, MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2001
2 - -
February 26, 2024
Temet Aguilar, Chairperson
Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 369
Pauma Valley, CA, 92061
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Aguilar:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. EN VI RON MENTAL CONSUL T_A_N_T_S _________________________ _ 525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2002
2 - -
Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
Sonia Sifuentes, MS
525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2003
- -
February 26, 2024
Alexis Wallick, Assistant THPO
Pala Band of Mission Indians
PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road
Pala, CA, 92059
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Wallick:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2005
- -
February 26, 2024
Christopher Nejo, Legal Analyst/Researcher
Pala Band of Mission Indians
PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road
Pala, CA, 92059
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Nejo:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2007
- -
February 26, 2024
Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Pala Band of Mission Indians
PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road
Pala, CA, 92059
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Gaughen:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
Snni;:i Sif11Pntpc;_ MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2009
- -
February 26, 2024
Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. McCormick:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2011
- -
February 26, 2024
Jordan Joaquin, President, Quechan Tribal Council
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Joaquin:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS --s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2013
- -
February 26, 2024
Manfred Scott, Acting Chairman - Kw'ts'an Cultural Committee Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Scott:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2015
- -
February 26, 2024
Cheryl Madrigal, Cultural Resources Manager/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA, 92082
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Madrigal:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2017
- -
February 26, 2024
Denise Turner Walsh, Attorney General
Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA, 92082
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Walsh:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2019
- -
February 26, 2024
Joseph Linton, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member
Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA, 92082
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Linton:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS --s
r _ __ : _ r :L .. -.-.&.-- • •r
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2021
- -
February 26, 2024
Laurie Gonzalez, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA, 92082
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Gonzalez:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS -s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2023
- -
February 26, 2024
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Vivanco:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2025
- -
February 26, 2024
Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Valdez:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
Snni;:i SifuPntPs. MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2027
- -
February 26, 2024
Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mr. Ontiveros:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
nsulting,_I_n_c_. ____________________ _ TAL CON ULTA TS s
Sonia Sifuentes. MS
2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2029
- -
February 26, 2024
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the 20-acre Park Project in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California.

Dear Mrs. Redner:

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 307-0046 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance and participation in this project.

CULTURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
One Government Center Lane | Valley Center | CA 92082
(760) 749-1092 | Fax: (760) 749-8901 | rincon-nsn.gov
Bo Mazzetti
Chairman
Vacant
Vice Chair
Laurie E. Gonzalez
Council Member
John Constantino
Council Member
Joseph Linton
Council Member
March 25, 2024
Sent via email: [email protected]
Re: CIP-099 20 Acre Passive Park, City of Wildomar, County of Riverside, California Dear Ms. Sifuentes,
Tribe
recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government in response to your request for information pertaining to cultural and tribal cultural resources on the above referenced project. The identified location is within the Traditional Use Area of the Luiseño people and is also within the Tribe As such, the Rincon Band is traditionally and culturally affiliated to the project area.

The tribe has no further comments. The proposed project is in a culturally-sensitive area and the Tribe believes that the potential exists for cultural resources to be identified during further research and survey work. We recommend working closely with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians as they may have pertinent information to provide.

Please forward a final copy of the cultural resources study upon completion to the Rincon Band.

If you have additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact our office at your convenience at (760) 749 1092 ext. 320 or via electronic mail at [email protected]. Thank you for the opportunity to protect our cultural assets.

Sincerely,
Shuuluk Linton
Tribal Historic Preservation Coordinator
Cultural Resources
This letter is written on behalf of the Rincon Band of Luisefio Indians ("Rincon Band" or " "), a federally 's specific area of Historic interest.
2031
- -
Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Sonia Sifuentes, MS
Senior Archaeologist
Southern California Cultural Resources Group Manager
Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map
ECORP Consulting, Inc. EN VI RON MENTAL CONSUL T_A_N_T_S _________________________ _ 2525 Warren Drive • Rocklin, CA 95677 • Tel: (916) 782 9100 • Fax: (916) 782 9134 • www.ecorpconsulting.com 2032

APPENDIX C
Project Area Photographs
2033

PHOTOLOG
Camera Photo
No.
\V~ \ M bi-
~& oi1A
\tv\l11 - 0'61~
\Mb\~
O'tV-o
\M(J\_
O'i<L7
\M{j\_ tilL<l
,I
\ tv\(n-
('(,()9\
Project Name: Wil duvnoiv 20 c,(Jre ~
Project Number: 2~72-25'2 .07
Description Facing Date Initials
\l A 'JWr0i.){\} o~ ~U-\vicir~ i~m.0Ylt S\N 4/17/2-t DL, L- °JYO\/\ r'lo\ s \f\rtvtu v'\-~' ~· \ i t'J I(\
S UV\1V\r:rV'I ~O\VY\U\r- d- rA vJ
f /\ (JVW Yl.T/1/V -t'YOY"\ NV\} UOYY\LiY SE
\7 A o \fJY" v.. '1fvJ m VY\ N 6 VOYVU;v svv ~ YlJ\NY\C\ ~ \N( ~U, V\ ~ \ 0,·\ ,~iY\ UMW'f ~ \7A C N ~ t\ vJ
VA (J\/(J( V\ W {lf 01/Y\ St ()J('/Vl'f N0 'V" ,/
2034
2035
2036
IMG
_0828.jpg IMG_0829.jpg IMG_0824.jpg IMG_0825.jpg IMG_0826.jpg IMG_0827.jpg
2037
2038
This page intentionally left blank.
2039
20-Acre Passive Park (CIP 099) IS/MND
PlaceWorks
Appendix 5 Geotechnical Evaluation Report
2040

GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
WILDOMAR 20-ACRE NATURE PARK

PALOMAR STREET AND SOUTH PASADENA STREET

CITY OF WILDOMAR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

PREPARED FOR

ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP
10221-A TRADEMARK
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730

PREPARED BY
GEOTEK, INC.
1548 NORTH MAPLE STREET
CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92878
PROJECT NO. 3901-CR JUNE 18, 2024
GEOTEK 2041
GEOTECHNICAL | ENVIRONMENTAL | MATERIALS
June 18, 2024
Project No. 3901-CR
Architerra Design Group
10221-A Trademark
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Attention: Mr. Peter Dalman
Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Dear Mr. Dalman:

GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) is pleased to provide the results of this Geotechnical Evaluation for the Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park project to be located easterly of the intersection of Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street, in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California. This report presents the results of GeoTek’s evaluation, discussion of findings, and provides geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and construction.

Based upon review and evaluation, site development appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the recommendations included in this report are incorporated into the design and construction phases of the project.

GeoTek, Inc.
1548 North Maple Street, Corona, California 92878
(95 I) 710-1 160 Office (95 I) 710-1 167 Fax www.geotekusa.com 2042
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page i
The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact GeoTek.

Respectfully submitted,
GeoTek, Inc.

Bruce A. Hick
GE 2284, Exp. 12/31/24
Geotechnical Engineer
Edward H. LaMont
CEG 1892, Exp. 07/31/26
Principal Geologist
Anna M. Scott Kase I. Gebbie, EIT
Project Geologist Staff Engineer
Distribution: (1) Addressee via email (one PDF file)
\\geotekfs1\Riverside\Projects\3901 to 3950\3901CR Architerra Design Group Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Wildomar\Geotechnical Evaluation\3901CR Geotechnical Evaluation Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park.doc Cot
1tiiif:E.Ssi~
f.r.,~~ t ~- ~,,,
GE
;?re Or
GEOTEK 2043
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................. 1

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT............................................................... 1

2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................................................. 1

2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................................................... 2

3. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................ 3

3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................................................................................................................... 3

4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS ........................................................................................... 4

4.1 REGIONAL SETTING ................................................................................................................................................................ 4

4.2 GENERAL SOIL CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 5

4.2.1 Disturbed Soil ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

4.2.2 Alluvium .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5

4.2.3 Pauba Formation Sedimentary Bedrock .................................................................................................................................. 5

4.3 SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................ 6

4.3.1 Surface Water ................................................................................................................................................................................. 6

4.3.2 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

4.4 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY .................................................................................................................................................... 6

4.4.1 Faulting ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

4.4.2 Lineament Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7

4.4.3 Seismic Design Parameters.......................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.5 LIQUEFACTION ........................................................................................................................................................................ 9

4.6 OTHER SEISMIC HAZARDS ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 10

5.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................................................................................ 10

5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 10

5.2.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 10

5.2.2 Site Clearing ................................................................................................................................................................................... 10

5.2.3 Site Preparation ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10

5.2.4 Engineered Fill ............................................................................................................................................................................... 11

5.2.5 Trench Excavations and Backfill ............................................................................................................................................. 11

5.2.6 Shrinkage and Bulking ................................................................................................................................................................ 12

5.2.7 Grading Plan Review ................................................................................................................................................................... 12

5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 12

5.3.1 Shallow Foundation Design Criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 12

5.3.2 Miscellaneous Shallow Foundation Recommendations .................................................................................................... 15

5.3.3 Foundation Setbacks ................................................................................................................................................................... 16

5.3.4 Deep Foundation Design Criteria – Drilled Piers............................................................................................................... 16

5.3.5 Soil Corrosivity ............................................................................................................................................................................... 18

5.3.6 Soil Sulfate Content ..................................................................................................................................................................... 18

5.3.6 Import Soils .................................................................................................................................................................................... 18

5.4 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................................................... 18

5.4.1 General Design Criteria .............................................................................................................................................................. 18 GEOTEK 2044
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5.4.2 Cantilevered Walls ....................................................................................................................................................................... 19

5.4.3 Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage ................................................................................................................................... 20

5.4.4 Restrained Retaining Walls ....................................................................................................................................................... 21

5.4.5 Additional Retaining Wall Design Considerations ............................................................................................................. 21

5.5 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 21

5.5.1 Asphalt Concrete (AC) Pavement ........................................................................................................................................... 21

5.5.2 Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavers .............................................................................................................................. 22

5.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement ....................................................................................................................... 23

5.5.4 Pourous Asphalt Concrete ......................................................................................................................................................... 24

5.5.4 Gravel Surfaced Concrete Parking Lot .................................................................................................................................. 24

5.5.5 Pavement Construction .............................................................................................................................................................. 24

5.6 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 25

5.6.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 25

5.6.2 Concrete Mix Design .................................................................................................................................................................. 25

5.6.3 Concrete Flatwork ........................................................................................................................................................................ 25

5.6.4 Concrete Performance ................................................................................................................................................................ 26

5.7 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 27

5.7.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting ................................................................................................................................... 27

5.7.2 Drainage .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

5.8 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS .................................................................................................... 27

6. INTENT ............................................................................................................................................... 28

7. LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 28

8. SELECTED REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 29

ENCLOSURES
Figure 1 – Site Location and Topography Map
Figure 2 – Boring Location Map
Figure 3 – California Geological Survey Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map Figure 4 – Lineament Air Photo Assessment Map

Appendix A – Logs of Exploratory Borings
Appendix B – Laboratory Test Results
Appendix C – Historic Aerial Photographs
Appendix D – General Earthwork Grading Guidelines
GEOTEK 2045
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 1

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the geotechnical engineering and geologic conditions at the project site, as outlined in GeoTek’s proposal P-0407924-CR, dated April 24, 2024.

Services provided for this study included the following:
 Research and review of available geologic data and general information pertinent to the site,
 Perform a site reconnaissance,
 Site exploration consisting of the excavation, logging, and sampling of eight (8) exploratory test borings extending to depths of approximately 11.5 to 51.5 feet below existing grades,
 Laboratory testing of soil samples collected during the field investigation,  Review and evaluation of site seismicity and geologic hazards, including a fault lineament study based on research of available topographic maps, geologic reports for the area, and aerial photography information for the project site, and  Preparation of this Geotechnical Evaluation report which presents GeoTek’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations for this site.

The intent of this report is to aid in the evaluation of the site for future proposed improvements from a geotechnical perspective. The professional opinions and geotechnical information contained in this report may need to be updated based upon review of the final site development plans. These plans should be provided to GeoTek for review when available.

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The approximate 20.54-acre irregular shaped project site is located easterly of the intersection of Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street, in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California (see Figure 1, Site Location and Topography Map). The project site is comprised of GEOTEK 2046
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 2
two (2) parcels identified as Riverside County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 380-050-025 and -029. The two parcels are separated by a concrete-lined drainage channel in the western portion of the project site.

Access to the site is from Palomar Street, a paved, improved street located adjacent to the southwestern boundary of the site. The site currently consists of vacant, undeveloped land, with a light scattering of trees and moderate covering of native grasses and brush.

The site consists of relatively flat to gently sloping terrain, with surface drainage generally directed to the south-southwest direction, as dictated by site topography.

The site is bound by the concrete-lined drainage channel, Palomar Street, and Anne Sullivan Preschool to the southwest, a single-family residential development to the northeast, mostly by vacant land associated with a single-family residence to the southeast, and by vacant land for the future extension of Gierson Avenue or Como Street to the northwest.

2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Based upon review of the referenced Wildomar 20 Acre Nature Park Conceptual Master Plan prepared by Architerra Design Group, GeoTek understands that the project will include, but not necessarily be limited to, two (2) prefabricated restroom buildings; a shade structure; a pedestrian bridge over the aforementioned adjacent concrete-lined drainage channel; parking areas; monument signs; walking trails; landscaping; and other associated improvements.

Gierson Avenue will be extended into the northeast corner of the site and is to be terminated by the construction of a partially asphalt concrete paved and gravel surfaced parking lot area. A pourous asphalt concrete parking lot is also proposed with access from Palomar Street.

Structural plans are not yet available for review for any of the proposed structures. However, GeoTek has assumed that the structures will be one-story in height and will be supported by conventional shallow foundations and a conventional slab-on-grade floor. Relatively light foundation loading is anticipated for the proposed structures (restroom buildings, shade structure, etc.). Maximum structural loads estimated for the structures are 2 kips per lineal foot for continuous footings and 25 kips for isolated pad foundations.

The pedestrian bridge abutments are anticipated to be supported by deepened shallow foundations and possibly by cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) deep foundations and are to be constructed in the southern portion of the project site adjacent to the concrete lined drainage channel. Current structural loading for the proposed bridge abutments is unknown.

GEOTEK 2047
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 3
If site development differs from the assumptions made herein, the recommendations included in this report should be subject to further review and evaluation. Site development plans should be reviewed by GeoTek when they become available.

3. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for this report was conducted on May 30 and June 11, 2024, and included the excavating of eight (8) geotechnical exploratory borings with a track-mounted hollow-stem auger drill rig to depths between about 11.5 and 51.5 feet each below grade at the boring locations.

The approximate locations of the GeoTek excavations are shown on the Geotechnical Investigation Map (Figure 2). A geologist from GeoTek logged the excavations and collected soil samples for use in subsequent laboratory testing. The logs of the exploratory borings are included in Appendix A.

Relatively undisturbed soil samples were recovered at various intervals in the geotechnical borings with a California sampler. The California sampler is a 3-inch outside diameter, 2.5-inch inside diameter, split barrel sampler lined with brass rings. The sampler was 18 inches long.

The sampler conformed to the requirements of ASTM D 3550. A 140-pound automatic trip hammer was utilized, dropping 30 inches for each blow. The relatively undisturbed samples, together with bulk samples of representative soil types, were returned to the laboratory for testing and evaluation. The sampler test data are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A.

In Borings B-2 and B-3, standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed with a 2.0-inch outside diameter, 1.5-inch inside diameter, and split-barrel sampler. The sampler was 18 inches long. The inside diameter of the sampler shoe was 1.4 inches. The sampler was unlined. The sampler conformed to the requirements of ASTM D 1586. A 140-pound automatic trip hammer was utilized, dropping 30 inches for each blow. The sampler penetration test data are presented on the Logs of Borings for B-2 and B-3.

3.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing was performed on selected relatively undisturbed ring and bulk samples collected during the field exploration. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to confirm GEOTEK 2048
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 4
the field classification of the materials encountered and to evaluate their physical properties for use in the engineering design and analysis. Results of the laboratory testing program along with a brief description and relevant information regarding testing procedures are included on the exploratory borings logs included in Appendix A and in Appendix B.

4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS

4.1 REGIONAL SETTING
The subject property is situated in the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges province is one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America. It extends approximately 975 miles south of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the tip of Baja California. This province varies in width from about 30 to 100 miles. It is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province.

The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks.

Several major fault zones are found in this province. The Elsinore Fault zone and the San Jacinto Fault zone trend northwest-southeast and are found near the middle of the province.

The San Andreas Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province.

More specific to the subject property, the site is in an area geologically mapped to be underlain by alluvium and sedimentary bedrock of the Pauba Formation (Morton, D.M., Miller, F.K., 2006).

The site is partially located within an “Alquist-Priolo” fault hazard zone along Palomar Street and the approximate southwestern half of the project site. The County of Riverside has indicated the site to be located within a “County Fault Zone” identified as the Elsinore Fault Zone. The site has not yet been mapped to be located within a California Geological Survey identified liquefaction or seismic-induced landslide zone. Additionally, the County of Riverside has indicated the site is located within a fault line identified as the “Elsinore Fault | Wildomar Fault”, as having a “Moderate/Very Low” liquefaction potential hazard and as “susceptible” with regards to subsidence.

GEOTEK 2049
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 5

4.2 GENERAL SOIL CONDITIONS
A brief description of the earth materials encountered is presented in the following section.

Based on the site reconnaissance, the exploratory excavations and review of published geologic maps, the area investigated is locally underlain by some surficial disturbed soils underlain by alluvium and sedimentary bedrock of the Pauba Formation.

4.2.1 Disturbed Soil
Disturbed soils, consisting of relatively loose clayey to silty sands, sandy silts and sandy clays (SC, SM, ML, and CL soil types based upon the Unified Soil Classification System), were encountered in all borings to depths of about 6 inches to 3 feet below existing grades. Deeper or other deposits of disturbed soils may be present in areas of the site that were not explored.

The upper site soils were likely disturbed as a result of previous land uses. Undocumented fill soils, while not encountered within any of the borings performed, may be present at the site in areas that were not explored, especially in the vicinity of any existing improvements.

4.2.2 Alluvium
Alluvial soils were encountered beneath the surficial disturbed soils in all of the borings performed. The alluvium was found to generally consist of medium dense to very dense silty sands, clayey sands, and relatively stiff to hard silty and sandy clays (SM, SC, and CL soil types based upon the Unified Soil Classification System). Alluvial soils were encountered within all borings performed, at depths ranging between about 1.5 to 16.5 feet below existing grades.

Based on the laboratory test results, the near surface materials have a “Low” (0≤EI≤20) Expansion Index (EI) when tested in general accordance with ASTM D 4829. Based on the laboratory test results, the near surface materials have a soluble sulfate content of less than 0.1 percent (ASTM D 4327). Based upon the consolidation tests, the upper site soils generally demonstrated a “very low” potential for hydro-consolidation (settlement due to the addition of water with or without additional loading). Based on the R-Value test result obtained from a select sample in the proposed parking lot area in the northern portion of the site, the anticipated subgrade soils generally exhibit a relatively poor pavement support capacity, when recompacted. The laboratory test results are provided in Appendix B.

4.2.3 Pauba Formation Sedimentary Bedrock
Late Pleistocene-aged sedimentary bedrock of the Pauba Formation was encountered within all borings performed with the exception of Boring B-6. The sedimentary bedrock of the Pauba Formation was encountered as shallow as about 1.5 feet below existing grades within Boring B-4 and up to about 15 feet below existing grades near the southern portion of the site.

GEOTEK 2050
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 6
The sedimentary bedrock, as encountered in the borings, generally consists of very pale brown to brown and grey-brown to olive-grey, slightly moist to moist, dense to hard, indurated, massive silty sandstone to sandy siltstone with minor amounts of clay. Caliche stringers were observed to be present within the bedrock units. Sedimentary bedrock is regionally mapped by others as being located within the southern portion of the site, and within the site vicinity to the north, east, and west.

4.3 SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER

4.3.1 Surface Water
If encountered during earthwork operations, surface water on this site will most be likely the result of precipitation or possibly some minor surface run-off from the surrounding areas.

Overall site area drainage is generally to the south-southwesterly direction. Provisions for surface drainage will need to be accounted for by the project civil engineer.

4.3.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered within any of the borings performed to a maximum depth of about 51.5 feet below existing grades within Borings B-2 or B-3 at the time of drilling. The California Department of Water Resources, Water Data Library indicates multiple groundwater wells within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site, which suggests groundwater levels in excess of 50 feet below existing grades. Therefore, the depth to historic groundwater at the site is estimated to be greater than 50 feet below existing grades.

Based on the above, groundwater is not anticipated to be a factor during the site grading.

However, seasonal perched groundwater may be encountered during grading within portions of the site.

4.4 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY

4.4.1 Faulting
The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated mainly by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas system. The site is in a seismically active region.

The site is partially situated within an “Alquist-Priolo” Earthquake Fault Zone. The County of Riverside has designated the site as in a “County Fault Zone “identified as the “Elsinore Fault GEOTEK 2051
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 7
Zone”, within the “Elsinore Fault” and “Wildomar Fault” fault lines, as having a “Moderate” to “Very Low” potential for liquefaction and as “Susceptible” to subsidence.

4.4.2 Lineament Analysis
In order to identify possible mapped and unmapped faults and to evaluate the topographic expressions of published or previously reported fault traces, a lineament analysis was performed for the project site.

GeoTek reviewed aerial photographs provided by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) dated 1938, 1949, 1953, 1961, 1967, 1978, 1985, 1989, 1994, 1997, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2012, 2016 and 2020. The aerial photographs reviewed were at a scale of 1” = 500’. Source Maps were provided by USDA, USGS/DOQQ and USDA/NAIP.

Geologic field mapping was also utilized in GeoTek’s lineament analysis.

Lineaments can generally be classified as strong, moderate or weak. A strong lineament is a well-defined feature, which can be continuously traced several hundred feet to a few thousand feet. A moderate lineament is less well defined, somewhat discontinuous, and can be traced for only a few hundred feet. A weak lineament is discontinuous, poorly defined, and can be traced for a few hundred feet or less.

The subject property appears to be vacant land on all of the aerial photographs dating back to 1938. Multiple aerial photographs show evidence of some minor ground disturbance, particularly in the 1985 aerial photograph.

A strong northwest-trending lineament is visible on the southern portion of the subject site.

The photo-lineament is identified by a faint to very sharp tonal color change that is best observed in the southern portion of the site in the 1949 aerial photograph. The 1949 aerial photograph and subsequent lineaments are shown on Figure 4 – Lineament Air Photo Assessment Map.

In the parcels to the northwest of the site the lineament continues on a northwest trend; showing faint to moderate tonal color change. More strikingly, a strong northwest trending lineament identified by a very sharp tonal color change is visible on the parcels to the southeast of the site. The strong tonal change is interpreted by GeoTek to be likely caused by a subsurface groundwater barrier, likely associated with strike-slip faulting in the region. The moisture appears to be trapped on the northern side of the lineament, thus possibly causing the vastly darker tones in the aerial photographs. The development of the planned GEOTEK 2052
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 8
improvements for the Nature Park are not anticipated to be adversely impacted by faulting due to the absence of planned habitable structures.

4.4.3 Seismic Design Parameters
The site is located at approximately 33.6004 degrees Latitude and -117.2666 degrees Longitude. Due to the dense/stiff nature of the site soils a Site Class “D” is considered appropriate for this site. Site spectral accelerations (Sa and S1), for 0.2 and 1.0 second periods for a Class “D” site, was determined from the SEAOC/OSHPD web interface that utilizes the USGS web services and retrieves the seismic design data and presents that information in a report format. Using the ASCE 7-16 option on the SEAOC/OSHPD website results in the values for SM1 and SD1 reported as “null-See Section 11.4.8” (of ASCE 7-16). As noted in ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8, a site-specific ground motion procedure is recommended for Site Class D when the value S1 exceeds 0.2. The value S1 for the subject site exceeds 0.2.

For a site Class D, an exception to performing a site-specific ground motion analysis is allowed in ASCE 7-16 where S1 exceeds 0.2 provided the value of the seismic response coefficient, Cs, is conservatively calculated by Eq 12.8-2 of ASCE 7-16 for values of T≤1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Eq. 12.8-3 for TL≥T>1.5Ts or Eq.

12.8-4 for T>TL.

The results, based on the 2015 NEHRP and the 2022 CBC, are presented in the following table as it is assumed that the exception as allowed in ASCE 7-16 is applicable. If the exception is deemed not appropriate, a site-specific ground motion analysis will be required.

SITE SEISMIC PARAMETERS
Mapped 0.2 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss 1.682g
Mapped 1.0 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S1 0.625g
Site Coefficient for Site Class “D”, Fa 1.0
Site Coefficient for Site Class “D”, Fv 1.7
Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 0.2 Second, SMS

1.682g
Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 1.0 Second, SM1

1.063g
5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at

0.2 Second, SDS

1.121g
5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1 second, SD1

0.709g
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGAM) 0.810g
Seismic Design Category D
GEOTEK 2053
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 9
Final selection of the appropriate seismic design coefficients should be made by the project structural engineer based upon the local practices and ordinances, expected building response and desired level of conservatism.

4.5 LIQUEFACTION
Liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which cyclic stresses, produced by earthquakeinduced ground motion, create excess pore pressures in relatively cohesionless soils. These soils may thereby acquire a high degree of mobility, which can lead to lateral movement, sliding, consolidation and settlement of loose sediments, sand boils and other damaging deformations. This phenomenon occurs only below the water table, but, after liquefaction has developed, the effects can propagate upward into overlying non-saturated soil as excess pore water dissipates.

The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and grain size, relative density, groundwater level, confining pressures, and both intensity and duration of ground shaking. In general, materials that are susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated granular soils having low fines content under low confining pressures.

The project site is located within an area mapped by the County of Riverside as having a “moderate/very low” for liquefaction potential. Based on the relatively shallow sedimentary bedrock, as well as the relatively deep estimated historic groundwater at the project site, the liquefaction hazard potential and unsaturated (“dry sand”) settlement potential at the project site is considered minimal.

4.6 OTHER SEISMIC HAZARDS
Due to the general flat terrain, the potential for seismic induced landslides or lateral spreading is considered nil. The potential for secondary seismic hazards such as a seiche and tsunami is considered negligible due to site elevation and distance from an open body of water.

Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instability at this site was not observed during the site reconnaissance. Therefore, the potential for landslides is considered negligible for design purposes.

GEOTEK 2054
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 10

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 GENERAL
Development of the site appears feasible from a geotechnical engineering viewpoint. The following recommendations should be incorporated into the design and construction phases of development. The site contains some non-uniform surficially disturbed soils, and relatively loose alluvium. These soils will require removal and recompaction as engineered fill in order to provide a uniform bearing surface for the proposed structures.

5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS

5.2.1 General
Earthwork and grading should be performed in accordance with the applicable grading ordinances of the City of Wildomar, the County of Riverside, the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) and recommendations contained in this report. The Grading Guidelines included in Appendix D outline general procedures and do not anticipate all site-specific situations. In the event of conflict, the recommendations presented in the text of this report should supersede those contained in Appendix D.

5.2.2 Site Clearing
In areas of planned grading and improvements, the locations of existing utilities should be determined. Existing utilities should be relocated or abandoned. Initial site preparation should commence with removal of debris, any deleterious materials and vegetation within the limits of the planned improvements. These materials should be properly disposed of off-site. Voids resulting from removing any materials should be replaced with engineered fill materials with expansion characteristics similar to the onsite materials.

5.2.3 Site Preparation
Due to the presence of upper disturbed site soils as encountered in the borings performed, it is recommended that the upper two (2) feet of soil should be removed beneath all areas to receive new fill and/or surface improvements. The precise depths of over-excavation should be determined by a GeoTek representative during site construction based on actual soil conditions encountered. The lateral extent of this recommendation should include the area extending at least three (3) feet beyond the structure limits, where obtainable. Deeper removals may be necessary within the areas of planned bridge abutments. The removals for the planned abutments should extend until competent materials are reached. The bottoms of all remedial GEOTEK 2055
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 11
excavations should be reviewed and approved by a GeoTek representative. Removal bottoms terminating in alluvial soils should be relatively uniform in soil type, which is not visibly porous and having an in-place density of at least 85 percent of the soil’s maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures. These removal recommendations apply to the proposed structures at the project site. Removals encountering sedimentary bedrock should extend to competent bedrock.

Once the base of the over-excavation is approved, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of about 12 inches, be moisture treated to slightly above the soil’s optimum moisture content (ASTM D1557) and then be compacted to at least 90 percent of the soil’s maximum dry density (ASTM D1557).

Testing by GeoTek is recommended to document that the engineered fill soils have been properly moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended.

5.2.4 Engineered Fill
The on-site materials are generally considered suitable for reuse as engineered fill provided, they are free from vegetation, debris, oversized materials (6-inch diameter or greater) and other deleterious material. All areas should be brought to final subgrade elevations with fill materials that are placed and compacted in general accordance with minimum project standards. Engineered fill should be placed in 6-to-8-inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned to slightly above the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent as determined by ASTM D-1557 test procedures.

If wet soils are encountered during remedial grading, methods for drying soils such as stockpiling or mixing with dry soils may be required to bring the soils to the required moisture content for placement as engineered fill. Placement of engineered fill should be observed and tested on a full-time basis by a GeoTek representative during grading activities.

5.2.5 Trench Excavations and Backfill
Temporary trench excavations within the on-site materials should be stable at a 1.5:1 inclination for short durations during construction and where cuts do not exceed 10 feet in height. Deeper temporary excavations should be reviewed by GeoTek prior to their planned excavation to determine if supplemental recommendations or analysis are warranted. It is anticipated that temporary cuts to a maximum height of four (4) feet can be excavated vertically.

GEOTEK 2056
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 12
Trench excavations should conform to Cal-OSHA regulations. The contractor should have a competent person, per OSHA requirements, on site during construction to observe conditions and to make the appropriate recommendations.

Utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (as determined by ASTM D-1557 test procedures). Under-slab trenches should also be compacted to project specifications. Where applicable, based on jurisdictional requirements, the top 12 inches of backfill below subgrade for road pavements should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. On-site materials may not be suitable for use as bedding material but should be suitable as backfill provided particles larger than six (6) inches are removed.

Compaction should be achieved with a mechanical compaction device. Ponding or jetting of trench backfill is not recommended. If backfill soils have dried out, they should be properly moisture conditioned prior to placement in trenches.

5.2.6 Shrinkage and Bulking
Several factors will impact earthwork balancing on the site, including shrinkage, subsidence, trench spoil from utilities and footing excavations, as well as the accuracy of topography.

For planning purposes, a shrinkage factor of about ten (10) to twenty (20) percent may be considered for disturbed soil and alluvial materials that need to be removed and replaced.

Subsidence up to about 0.2 feet is estimated in soil areas during site preparation. No subsidence is expected in bedrock areas. Site balance areas should be available in order to adjust project grades, depending on actual field conditions at the conclusion of earthwork construction.

5.2.7 Grading Plan Review
Upon completion of the site grading plans, it is recommended that those plans be provided to GeoTek for review. Based on that review, some modifications to the recommendations provided in this report may be necessary.

5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

5.3.1 Shallow Foundation Design Criteria
The near surface materials can be classified as having a “Low” (21≤EI≤50) Expansion Index (EI) in accordance with ASTM D 4829. Typical design criteria for the site based upon a “Low” expansion index are tabulated below. These are minimal recommendations and are not GEOTEK 2057
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 13
intended to supersede the design by the project structural engineer. Once structural loading information is provided, revisions to the recommendations provided in this report may be necessary.

The conventional foundation elements for the proposed structures/improvements should bear entirely in engineered fill soils or bedrock (not a combination of the two). Foundations should be designed in accordance with the 2022 CBC.

Expansion index and soluble sulfate evaluation of the soils should be performed during construction to evaluate the as-graded conditions. Final recommendations should be based upon the as-graded soils conditions.

A summary of the foundation design recommendations is presented in the following table:

GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
Design Parameter “Low” Expansion Index
Minimum Foundation Depth
(Inches below lowest adjacent grade) 12 – One- and two-stories Minimum Foundation Width (Inches)* 12 – One- and two stories Minimum Slab Thickness (actual) 4 – Actual
Minimum Slab Reinforcing 6” x 6” – W2.9 x W2.9 welded wire fabric placed in middle of slab or No. 3 bars at 18-inch centers, each way Minimum Footing Reinforcement Two No. 4 reinforcing bars, one placed near the top and one near the bottom
Presaturation of Subgrade Soil
(Percent of Optimum)
Minimum of 110% of the optimum moisture content to a
depth of at least 12 inches prior to placing concrete
*Code minimums per Table 1809.7 of the 2022 CBC should be complied with.

An allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of building foundations for a footing depth of 12 inches and a footing width of 12 inches. This allowable soil bearing capacity may be increased by 400 psf for each additional 12 inches of embedment depth and by 200 psf for each additional 12 inches in width to a maximum of 3,250 psf. The allowable bearing capacity may also be increased by one-third when considering shortterm wind and seismic loads. These bearing values contain a minimum factor of safety of three (3).

The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 3,000 psf for footings founded on engineered fill or competent native soil. The allowable passive earth pressure contains a factor of safety of 1.5. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.30 may be used with GEOTEK 2058
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 14
dead load forces. The coefficient of friction contains a reduction value of one-third (1/3).

Passive pressure and frictional resistance may be combined without reduction. The upper one foot of soil should be ignored in the passive pressure calculations unless the surface is covered with pavements.

A grade beam, a minimum of 12 inches wide and 12 inches deep, should be utilized across large entrances. The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as the bottom of the adjoining footings.

It is recommended that control joints in concrete slabs be placed in two directions spaced approximately 24 to 36 times the thickness of the slab in inches. These joints are a widely accepted means to control cracks and should be reviewed by the project structural engineer.

For footings designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report, it is anticipated that a maximum static settlement of less than an inch and a maximum differential static settlement of about ½ the total static settlement in a 40-foot span will occur. Dynamic (seismic-induced) settlements are estimated to be minimal due to the presence of relatively shallow bedrock. These static and dynamic settlement estimates should be accounted for in the proposed building design by the project structural engineer.

Where the slab is to be designed as a beam on an elastic foundation, a modulus of subgrade reaction (k-value) of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be considered for design based on a presumed value for a 1-foot by 1-foot plate load test. Dependent upon how the mat slab is loaded, the subgrade modulus value may need to be geometrically modified.

A moisture and vapor retarding system should be placed below slabs-on-grade where moisture migration through the slab is undesirable. Guidelines for these are provided in the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) Section 4.505.2, the 2022 CBC Section 1907.1 and ACI 360R-10. The vapor retarder design and construction should also meet the requirements of ASTM E 1643. A portion of the vapor retarder design should be the implementation of a moisture vapor retardant membrane.

It should be realized that the effectiveness of the vapor retarding membrane can be adversely impacted as a result of construction related punctures (e.g., stake penetrations, tears, punctures from walking on the vapor retarder placed atop the underlying aggregate layer, etc.).

These occurrences should be limited as much as possible during construction. Thicker membranes are generally more resistant to accidental puncture than thinner ones. Products specifically designed for use as moisture/vapor retarders may also be more puncture resistant.

Although the CBC specifies a 6-mil vapor retarder membrane, it is GeoTek’s opinion that a GEOTEK 2059
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 15
minimum 10 mil thick membrane with joints properly overlapped and sealed should be considered, unless otherwise specified by the slab design professional. The membrane should consist of Stego wrap or the equivalent.

Moisture and vapor retarding systems are intended to provide a certain level of resistance to vapor and moisture transmission through the concrete, but do not eliminate it. The acceptable level of moisture transmission through the slab is to a large extent based on the type of flooring used and environmental conditions. Ultimately, the vapor retarding system should be comprised of suitable elements to limit migration of water and reduce transmission of water vapor through the slab to acceptable levels. The selected elements should have suitable properties (i.e., thickness, composition, strength, and permeability) to achieve the desired performance level.

Moisture retarders can reduce, but not eliminate, moisture vapor rise from the underlying soils up through the slab. Moisture retarder systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable American Concrete Institute, Portland Cement Association, PostTensioning Concrete Institute, ASTM and California Building Code requirements and guidelines.

GeoTek recommends that a qualified person, such as the flooring contractor, structural engineer, architect, and/or other experts specializing in moisture control within the building be consulted to evaluate the general and specific moisture and vapor transmission paths and associated potential impact on the proposed construction. That person (or persons) should provide recommendations relative to the slab moisture and vapor retarder systems and for migration of potential adverse impact of moisture vapor transmission on various components of the structures, as deemed appropriate.

In addition, the recommendations in this report and GeoTek’s services in general are not intended to address mold prevention; since GeoTek, along with geotechnical consultants in general, do not practice in the area of mold prevention. If specific recommendations addressing potential mold issues are desired, then a professional mold prevention consultant should be contacted.

5.3.2 Miscellaneous Shallow Foundation Recommendations

5.3.2.1 To reduce moisture penetration beneath the slab on grade areas, utility trench excavations should be backfilled with engineered fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they intercept the perimeter footing or thickened slab edge.

GEOTEK 2060
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 16

5.3.2.2 Soils from the footing excavations should not be placed in the slab-on-grade areas unless properly compacted and tested. The excavations should be free of loose/sloughed materials and be neatly trimmed at the time of concrete placement.

5.3.3 Foundation Setbacks
Minimum setbacks for all foundations should comply with the 2022 CBC, County of Riverside, or City of Wildomar requirements, whichever is more stringent. Improvements not conforming to these setbacks are subject to the increased likelihood of excessive lateral movements and/or differential settlements.

If large enough, these movements can compromise the integrity of the improvements. The top outside edge of all footings should be set back a minimum of H/3 (where H is the slope height) from the face of any descending slope. The setback should be at least five (5) feet and need not exceed 40 feet.

5.3.4 Deep Foundation Design Criteria – Drilled Piers
Drilled piers used to support the proposed pedestrian bridge should extend to a minimum depth of ten (10) feet below finish grade, or a minimum embedment of at least five (5) feet into competent materials and be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter. This minimum depth incorporates any potential down drag (negative skin friction) associated with the existing disturbed soils. The drilled piers can be designed using an average allowable skin friction value of 200 pounds per square foot.

The top foot of embedment depths for the drilled pier foundations should be neglected unless the ground surface is covered by concrete or pavement. This value incorporates a safety factor of 2.0 and may be increased by one-third for temporary wind and/or seismic loading.

Alternatively, the drilled pier can be designed using an allowable end-bearing capacity of 6,000 psf. End-bearing and skin friction values cannot be combined.

A representative of the geotechnical engineer should be present during installation to verify the embedment depth. The capacities are based on soil strength considerations, and stresses within the piles and piers may impose more severe limitations. The recommendations are for single-acting piles and piers. If necessary, the capacities for closely spaced piles and piers should be reduced in accordance with the efficiency formula provided below:

GEOTEK 2061
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 17
E = 1 - Ø[(n-1)m+(m-1)n]
90mn
where: E = Pile efficiency
Ø = tan-1 (d/s)
d = pile diameter
s = spacing of piles center to center
m = number of rows
n = number of piles in a row
For insertion into the efficiency formula, groups containing three piles or piers should be considered to have two rows and two piles or piers per row.

If caving soils are encountered, drilled piers should be provided with temporary steel casing.

The temporary casing may be withdrawn as concrete is placed within the drilled pier, keeping a concrete head of at least two feet above the bottom of the casing as it is being removed.

After excavating the drilled piers, the excavations should be observed by the geotechnical consultant of record and concrete placed as quickly as possible to avoid exposure of the foundation sidewalls to wetting and drying. Surface run-off water should be drained away and not be allowed to pond adjacent to the excavations. It is recommended that foundation concrete be placed within 24 hours of the drilled pier excavation being completed.

If it is required that foundation excavations be left open for more than one day, they should be properly covered to prevent personal injury and fall hazards and be protected to reduce evaporation or entry of moisture. Where drilled piers are to be placed closer than 2.5 diameters center to center, the closely spaced piers should be constructed on different days.

The vertical uplift capacity of the piers due to friction is considered two-thirds (2/3) of the download friction capacity (130 psf), plus the weight of the pier.

Lateral bearing capacity of drilled piers may be computed using any accepted code-allowed “pole” formula. The allowable lateral passive earth pressure for drilled piers may be considered to develop at a rate of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth to a maximum value of 4,500 psf. This value may be increased by one-third for wind or seismic loading. However, the allowable passive pressure can be doubled where the piers will not be adversely affected by ½ inch lateral movements at the ground surface. The effective width of the drilled piers can be assumed to be twice the pier diameter for passive resistance calculations.

GEOTEK 2062
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 18
Moment distribution and lateral deflection analyses for the drilled piers can be provided, if needed, when vertical and lateral loads are known.

For drilled piers designed and constructed as recommended in this report, it is anticipated a maximum static settlement of less than one inch will occur with a maximum differential static settlement of ½ inch over a 50-foot span.

5.3.5 Soil Corrosivity
The resistivity of the near surface soils at this site was tested in the laboratory on one (1) soil sample collected during the field investigation. The results of the testing indicate that the near surface soils are considered “moderately corrosive” (5,226 ohm-cm) (Roberge, 2000) to buried ferrous metal in accordance with current standards used by corrosion engineers.

Recommendations for protection of buried ferrous metal should be provided by a corrosion engineer. Additional corrosion testing should be performed at the time of site grading to assess the corrosion potential of the as-graded soils.

5.3.6 Soil Sulfate Content
The sulfate content of the near surface soils was determined in the laboratory on one (1) soil sample collected during the field investigation. The results indicate that the water-soluble sulfate content is less than 0.1 percent by weight, which is considered “negligible” (“S0” exposure classification) as per Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI 318-19. Based on the test results and Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI 318-19, no special recommendations for concrete are required for this project due to soil sulfate exposure.

5.3.6 Import Soils
Import soils should consist of soils similar or better than the on-site soils and should be tested for expansion and corrosivity potential prior to their use. GeoTek, Inc. should be notified a minimum of 72 hours prior to importing so that appropriate sampling and laboratory testing can be performed.

5.4 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

5.4.1 General Design Criteria
Recommendations presented in this report apply to typical masonry or concrete vertical retaining walls to a maximum height of up to six (6) feet. Additional review and recommendations should be requested for higher walls. These are typical design criteria and are not intended to supersede the design by the structural engineer. Retaining wall foundations should be embedded a minimum of 18 inches into engineered fill or competent GEOTEK 2063
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 19
bedrock. Retaining wall foundations should be designed in accordance with Section 5.3 of this report. Structural needs may govern and should be evaluated by the project structural engineer.

All earth retention structure plans, as applicable, should be reviewed by this office prior to finalization.

Earthwork considerations, site clearing and remedial earthwork for all earth retention structures should meet the requirements of this report, unless specifically provided otherwise, or more stringent requirements or recommendations are made by the designer. The backfill material placement for all earth retention structures should meet the requirement of Section

5.2.4 in this report.

In general, cantilever earth retention structures, which are designed to yield at least 0.001H, where H is equal to the height of the earth retention structure, may be designed using the “active” condition. Rigid earth retention structures (including but not limited to rigid walls, and walls braced at top, such as typical basement walls) should be designed using the “at-rest” condition.

In addition to the design lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharges due to improvements, such as an adjacent building or traffic loading, should be considered in the design of the earth retention structures. Loads applied within a 1:1 (horizontal: vertical) projection from the surcharge on the stem of the earth retention structure should be considered in the design.

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

5.4.2 Cantilevered Walls
The recommendations presented below are for cantilevered retaining walls up to six (6) feet high. Active earth pressure may be used for design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflections. An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the pressure against the wall.

Appropriate fluid unit weights are given below for specific slope gradients of retained material.

These do not include other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, seismic events, or adverse geologic conditions.

GEOTEK 2064
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 20

ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURES
Surface Slope of Retained Materials
(horizontal: vertical)
Equivalent Fluid Pressure
(pcf)
Select Backfill* and Native Soils
Level 48
2:1 72
*The design pressures assume the backfill material has an expansion index less than or equal to 30.

Backfill zone includes area between back of the wall to a plane (1:1 horizontal: vertical) up from bottom of the wall foundation (on the backside of the wall) to the ground surface.

For walls with a retained height greater than six (6) feet, an incremental seismic pressure should be included into the wall design. Where needed, it is recommended that an incremental seismic load for unrestrained walls with level backfill of 12H2 [Units: pounds per lineal foot of wall] should be included into the wall design to account for seismic loading conditions, where H is the retained height of the wall. For unrestrained walls with a retained height greater than six (6) feet with backfill of a 2:1 [horizontal: vertical] gradient, a dynamic load increment of 20H2 should be included in the wall design. These incremental seismic loads may be assumed to be applied at a point 1/3H above the base of the wall.

5.4.3 Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage
The wall backfill should also include a minimum one (1) foot wide section of ¾- to 1-inch clean crushed rock (or an approved equivalent). The rock should be placed immediately adjacent to the back of the wall and extend up from a back drain to within approximately 24 inches of the finish grade. The upper 24 inches should consist of compacted on-site materials. The rock should be separated from the earth with filter fabric. The presence of other materials might necessitate revision to the parameters provided and modification of the wall designs.

The backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than eight (8) inches in thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures. Proper surface drainage needs to be provided and maintained.

As an alternative to the drain, rock and fabric, a pre-manufactured wall drainage product (example: Mira Drain 6000 or approved equivalent) may be used behind the retaining wall. The wall drainage product should extend from the base of the wall to within two (2) feet of the ground surface. The subdrain should be placed in direct contact with the wall drainage product.

Retaining walls should be provided with an adequate pipe and gravel back drain system to help prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains should consist of a four (4)-inch diameter perforated collector pipe (Schedule 40, SDR 35, or approved equivalent) embedded in a minimum of one (1) cubic foot per linear foot of ¾- to 1-inch clean crushed rock or an GEOTEK 2065
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 21
approved equivalent, wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or an approved equivalent). The drain system should be connected to a suitable outlet. Waterproofing of site walls should be performed where moisture migration through the walls is undesirable.

5.4.4 Restrained Retaining Walls
Retaining walls that will be restrained at the top that support level backfill or that have reentrant or male corners, should be designed for an equivalent at-rest fluid pressure of 71 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading. For areas of male or reentrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of the wall laterally from the corner, or a distance otherwise determined by the project structural engineer.

5.4.5 Additional Retaining Wall Design Considerations
 Wall design should consider the additional surcharge loads from superjacent slopes and/or footings, where appropriate.
 No backfill should be placed against concrete until minimum design strengths are evident by compression tests of cylinders.
 The retaining wall footing excavations, backcuts, and backfill materials should be approved by the project geotechnical engineer or their authorized representative.  Positive separations should be provided in garden walls at horizontal distances not exceeding 20 feet.

5.5 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

5.5.1 Asphalt Concrete (AC) Pavement
Although planned final grades beneath the proposed parking, access roads and adjacent street improvements within the site are not yet known, the following preliminary pavement design recommendations are based on assumed Traffic Indexes of 5.0 for local streets and car parking areas and 6.0 for access drives, in accordance with the County of Riverside Standard No. 114.

Preliminary pavement thickness design is based on the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (2018).

An R-value of 12 was tested by GeoTek in general accordance with ASTM D 2844 test procedures, which was then assumed for the determination of preliminary pavement sections for this report.

GEOTEK 2066
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 22
Once the traffic loading information becomes more defined, revision to the pavement design recommendations may be warranted. It is recommended that the final pavement design be based on R-value testing of the as-graded subgrade soils within the pavement areas.

Based on the assumptions noted above, the following preliminary pavement recommendations are provided for the site:

PRELIMINARY MINIMUM PAVEMENT SECTION*
Traffic Index
Thickness of Asphalt Concrete
(inches)
Thickness of Aggregate Base
(inches)

5.0 (Car Parking Areas)

4.0 6.5

6.0 (Access/Truck
Delivery/Emergency
Vehicle Drives)

4.0 10.0

5.0 8.0
*Shall be in accordance with the County of Riverside Standard No. 114.

Traffic Indices (TIs) used in the pavement design are designated by the County of Riverside and should provide a pavement life of approximately 20 years with a normal amount of flexible pavement maintenance. Irrigation adjacent to pavements, without a deep curb or other cutoff to separate landscaping from the paving may result in premature pavement failure. Traffic parameters used for design were selected based upon engineering judgment and not upon information furnished to us such as an equivalent wheel load analysis or a traffic study.

All base material and the upper 12 inches of subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the material’s maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 test procedures.

All materials and methods of construction should conform to the requirements of the County of Riverside.

5.5.2 Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavers
Interlocking concrete pavers can be used for this project. The pavers are assumed to be approximately 3.2 inches (80 millimeters) in thickness. Concrete pavers should be underlain by

1.0 inch to 1.5 inches of bedding sand overlying four inches of aggregate base founded on compacted subgrade soils. The aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures.

Where possible, the aggregate base should extend beyond the perimeter of the pavers a minimum distance of four inches. The bedding sand should be placed and lightly moistened and GEOTEK 2067
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 23
compacted. Since this compaction cannot be tested it should be observed by a representative of this firm.

Historically, paver systems have experienced failures in areas where water has degraded the support characteristics of the underlying base and/or subgrade soils. Since paver systems are permeable and allow transmission of water into the underlying materials, it may be prudent to discuss with the paver designer/manufacturer what methods may be employed to address the issue of potential water introduction into the underlying materials.

Underdrain systems, local subgrade reinforcement, tilting the pavement subgrade to drain away from paver areas and not pond, or additional structural elements such as geotextiles can be considered, particularly in high traffic areas and/or low areas where water will tend to collect.

The recommendations of the designer/manufacturer should then be implemented into the design and construction of the paver system.

5.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement
For the proposed vehicle parking and access lanes, it is recommended that a minimum of five and one-half (5.5) inches of PCC pavement over 12 inches subgrade compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures be utilized.

For vehicle service lanes, it is recommended that a minimum of six (6.0) inches of PCC pavement over 12 inches subgrade compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density be utilized. This section should also be used in heavy truck traffic areas such as fire lanes, trash dumpster pads and approaches.

Requirements of Section 90 of Caltrans Standard Specifications, and various ACI and ASTM standards regarding mixing and placing concrete should be followed. The PCC pavement should have a minimum modulus of rupture of 500 pounds per square inch, and a minimum 28- day compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch. Concrete should incorporate 1- inch maximum size aggregate and should be proportioned to achieve a maximum slump of four inches. Instead of increasing the water content, a plasticizing admixture may be utilized to increase the workability of the concrete. The concrete should be properly cured after placement. Concrete should not be placed during hot and windy weather.

Crack control joints should be provided in the transverse direction spaced at horizontal intervals ranging from 24 to 36 times the thickness of the concrete.

GEOTEK 2068
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 24

5.5.4 Pourous Asphalt Concrete
Pourous asphalt concrete is proposed for the surface of the southwestern parking lot to be located adjacent to Palomar Street. Permeable pavements, unlike traditional pavements that are impermeable, reduce the volume and peak of stormwater runoff, provided the underlying soils can accept infiltration. Permeable pavement surfaces generally function best under relatively flat to very gently sloping ground conditions. The permeable asphalt surface layer is placed on top of a reservoir layer that holds the water quality stormwater volume, which infiltrates from the reservoir layer to the native subsoil. Compaction of the subgrade soils will likely significantly reduce the infiltration capacity of the subgrade soils, and therefore the use of pourous asphalt concrete may not be suitable for high trafficked areas and drive aisles and may be more suitable for parking spaces.

Sediment clogging the soil below the permeable pavement surface and reservoir layer should be expected over time, even with proper surface maintenance. Therefore, the reservoir layer is recommended by Riverside County LID BMP guidelines (RCFC, 2018) to not exceed 12 inches in depth to ensure adequate drainage. The minimum thickness of the pourous asphalt should be at least 4 inches in thickness and be underlain by at least 10 inches of AASHTO #57 gravel (or equivalent) vibrated in place, with a minimum void ratio of 0.40.

5.5.4 Gravel Surfaced Concrete Parking Lot
Gravel surface parking is proposed for a portion of the parking lot located near the extension of Gierson Avenue in the northern portion of the site. The gravel surface should consist of at least twelve (12) inches in thickness. The subgrade beneath the gravel surface parking lot should consist of at least 18 inches of engineered fill.

Removals within native materials should expose competent alluvium, with an in-place density of at least 85 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557), and not visibly porous. The subgrade soils beneath the gravel surface parking lot should be moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). The surface should consist of Class II Aggregate Base, or equivalent, and be compacted in thin lifts (less than about 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness) to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density of the aggregate base (ASTM D 1557).

5.5.5 Pavement Construction
All pavement installation, including preparation and compaction of subgrade and base material, placement and rolling of asphaltic concrete and placement of concrete pavement, should be GEOTEK 2069
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 25
done in accordance with the City of Wildomar, County of Riverside guidelines, and under the observation and testing of GeoTek and a City/County inspector, where required.

Any aggregate base should consist of crushed rock with an R-Value and gradation in accordance with Crushed Aggregate Base (Section 400-2.4 of the “Greenbook” Regional Supplement Amendments). Any Crushed Miscellaneous Base shall conform to Section 200-2.4 of the Green Book.

Minimum compaction requirements for aggregate base should be 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures for both soil subgrade and aggregate base. Jurisdictional minimum compaction requirements in excess of the aforementioned minimums may govern. The upper 12 inches of subgrade should be moisture-conditioned to at least optimum moisture. The top of the subgrade and aggregate base should be graded to drain to the perimeter of the pavement.

5.6 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

5.6.1 General
Concrete construction should follow the 2022 CBC and ACI guidelines regarding design, mix placement and curing of the concrete. If desired, GeoTek could provide quality control testing of the concrete during construction.

5.6.2 Concrete Mix Design
As discussed in Section 5.3.5, no special recommendations for concrete are required for this project due to soil sulfate exposure. Additional testing should be performed during grading so that specific recommendations can be formulated based on the as-graded conditions.

5.6.3 Concrete Flatwork
Exterior concrete flatwork is often one of the most visible aspects of site development. They are typically given the least level of quality control, being considered “non-structural” components. Cracking of these features is common due to various factors. While cracking usually does not affect the structural performance of the concrete, it is unsightly. It is recommended that the same standards of care be applied to these features as to the structure itself.

Exterior concrete slabs and sidewalks should be designed using a four (4) inch minimum thickness. No specific reinforcement is required due to the non-structural nature. However, the use of some reinforcement should be considered. Recommendations can be provided GEOTEK 2070
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 26
upon request. Some shrinkage and cracking of the concrete should be anticipated as a result of typical mix designs and curing practices commonly utilized in residential construction.

Sidewalks and driveways may be under the jurisdiction of the governing agency. If so, jurisdictional design and construction criteria would apply, if more restrictive than the recommendations presented herein. The upper 12 inches of hardscape subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned at or near optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 test procedures.

Subgrade soils, classified as having “Low” expansion potential, should be pre-moistened prior to placing concrete. The subgrade soils below exterior slabs, sidewalks, driveways, etc. at the subject site should be pre-saturated to a minimum of 110% of optimum moisture content to a depth of 12 inches for “Low” expansive soils.

All concrete installation, including preparation and compaction of subgrade, should be done in accordance with the City of Wildomar specifications, and under the observation and testing of GeoTek and a City Inspector, if necessary.

5.6.4 Concrete Performance
Concrete cracks should be expected. These cracks can vary from sizes that are hairline to more than 1/8 inch in width. Most cracks in concrete while unsightly do not significantly impact long-term performance. While it is possible to take measures (proper concrete mix, placement, curing, control joints, etc.) to reduce the extent and size of cracks that occur, some cracking will occur despite the best efforts to minimize it. Concrete undergoes chemical processes that are dependent on a wide range of variables, which are difficult, at best, to control. Concrete, while seemingly a stable material, is subject to internal expansion and contraction due to external changes over time.

One of the simplest means to control cracking is to provide weakened control joints for cracking to occur along. These do not prevent cracks from developing; they simply provide a relief point for the stresses that develop. These joints are a widely accepted means to control cracks but are not always effective. Control joints are more effective the more closely spaced they are. GeoTek suggests that control joints be placed in two orthogonal directions and located at a distance approximately equal to 24 to 36 times the slab thickness.

GEOTEK 2071
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 27

5.7 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

5.7.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting
Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from graded slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Controlling surface drainage and runoff and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover can minimize erosion. Plants selected for landscaping should be lightweight, deep-rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate.

Overwatering should be avoided. An abatement program to control ground-burrowing rodents should be implemented and maintained. Burrowing rodents can decrease the longterm performance of slopes. It is common for planting to be placed adjacent to structures in planter or lawn areas. This will result in the introduction of water into the ground adjacent to the foundations. This type of landscaping should be avoided.

5.7.2 Drainage
Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond or seep into the ground adjacent to the footings and floor-slabs. Pad drainage should be directed toward approved areas and not be blocked by other improvements. Roof gutters should be installed that will direct the collected water at least 20 feet from the buildings.

5.8 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS
It is recommended that site grading, specifications, and foundation plans be reviewed by this office prior to construction to check for conformance with the recommendations of this report. It is also recommended that GeoTek representatives be present during site grading and foundation construction to observe and document for proper implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. The owner/developer should have GeoTek perform at least the following duties:
 Observe site clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials.
 Observe and test bottom of removals prior to fill placement.  Evaluate the suitability of on-site and import materials for fill placement and collect soil samples for laboratory testing where necessary.

GEOTEK 2072
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 28
 Observe the fill for uniformity during placement, including utility trench excavation backfill. Also, test the fill for density, relative compaction and moisture content.  Observe and probe foundation excavations to confirm suitability of bearing materials with respect to density.

If requested, a construction observation and compaction report can be provided by GeoTek which can comply with the requirements of the governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project. It is recommended that these agencies be notified prior to commencement of construction so that necessary grading permits can be obtained.

6. INTENT
It is the intent of this report to aid in the design and construction of the proposed development. Implementation of the advice presented in this report is intended to reduce risk associated with construction projects. The professional opinions and geotechnical advice contained in this report are not intended to imply total performance of the project or guarantee that unusual or variable conditions will not be discovered during or after construction.

The scope of GeoTek’s evaluation is limited to the area explored that is shown on the Geotechnical Investigation Map (Figure 2). This evaluation does not and should in no way be construed to encompass any areas beyond the specific area of the proposed construction as indicated to GeoTek by the client. Further, no evaluation of any existing site improvements is included. The scope is based on GeoTek’s understanding of the project and the client’s needs, GeoTek’s proposal (Proposal No. P-0407924-CR) dated April 24, 2024, and geotechnical engineering standards normally used on similar projects in this region.

7. LIMITATIONS
GeoTek’s findings are based on site conditions observed and the stated sources. Thus, GeoTek’s comments are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data.

GeoTek has prepared this report in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering at this time and location and science GEOTEK 2073
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 29
professions currently practicing under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this report.

Since GeoTek’s recommendations are based on the site conditions observed and encountered at the stated times and laboratory testing. Thus, GeoTek’s conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty of any kind is expressed or implied. Standards of care/practice are subject to change with time.

8. SELECTED REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2006, Publication 302.2R-06, Guide for Concrete Slabs That Receive Moisture Sensitive Flooring Materials.
_____, 2010, Publications 360R-10, Guide to Design of Slabs-On-Ground. _____, 2019, Publications 318-19, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017, “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,” ASCE/SEI 7-16.

Architerra Design Group, undated, “Wildomar 20 Acre Nature Park Conceptual Master Plan,”.

Bowles, J. E., 1977, “Foundation Analysis and Design”, Second Edition.

Bray, J.D., Sancio, R.B., 2006, “Assessment of the Liquefaction Susceptibility of Fine-Grained Soils,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Volume 132, Issue 9, dated September 1.

Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps, California Geological Survey: Special Publication 42.

California Code of Regulations, Title 24 Part 2, 2022 “California Building Code,” 2 volumes.

California Department of Transportation, 2018, “Highway Design Manual”, 6th Edition.

California Geological Survey (CGS, formerly referred to as the California Division of Mines and Geology), 1977, “Geologic Map of California.”
____, 1978a, “Fault Evaluation Report FER-72,” dated September 6. ____, 1978b, “Fault Evaluation Report FER-76,” dated November 16.

GEOTEK 2074
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page 30
____, 1979a, “Supplement to Fault Evaluation Report FER-72,” dated January 30. ____, 1979b, “Supplement No. 1 to Fault Evaluation Report FER-76,” dated March 23. ____, 1979c, “Supplement No. 2 to Fault Evaluation Report FER-76,” dated April 18. ____, 1980, “Wildomar Quadrangle, California – Riverside County, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic), State of California Special Studies Zone,” Official Map effective January 1. ____, 2008, “Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,” Special Publication 117A.
____, 2018, “Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42 (Revised).

Department of the Navy, 1982, “Foundations and Earth Structures”, Design Manual 7.2.

GeoTek, Inc., In-house proprietary information.

Kennedy, M.P., 1977, “Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Southern Riverside County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report No. 131, 12 pages.

Lamar, D.L., and Rockwell, T.K., 1986, “An Overview of the Tectonics of the Elsinore Fault Zone, in Ehlig, P.L., ed, Neotectonics and Faulting in Southern California, Guidebook for the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Cordilleran Section of the Geologic Society of America.

Morton, D.M., Miller, F.K., 2006, “Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30’ by 60’ Quadrangles, California,” U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report OF-2006-1217, Scale 1:100,000.

Peck R. B., Hanson W. H. & Thornburn T. H., 1974, “Foundation Engineering”, Second edition.

Riverside, County of, 2022, “Standard No. 114 (Sheets 1 and 2)”, dated November 30. _____, Map My County web service, v11.5 (Map My County v11.5 (countyofriverside.us)).

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, 2018, “Riverside County Santa Margarita River Watershed Region, Design Handbook for Low Impact Development, Best Management Practices,” dated June.

Roberge, P. R., 2005, “Handbook of Corrosion Engineering,” 2nd Edition.

Seismic Design Values for Buildings (http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php).

GEOTEK 2075
Architerra Design Group
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
Wildomar, Riverside County, California
GeoTek Project No 3901-CR
Figure 1
Site Location
and Topography
Map

APPROXIMATE

SITE LOCATION
Modified from USGS Corona
South and Alberhill 7.5-minute
Topographic Map Sheet
SCALE 11.24 000 m 0..5 Cl 1111..0MEffiAS l
000 m Cl ~~ ' 000 'MIOO
Cl~ Cl
~ NOIRTH I~ () ' 000 l!X!(I ]000 M)Clil 000 9llOO 0000
GEOTEK 2076
Figure 2
Boring
Location
Map
Architerra Design GroupWildomar 20-Acre Nature ParkAPNs 380-050-025 and -029Wildomar, Riverside County, CaliforniaProject No. 3901-CR LEGEND
(Locations are Approximate)
Site Boundary B-8 Geotechnical Boring
B-2 B-3
B-1
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-8
B-7
-
•
... . .

GEOTEK
2077
Figure 3
California Geological Survey
Earthquake Zones of
Required Investigation Map
Scale As Shown Architerra Design Group Proposed Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Palomar Street and South Pasadena StreetCity of Wildomar, Riverside County, CaliforniaProject No. 3901-CR

APPROXIMATE

SITE LOCATION

0.3 mi
Faul Traces
Accmale ly l ocated
pro,x1'!1 qle.ly Loa! !,icd!
?--· .Acpro:unately Localelli, Ou11nec1
Inferred Inferred, Ouetietl
ConeulM Conce11ted, Ouered
Aerial Ptwlo Lineament
f ault Zone
Llque.fa ci1on :Zone La nd111 ide Zone Llqullfactio - L.andalide Ov~tap Z.One Area N ol: Eval'uilted for Liq1.1era1.1ion or l a dslides Parcels
Parcel isin an Earth qu a e Fault Zone,
a lll!I, .e otion Zllfle , and a a lcle Zone
Parce l lsln a.n EaJthqua e f au Zone
d n Lque Cllon Zone
Parcel isin an Earthqva e Fau Zone
a d a La~dslide Zone
D l'arCl! l os ,n 11n E.11rthqu11t11 f!u I Znn.e
l'arc:el isin a Uiuefactio n Zone
d Lllnds de Zo· e
P11rc.el lsln II Uiuefllctlon Zone
Pare.el lsln s, Lan HIie Zone
GEOTEK
2078
Figure 4
Lineament
Air Photo
Assessment Map
LEGEND
Modified from Aerial Imagery for EDR, Inc.

SUBJECT SITE

BOUNDARY
Architerra Design Group
Proposed Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Project No. 3901-CR
Aerial Photo Lineament
YEAR: _1,._,,9--'-'49"-----
= 500' ~EDR"
··-·-·-
A
GEOTEK 2079

APPENDIX A

LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Geotechnical Evaluation
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Project No. 3901-CR
GEOTEK 2080
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page A-1

A - FIELD TESTING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The Modified Split-Barrel Sampler (Ring)
The Ring sampler is driven into the ground at various depths in accordance with ASTM D 3550 test procedures. The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, is lined with 1-inch long, thin brass rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sampler is typically driven into the ground 12 or 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free falling from a height of 30 inches. Blow counts are recorded for every 6 inches of penetration as indicated on the log of boring. The samples are removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing.

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Sampler
Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed with a 2.0-inch outside diameter, 1.5-inch inside diameter, split-barrel sampler. The sampler was 18 inches long. The inside diameter of the sampler shoe was 1.4 inches. The sampler was unlined. The sampler conformed to the requirements of ASTM D 1586. A 140-pound automatic trip hammer was utilized, dropping 30 inches for each blow. Blow counts are recorded for every 6 inches of penetration as indicated on the log of boring. Disturbed samples are removed from the sample barrel, sealed in a plastic bag, and transported to the laboratory for testing.

Bulk Samples (Large)
These samples are normally large bags of earth materials over 20 pounds in weight collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings.

Bulk Samples (Small)
These are plastic bag samples which are normally airtight and contain less than 5 pounds in weight of earth materials collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings. These samples are primarily used for determining natural moisture content and classification indices.

B - BORING LOG LEGEND
The following abbreviations and symbols often appear in the classification and description of soil and rock on the log of borings:

SOILS
USCS Unified Soil Classification System
f-c Fine to coarse
f-m Fine to medium

GEOLOGIC
B: Attitudes Bedding: strike/dip
J: Attitudes Joint: strike/dip
C: Contact line
……….. Dashed line denotes USCS material change
Solid Line denotes unit / formational change
Thick solid line denotes end of boring
(Additional denotations and symbols are provided on the boring logs) GEOTEK
2081
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 7 R1 CL
15 20 13.5 110.1
SC
6 R2
8 11 12.4 122.9 Collapse
9 R3
10 14 23.5 108.1
6 R4 CL
10 15 16.0 117.3
7 R5
10 16 10.9 124.4
24 R6
50/4"
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
F sandy CLAY, olive gray, moist, very stiff, oxidation staining F-m sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, very stiff
Victor
5/30/2024
GT 8 Track
Laboratory Testing
Disturbed Soil:

Others
JC
PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:

CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY:

PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE:

COORDINATES: 33°36'2.31"N, 117°16'1.79"W ELEVATION: 1,252 feet amsl DATE:

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-1
Dry Density
(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
30 5
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
10 15 Pauba Formation:

BORING TERMINATED AT 16.0 FEET
No groundwater encountered
25 20LEGEND
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis Alluvium:

Clayey f-m SAND, dark brown, moist medium dense
F-c sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, very stiff
RV = R-Value Test
Clayey/silty SANDSTONE, brown, moist
■ I [Z] □
2082
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 MD, EI, SH
Expansion Index = 23
SM/ML
35 R1 SC
13 14 9.4 118.9
6 R2 SM
8 14 6.3 114.7
8 R3 CL
10 14 16.2 118.9 SH
11 R4
17 23 12.0 122.8
7 R5
17 23 10.9 123.2
14 R6
16 15 23.8 103.7 SH
11 R7
17 24 20.9 107.3
5 S1
8 11
5 S2
14 38 19.1
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
F-m sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, very stiff, trace silt F-c sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, very stiff
Victor
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
5/30/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: GT 8 Track COORDINATES: 33°36'2.10"N, 117°16'1.53"W ELEVATION: 1,251 feet amsl DATE:

Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
Disturbed Soil:
5 SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-2

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, trace silt Silty f-c SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, trace clay
Alluvium:

Silty f-c SAND to f-c sandy SILT, light brown, slightly moist 25 10
15 20
30LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring
Clayey SILTSTONE, brown, moist, hard, trace oxidation & mottling stains ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Clayey SILTSTONE, olive gray, moist
Trace oxidation staining, trace caliche stringers
Some caliche
Pauba Formation:
■ I [Z] □
2083
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
7 S3
14 32
7 S4
10 18 14.2
4 S5
11 12
7 S6
10 16 22.8
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
Victor
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
5/30/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: GT 8 Track COORDINATES: 33°36'2.10"N, 117°16'1.53"W ELEVATION: 1,251 feet amsl DATE:

Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-2 (continued)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
35 Clayey/silty f-m SANDSTONE, dark brown, moist, oxidation staining 40 45 F sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, dark brown, moist
BORING TERMINATED AT 51.5 FEET
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
50 Becomes dark grey-brown LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~I
-
-
-
-
-
-
~I
-
-
-
-
-
-
~,-- -
-
-
-
-
-
=I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
■ I [Z] cg] □ ¥.'.
2084
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 8 R1 ML
14 11 4.5 118.7
8 R2 SM
7 8 8.5 123.1 SH
6 R3
9 7 7.6 117.0
16 R4 SC/SM
30 50/6" 9.5 122.7
20 R5
33 36 18.9 112.6
6 R6
15 45 14.0 103.5
10 R7
32 32 18.6 112.2 SH
19 S1
32 44 13.5
6 S2
11 17
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
F-m sandy SILT, brown, moist, very stiff
Clayey/silty f-c SAND, brown, moist, very dense
F sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive gray, moist
Victor
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
5/30/2024
GT 8 Track
COORDINATES: 33°36'2.22"N, 117°16'0.57"W ELEVATION: 1,252 feet amsl DATE:

PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE:

Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
Disturbed Soil:

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-3

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
5 10
15 Some oxidation staining
Silty f-c SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, trace clay
Alluvium:

Pauba Formation:

Clayey/silty f-c SANDSTONE, brown, moist
20 Trace caliche
25 30 F-m sandy SILTSTONE, olive gray, moist, caliche
Clayey/silty f-m SANDSTONE, brown, moist, oxidation staining, caliche stringers LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density ■ I [Z] □
2085
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
15 S3
10 16 15.5
6 S4
11 18
13 S5
16 21 15.3
7 S6
11 16
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
Victor
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
5/30/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: GT 8 Track COORDINATES: 33°36'2.22"N, 117°16'0.57"W ELEVATION: 1,252 feet amsl DATE:

Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-3 (continued)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
35 Clayey/silty f-c SANDSTONE, brown, moist
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
40 F sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, dark brown, moist, some caliche 45 F-m sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, dark brown, moist
50 Clayey/silty f-c SANDSTONE, dark brown, moist
BORING TERMINATED AT 51.5 FEET
LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~,-- -
-
-
-
-
-
~,-- -
-
-
-
-
-
~I
-
-
-
-
-
-
:("" -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
■ I [Z] cg] □ ¥.'.
2086
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 SM
13 R1 SM 4.3 115.2
50/6"
11 R2
50/6" 14.6 121.1
15 R3
50/5" 7.9 122.3
7 R4
23 34
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
Victor
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
140#/30" RIG TYPE: GT 8 Track
COORDINATES: 33°36'5.89"N, 117°15'58.45"W ELEVATION: 1,260 feet amsl DATE: 5/30/2024 PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER:

Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
Disturbed Soil: Silty f-c SAND, light brown, slightly moist

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-4

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
30 Silty f-c SANDSTONE, brown, moist
5 BORING TERMINATED AT 11.5 FEET
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
10 F-c sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive gray, moist
15 25
20LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis Alluvium:

Pauba Formation:

RV = R-Value Test
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Silty f-c SAND, brown, moist
Clayey/silty f-c SANDSTONE, brown, moist
----
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
■ I [Z] cg] □ ¥.'.
2087
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 SM
13 R1 SM
29 29 3.8 124.8
23 R2 SC
30 40 3.4 129.8
21 R3
41 50/5" 5.4 134.8
45 R4
50/5" 3.7 115.0
21 R5
30 50
42 R6
50/3" 10.6 122.4
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
Silty f-c SAND, light brown, slightly moist
RV = R-Value Test
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density ---Large Bulk
EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits
25 30LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT
15 20
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
BORING TERMINATED AT 16.0 FEET
No groundwater encountered
10 Clayey/silty f-m SANDSTONE, olive grey, moist
Alluvium:

Silty f-c SAND, brown, moist, dense, trace clay
5 Clayey f-m SAND, dark brown, moist, dense
Clayey/silty f-c SANDSTONE, brown, moist
F-c SANDSTONE, light brown, moist
Pauba Formation:

Disturbed Soil:

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
6/11/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: Simco
COORDINATES: 33°36'9.38"N, 117°16'0.53"W ELEVATION: 1,262 feet amsl DATE:

Adrian
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
■ I [Z] □
2088
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 SM
11 R1 SM/SC
6 6
6 R2 SC
8 11 10.3 120.8 Collapse
5 R3
5 7 13.7 118.7
6 R4 CL
9 13 15.2 117.6
5 R5
8 13 16.1 116.3
11 R6
16 25
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
Silty f-c SAND, light brown, slightly moist
RV = R-Value Test
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density BORING TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET
Clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, loose
Alluvium:

LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 30 15
Silty CLAY, olive grey, moist, very stiff
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
20 25
F-c sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, stiff
10 Silty/clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, loose
Clayey f-m SAND, dark brown, moist, medium dense
5 Disturbed Soil:

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-6

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
6/11/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: Simco
COORDINATES: 33°36'10.41"N, 117°15'55.72"W ELEVATION: 1,276 feet amsl DATE:

Adrian
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
■ I [Z] □
2089
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 7 R1 SC/SM
15 20 11.8 120.0
SC
21 R2
24 25 9.4 127.9
23 R3
36 46 9.1 126.0
37 R4
50/5" 9.1 114.7
50/6" R5
50/5" R6 6.9 120.3
32 R7
50/3"
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
RV = R-Value Test
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Silty/clayey f-m SAND, brown, slightly moist
Clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, dense
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
F-m sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive-grey, moist
LEGEND
Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 20 BORING TERMINATED AT 19.5 FEET
25 30
15 Silty f-m SANDSTONE, light brown, moist
Silty f SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, trace oxidation staining Pauba Formation:
10 F sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive grey, moist
Alluvium:

Clayey f-m SAND, dark brown, moist medium dense
5 Clayey f-m SAND, dark brown, moist, very dense
Disturbed Soil:

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-7

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Others
6/11/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: Simco
COORDINATES: 33°36'15.58"N, 117°15'59.05"W ELEVATION: 1,252 feet amsl DATE:

Adrian
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
-
----
-
=• -
-
-
-
-
-
=-•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
■ I [Z] cg] □ ¥.'.
2090
GeoTek, Inc.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
0 R-Value = 12
SC
11 R1 SC/CL
18 26 6.2 127.4
22 R2 SC
38 41 10.9 113.1
19 R3
31 44 11.6 115.9
32 R4
28 44 19.7 109.1
16 R5
25 29
31 R6
35 50/5" 23.8 111.7
---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table
RV = R-Value Test
LEGEND
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk
Lab testing:

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 30 15
F sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive-grey, moist, trace caliche BORING TERMINATED AT 16.5 FEET
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings
20 25
Clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, dense
Pauba Formation:
10 F-m sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive-grey, moist, some oxidation staining F-m sandy/clayey SILTSTONE, olive-grey, moist
5 Dry Density
(pcf)
Others

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
Disturbed Soil:

Clayey f-c SAND, light brown, slightly moist
Alluvium:

Clayey/silty f-c SAND to f-c sandy/silty CLAY, brown, moist, medium dense Clayey f-c SAND, dark brown, moist, very dense

SAMPLES
USCS Symbol
Boring No.: B-8
Laboratory Testing
Depth (ft)
Sample Type
Blows/ 6 in
Sample Number
Water Content
(%)
6/11/2024
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR HAMMER: 140#/30" RIG TYPE: Simco
COORDINATES: 33°36'15.59"N, 117°16'0.18"W ELEVATION: 1,280 feet amsl DATE:

Adrian
CLIENT: Architerra Design Group DRILLER: 2R Drilling LOGGED BY: JC PROJECT NAME: Wildomar Nature Park DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem OPERATOR:
■ I [Z] □
2091

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Geotechnical Evaluation
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Project No. 3901-CR
GEOTEK 2092
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page B-1

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
Classification
Soil and bedrock materials were classified visually in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM Test Method D 2487). The soil classifications are shown on the Logs of Borings in Appendix A.

Collapse Test
Collapse tests were performed on selected samples of the site materials in general accordance with ASTM D 5333 test procedures. The results of these tests are presented graphically in Appendix B.

Direct Shear
Shear testing was performed in a direct shear machine of the strain-control type in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 test procedures. The rate of deformation was approximately 0.035 inch per minute.

The sample was sheared under varying confining loads in order to determine the coulomb shear strength parameters, angle of internal friction and cohesion. The tests were performed on a soil sample remolded to approximately 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures and in-situ soil samples. The shear test results are presented graphically in Appendix B.

Expansion Index
Expansion Index testing was performed on one (1) soil sample. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4829. The results of the testing are provided below and in Appendix B.

Boring No. Depth (ft.) Description Expansion Index Classification B-2 0-5
Sandy/Clayey Silt (ML)
to Clayey Sand (SC)
23 Low
In-Situ Moisture and Density
The natural water content of sampled materials was determined in general accordance with ASTM D 2216 test procedures on samples of the materials recovered from the subsurface exploration.

In addition, in-place dry density of the sampled soils was determined in general accordance with ASTM D 2937 test procedures on relatively undisturbed samples to measure the unit weight of the subsurface soils. Results of these tests are shown on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths in Appendix A.

Moisture-Density Relationship
Laboratory testing was performed on one (1) sample collected during the subsurface exploration. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the soil type was determined in general accordance with test method ASTM Test Procedure D 1557. The results are presented graphically in Appendix B.

R-Value
Resistance “R”-Value testing was performed on one (1) disturbed bulk sample representative of the anticipated subgrade soils for paving areas of the project site. Testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D 2844. Test results are presented graphically in Appendix B.

GEOTEK
2093
ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP Project No. 3901-CR
Geotechnical Evaluation – Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park June 18, 2024 Wildomar, Riverside County, California Page B-2
Sulfate Content, Resistivity and Chloride Content
Testing to determine the water-soluble sulfate content was performed in general accordance with ASTM D4327 test procedures. Resistivity testing was completed in general accordance with ASTM G187 test procedures. Testing to determine the chloride content was performed in general accordance with ASTM D4327 test procedures. The results of the testing are provided below and in Appendix B.

Boring # Depth
(ft.)
pH
ASTM G51
Chloride
ASTM D4327
(mg/kg)
Sulfate
ASTM D4327 (% by
weight)
Resistivity
ASTM G187
(ohm-cm)
B-4 0-5 6.7 77.9 0.0096 5,226
GEOTEK
~ 2094
Plate B-1
Sample: B-1 @ 3 Feet
Seating Cycle
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4546
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR Date: 6/5/2024 Wildomar 20-Acre Park

COLLAPSE REPORT
CHECKED BY: EC Lab: Corona Architerra Design Group
Loading Prior to Inundation
Loading After Inundation
Rebound Cycle

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

4.00 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
CONSOLIDATION-PERCENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESS (%)

STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
--♦---
•
... --•--·
A
GEOTEK
2095
Plate B-2
Sample: B-6 @ 4 Feet
Seating Cycle
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4546
PROJECT NO.: 3901-CR Date: 6/17/2024 Wildomar 20-Acre Park

COLLAPSE REPORT
CHECKED BY: EC Lab: Corona Architerra Design Group
Loading Prior to Inundation
Loading After Inundation
Rebound Cycle

0.00 1.00

2.00 3.00

0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
CONSOLIDATION-PERCENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESS (%)

STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
, 1
--♦---
•
... --•--·
A
GEOTEK
2096
Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 28 O
, C = 175 psf
Notes:
3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.01 in/min.

Project Name:

Project Number: 3901-CR
B-2 @ 15 Feet

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
6/6/2024
1 - The soil specimens sheared were "undisturbed" ring samples. 2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions.

0.0 500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
3000.0
3500.0
4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 SHEAR STRESS (psf)
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
GEOTEK
------------,-------------r------------,-------------~-------------r------------,-------------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 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------~-------------+-------------~------------- 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------~-------------L------------~-------------L------------~-------------i-------------1 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------1------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : : : : : : : A 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 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 ------------◄1 -------------~-------------+------------~------------- 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 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 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 I ------------1-------------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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------ ----------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 1 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 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 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I 2097
Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 30 O
, C = 244 psf
Notes:
6/6/2024
1 - The soil specimens sheared were "undisturbed" ring samples. 2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions.

Project Name:

Project Number: 3901-CR
B-2 @ 6 Feet

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.01 in/min.

0.0 500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
3000.0
3500.0
4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 SHEAR STRESS (psf)
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
GEOTEK
------------,-------------r------------,-------------~-------------r------------,-------------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 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------~-------------+-------------~------------- 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------~-------------L------------~-------------L------------~-------------i-------------1 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------1------------~-------------r------------,-------------T----------- 1 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 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 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------t------------+------------i---- ------r------------~-------------+-------------1 • 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------- 1 I :

I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---.------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 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 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 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2098
Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 33 O
, C = 75 psf
Notes:
6/3/2024
1 - The soil specimens sheared were "undisturbed" ring samples. 2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions.

Project Name:

Project Number: 3901-CR
B-3 @ 20 Feet

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.01 in/min.

0.0 500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
3000.0
3500.0
4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 SHEAR STRESS (psf)
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
GEOTEK
------------,-------------r------------,-------------~-------------r------------,-------------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 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------~-------------+-------------~------------- 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------~-------------L------------~-------------L------------~-------------i-------------1 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------1------------~-------------r------------,-------------T---- ------, 1 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------t------------+---------- J;. -- -------r------------~-------------+-------------1 • 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r--------- .-------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 1 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 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 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 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 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 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 2099
Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 34 O
, C = 70 psf
Notes:

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.01 in/min.
1 - The soil specimens sheared were "undisturbed" ring samples. 2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions.

Project Name:

Project Number: 3901-CR
B-3 @ 3 Feet
6/3/2024

0.0 500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
3000.0
3500.0
4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 SHEAR STRESS (psf)
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
GEOTEK
------------,-------------r------------,-------------~-------------r------------,-------------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 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------~-------------+-------------~------------- 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------~-------------L------------~-------------L------------~-------------i-------------1 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------1------------~-------------r------------,-------------T--- -------, 1 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------t------------+------------i--- --------r------------~-------------+-------------1 • 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r--------- .-------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 1 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 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 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 --------~-------------+------------~------------- 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2100
Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 27 O
, C = 296 psf
Notes:

Project Name:

Project Number:
3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.01 in/min.
3901-CR
B-2 @ 0-5 Feet
6/7/2024

DIRECT SHEAR TEST
2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions. 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation.

Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park

0.0 500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
3000.0
3500.0
4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 SHEAR STRESS (psf)
NORMAL STRESS (psf)
GEOTEK
------------,-------------r------------,-------------~-------------r------------,-------------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 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 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 I I I I I I I I ------------1-------------~-------------+-------------~------------- 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------~-------------L------------~-------------L------------~-------------i-------------1 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r------------1------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1 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 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 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 I I I ------------◄1 -------------~-------------+------------~------------- 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 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 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 ------------1-------------t------------+------------i--------- -r------------~-------------+-------------1 • 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------,-------------r--------- 1 I I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I I I I .-------------~-------------r------------,-------------T-------------1

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 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 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 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2101
Sample Details
Sample ID: 24-00107-S01 Date Sampled: 5/30/2024
Sampled By:

Material: Clayey Fine to Course SAND
Location: B-2 @ 0-5 Feet
Test Results
ASTM D 1557
Maximum Dry Unit Weight
(lbf/ft³): 129.1
Optimum Water Content (%): 10.6
Method: A
Preparation Method: Moist
Retained Sieve No 4 (4.75mm) (%): 2
Passing Sieve No 4 (4.75mm) (%): 98
Tested By: Eduardo Cuevas
Date Tested: 6/4/2024
Dry Unit Weight - Water Content Relationship
Proctor Report
Report No: PTR:24-00107-S01
Client:

Project: 3901-CR
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park, Wildomar
Phone: (951) 710-1160
GeoTek - Corona
Corona, CA 92880
Fax: (951) 710-1167
1548 N. Maple St.

Architerra Design Group, Inc.

Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730
Attn: Richard Krumwiede

THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL
CC:

Form No: 110031, Report No: PTR:24-00107-S01 © 2000-2024 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 1 of 1 Comments
130.0 • • • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • •• • • • • r • • -- • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. . . . . . . 129.0
128.0 • • • • • • •
.., !s 127.0 • • • • • • •
,Q
:E
Cl
~ 126.0 • •
= C:
:::)
I .,.
.• · t- •.

I
C:- 125.0
0 ...................... · t . . •'• ............ . . . . . 124.0 • • . - . l ..
• • I , • .
123.0 • • • • • • • •.• • • • • • • • .• • • • • r • • •. • • • • • • • •.• • • • • • • ·: • 122.0 +---+---+---+---+----+---+---+-----<-->---+---+-----<

8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0
water Content (%)
■
2102
Ring #: Ring Dia. : Ring Ht.:1"
Weight of compacted sample & ring (gm)Weight of ring (gm)Net weight of sample (gm)Moisture Content, %Specific Gravity, assumedUnit Wt. of Water @ 20 °C, (pcf)% Saturation EXPANSION INDEX = 23
800.3 18.3

62.449.7 FINAL MOISTURE
Final Weight of wet
sample & tare % Moisture

2.70 6/5/2024 0.1680 Final10.0

SATURATION DETERMINATION
Dry Density, lb / ft3 (D/1.F) 109.2Wet Density, lb / ft3 (C*0.3016) 120.1 6/4/2024 0.1450 10 min/Dry 398.3 6/4/2024 0.1460 Initial

DENSITY DETERMINATION
767.4 READINGS369.1 DATE TIME READING
Sample Description:

4.01"
Project Number: 3901-CR Date Tested: 6/4/2024
Project Location: Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Sample Source: B-2 @ 0-5 Feet

EXPANSION INDEX TEST
(ASTM D4829)
Client: Architerra Design Group Tested/ Checked By: RY Lab No Corona GEOTEK
- -I
2103
Sample Details
Sample ID: 24-00107-S02 Date Sampled: 5/30/2024
Sampling Method: Source:

Material: Sandy CLAY Specification:

Location: B-8 @ 0-5 Feet Tested By: Eduardo Cuevas
Date Tested: 6/14/2024
Test Results
ASTM D 2844
R Value at 300 psi Exudation: 12
R Value
Specimen Results
Moisture Content (%) 11.4 11.4 11.4
Dry Density (lb/ft³) 113.4 113.4 113.4
Exudation Pressure (psi) 349 349 349
R Value 15 15 15
Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.9 0.9 0.9
Moisture Content (%) 11.4 13.2 13.2
Dry Density (lb/ft³) 113.4 108.1 108.1
Exudation Pressure (psi) 349 224 224
R Value 15 9 9
Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.9 0.7 0.7
Moisture Content (%) 11.4 13.2 14.1
Dry Density (lb/ft³) 113.4 108.1 107.3
Exudation Pressure (psi) 349 224 406
R Value 15 9 19
Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.9 0.7 1.0
R Value Report
Report No: RV:24-00107-S02
Client:

Project: 3901-CR
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park, Wildomar
Phone: (951) 710-1160
GeoTek - Corona
Corona, CA 92880
Fax: (951) 710-1167
1548 N. Maple St.

Architerra Design Group, Inc.

Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730
Attn: Richard Krumwiede

THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL
CC:

Form No: 18964, Report No: RV:24-00107-S02 © 2000-2024 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 1 of 1 Comments
......... ., .. ...... r ......... .
i
: .......• : ........ i .......•. : ......... : ...... .

I
. I· ... • .. • . •, • . • .. • . .•. • . • • ..
i • I
I
.. i. ........ ·. I
I
i
20 18
16 14
· ......... · .... ' ... . . . • • • • • • • • • • • 12 I Q)
:::, . . i ; .•..•..• ; .• .. • ... f ...

I
i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . 10 ~
a:: I
I I • • ' • ~ • • • •• • • • • • • • 'r • ' • • • • • • ,• ' • ' • • ' • • •• ' • • • • ' 8 .................. , ............................ 6
I
i
I ... . j' •..• ...... •. . 4
. . . . . . . . , ......... , ........... ' 2 I
i
I
~--t------------t---t--------+o
500 400 300 200 100 0
Exudation Pressure (psi)
■
2104
Project X REPORT S240612F
Corrosion Engineering Page 1
Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab 29990 Technology Dr, Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com
Results Only Soil Testing
for
Wildomar 20 acre Nature Park
June 13, 2024
Prepared for:

Eddy Cuevas
GeoTek USA
1548 N. Maple Avenue
Corona, CA 92878
[email protected], [email protected]
Project X Job#: S240612F
Client Job or PO#: 3901-CR Architerra Design
Respectfully Submitted,
Eduardo Hernandez, M.Sc., P.E.

Sr. Corrosion Consultant
NACE Corrosion Technologist #16592
Professional Engineer
California No. M37102
[email protected]
Respectfully Submitted, r - - -- -·- -.; ·- -------- -- -·;:, No.lMG7102
2105
Project X REPORT S240612F
Corrosion Engineering Page 2
Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab 29990 Technology Dr., Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com
Soil Analysis Lab Results
Client: GeoTek USA
Job Name: Wildomar 20 acre Nature Park
Client Job Number: 3901-CR Architerra Design
Project X Job Number: S240612F
June 13, 2024
Method ASTM
G51
ASTM
G200
SM
4500-D
ASTM
D4327
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D6919
ASTM
D4327
ASTM
D4327
Bore# /
Description
Depth pH Redox Sulfide
S2-
Nitrate
NO3
-
Ammonium
NH4
+
Lithium
Li+
Sodium
Na+
Potassium
K+
Magnesium
Mg2+
Calcium
Ca2+
Fluoride
F2
2-
Phosphate
PO4
3-
(ft) (mg/kg) (wt%) (mg/kg) (wt%) (Ω-cm) (Ω-cm) (mV) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) B-4 0-5 95.9 0.0096 77.9 0.0078 154,100 5,226 6.7 133 2.0 4.2 10.4 0.01 81.5 7.2 39.0 130.7 3.7 8.9 ASTM
G187
ASTM
D4327
ASTM
D4327
Resistivity
As Rec'd | Minimum
Sulfates
SO4
2-
Chlorides
ClCations and Anions, except Sulfide and Bicarbonate, tested with Ion Chromatography mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil weight ND = 0 = Not Detected | NT = Not Tested | Unk = Unknown Chemical Analysis performed on 1:3 Soil-To-Water extract PPM = mg/kg (soil) = mg/L (Liquid)
Note: Sometimes a bad sulfate hit is a contaminated spot. Typical fertilizers are Potassium chloride, ammonium sulfate or ammonium sulfate nitrate (ASN). So this is another reason why testing full corrosion series is good because we then have the data to see if those other ingredients are present meaning the soil sample is just fertilizercontaminated soil. This can happen often when the soil samples collected are simply surface scoops. This is why it's best to dig in a foot, throw away the top and test the deeper stuff. Dairy farms are also notorious for these items.

If one sample pops up much more corrosive than all others, we would recommend collecting more samples surrounding the problem sample location to determine if the peak is isolated to it. This allows us to conclude it was a contaminated sample and able to declare it an outlier.

Try out our new online forms: SOIL CORROSIVITY & THERMAL RESISTIVITY LAB REQUEST FORM & IN-SITU WENNER 4 PIN QUOTE REQUEST FORM

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
2106

APPENDIX C

HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Evaluation
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Project No. 3901-CR
GEOTEK 2107
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Not Reported
WILDOMAR, CA 92595
Inquiry Number:

June 12, 2024
7679831.1
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
2108
2020 1"=500' Flight Year: 2020 USDA/NAIP
2016 1"=500' Flight Year: 2016 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=500' Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=500' Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2005 1"=500' Flight Year: 2005 USDA/NAIP
2002 1"=500' Acquisition Date: January 01, 2002 USGS/DOQQ 1997 1"=500' Acquisition Date: October 16, 1997 USGS/DOQQ 1994 1"=500' Acquisition Date: January 01, 1994 USGS/DOQQ 1989 1"=500' Flight Date: August 15, 1989 USDA
1985 1"=500' Flight Date: February 24, 1985 USDA
1978 1"=500' Flight Date: September 20, 1978 USDA
1967 1"=500' Flight Date: May 15, 1967 USDA
1961 1"=500' Flight Date: June 17, 1961 USDA
1953 1"=500' Flight Date: September 22, 1953 USDA
1949 1"=500' Flight Date: May 06, 1949 USDA
1938 1"=500' Flight Date: June 14, 1938 USDA
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 06/12/24 Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Site Name: Client Name: Geotek Not Reported 1548 North Maple Street WILDOMAR, CA 92595 Corona, CA 92880 EDR Inquiry # 7679831.1 Contact: Kyle Richard Mchargue Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo per decade. Search Results: Year Scale Details Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more information contact your EDR Account Executive. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice Copyright 2024 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. 7679831 - 1 page 2 This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an “AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY

KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN

THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,

COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS

SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,

CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF DATA), ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.

Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only an assessment performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any property.
~EDR'
2109
7679831.1 2020 = 500'
YEAR: -----------
2110
7679831.1 2016 = 500'
YEAR: -----
2111
7679831.1 2012 = 500'
2112
7679831.1 2009 = 500'
2113
7679831.1 2005 = 500'
2114
7679831.1 2002 = 500'
2115
7679831.1 1997 = 500'
2116
7679831.1 1994 = 500'
2117
7679831.1 1989 = 500'
.. ·
INQUIRY#:
-----
YE AR: -----
2118
7679831.1 1985 = 500'
2119
7679831.1 1978 = 500'
INQUIRY#:
-----
YE AR:
2120
7679831.1 1967 = 500'
•
INQUIRY#:

YEAR:
2121
7679831.1 1961 = 500'
INQUIRY#:

YEAR:
2122
7679831.1 1953 = 500'
INQUIRY#:

YEAR:
2123
7679831.1 1949 = 500'
INQUIRY#: ___ _
YEAR: -----
2124
7679831.1 1938 = 500'
2125

APPENDIX D

GENERAL EARTHWORK GRADING GUIDELINES
Geotechnical Evaluation
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park
Palomar Street and South Pasadena Street
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Project No. 3901-CR
GEOTEK 2126

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-1
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES
Guidelines presented herein are intended to address general construction procedures for earthwork construction. Specific situations and conditions often arise which cannot reasonably be discussed in general guidelines, when anticipated these are discussed in the text of the report. Often unanticipated conditions are encountered which may necessitate modification or changes to these guidelines. It is our hope that these will assist the contractor to more efficiently complete the project by providing a reasonable understanding of the procedures that would be expected during earthwork and the testing and observation used to evaluate those procedures.

General
Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of governing agencies, Chapters 18 and 33 of the Uniform Building Code, CBC (2022) and the guidelines presented below.

Preconstruction Meeting
A preconstruction meeting should be held prior to site earthwork. Any questions the contractor has regarding our recommendations, general site conditions, apparent discrepancies between reported and actual conditions and/or differences in procedures the contractor intends to use should be brought up at that meeting. The contractor (including the main onsite representative) should review our report and these guidelines in advance of the meeting. Any comments the contractor may have regarding these guidelines should be brought up at that meeting.

Grading Observation and Testing

1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by our representative during grading. Verbal communication during the course of each day will be used to inform the contractor of test results.

The contractor should receive a copy of the "Daily Field Report" indicating results of field density tests that day. If our representative does not provide the contractor with these reports, our office should be notified.

2. Testing and observation procedures are, by their nature, specific to the work or area observed and location of the tests taken, variability may occur in other locations. The contractor is responsible for the uniformity of the grading operations; our observations and test results are intended to evaluate the contractor’s overall level of efforts during grading. The contractor’s personnel are the only individuals participating in all aspect of site work. Compaction testing and observation should not be considered as relieving the contractor’s responsibility to properly compact the fill.

3. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed by our representative prior to placing any fill. It will be the contractor's responsibility to notify our representative or office when such areas are ready for observation.

GEOTEK 2127

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-2
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

4. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as considered warranted by this firm.

5. In general, density tests would be made at maximum intervals of two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and size of the fill. More frequent testing may be performed. In any case, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained.

6. Laboratory testing to support field test procedures will be performed, as considered warranted, based on conditions encountered (e.g. change of material sources, types, etc.) Every effort will be made to process samples in the laboratory as quickly as possible and in progress construction projects are our first priority. However, laboratory workloads may cause in delays and some soils may require a minimum of 48 to 72 hours to complete test procedures. Whenever possible, our representative(s) should be informed in advance of operational changes that might result in different source areas for materials.

7. Procedures for testing of fill slopes are as follows:
a) Density tests should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill, three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope.
b) If a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be employed, slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to determine if the required compaction is being achieved.

8. Finish grade testing of slopes and pad surfaces should be performed after construction is complete.

Site Clearing

1. All vegetation, and other deleterious materials, should be removed from the site. If material is not immediately removed from the site it should be stockpiled in a designated area(s) well outside of all current work areas and delineated with flagging or other means. Site clearing should be performed in advance of any grading in a specific area.

2. Efforts should be made by the contractor to remove all organic or other deleterious material from the fill, as even the most diligent efforts may result in the incorporation of some materials. This is especially important when grading is occurring near the natural grade. All equipment operators should be aware of these efforts. Laborers may be required as root pickers.

3. Nonorganic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas provided the procedures used are observed and found acceptable by our representative.

Treatment of Existing Ground

1. Following site clearing, all surficial deposits of alluvium and colluvium as well as weathered or creep effected bedrock, should be removed unless otherwise specifically indicated in the text of this report.

GEOTEK 2128

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-3
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

2. In some cases, removal may be recommended to a specified depth (e.g. flat sites where partial alluvial removals may be sufficient). The contractor should not exceed these depths unless directed otherwise by our representative.

3. Groundwater existing in alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months.

4. Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards.

5. Exploratory back hoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located.

Fill Placement

1. Unless otherwise indicated, all site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see text of report).

2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts six (6) to eight (8) inches in compacted thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a nearly horizontal plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by our representative.

3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that recommended by this firm, the contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following:
a) Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. Moisture should be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre-watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or dry surficial soils. The ability of the contractor to obtain the proper moisture content will control production rates.
b) Each six-inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In most cases, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D 1557.

4. Rock fragments less than eight inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided:
a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets;
b) There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks; c) The distribution of the rocks is observed by, and acceptable to, our representative.

5. Rocks exceeding eight (8) inches in diameter should be taken off site, broken into smaller fragments, or placed in accordance with recommendations of this firm in areas designated suitable for rock disposal. On projects where significant large quantities of oversized materials are anticipated, alternate guidelines for placement may be included. If significant oversize materials are encountered during construction, these guidelines should be requested.

GEOTEK 2129

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-4
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

6. In clay soil, dry or large chunks or blocks are common. If in excess of eight (8) inches minimum dimension, then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break up blocks. When dry, they should be moisture conditioned to provide a uniform condition with the surrounding fill.

Slope Construction

1. The contractor should obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment.

2. Slopes trimmed to the compacted core should be overbuilt by at least three (3) feet with compaction efforts out to the edge of the false slope. Failure to properly compact the outer edge results in trimming not exposing the compacted core and additional compaction after trimming may be necessary.

3. If fill slopes are built "at grade" using direct compaction methods, then the slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades. Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes should be back rolled or otherwise compacted at approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built.

4. Corners and bends in slopes should have special attention during construction as these are the most difficult areas to obtain proper compaction.

5. Cut slopes should be cut to the finished surface. Excessive undercutting and smoothing of the face with fill may necessitate stabilization.

UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL
Utility trench excavation and backfill is the contractor’s responsibility. The geotechnical consultant typically provides periodic observation and testing of these operations. While efforts are made to make sufficient observations and tests to verify that the contractors’ methods and procedures are adequate to achieve proper compaction, it is typically impractical to observe all backfill procedures. As such, it is critical that the contractor use consistent backfill procedures.

Compaction methods vary for trench compaction and experience indicates many methods can be successful.

However, procedures that “worked” on previous projects may or may not prove effective on a given site.

The contractor(s) should outline the procedures proposed, so that we may discuss them prior to construction. We will offer comments based on our knowledge of site conditions and experience.

GEOTEK 2130

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-5
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

1. Utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas, in streets and beneath flat work or hardscape should be brought to at least optimum moisture and compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Soil should be moisture conditioned prior to placing in the trench.

2. Flooding and jetting are not typically recommended or acceptable for native soils. Flooding or jetting may be used with select sand having a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or higher. This is typically limited to the following uses:
a) shallow (12 + inches) under slab interior trenches and, b) as bedding in pipe zone.

The water should be allowed to dissipate prior to pouring slabs or completing trench compaction.

3. Care should be taken not to place soils at high moisture content within the upper three feet of the trench backfill in street areas, as overly wet soils may impact subgrade preparation. Moisture may be reduced to 2% below optimum moisture in areas to be paved within the upper three feet below sub grade.

4. Sand backfill should not be allowed in exterior trenches adjacent to and within an area extending below a 1:1 projection from the outside bottom edge of a footing, unless it is similar to the surrounding soil.

5. Trench compaction testing is generally at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Testing frequency will be based on trench depth and the contractor’s procedures. A probing rod would be used to assess the consistency of compaction between tested areas and untested areas. If zones are found that are considered less compact than other areas, this would be brought to the contractor’s attention.

JOB SAFETY
General
Personnel safety is a primary concern on all job sites. The following summaries are safety considerations for use by all our employees on multi-employer construction sites. On ground personnel are at highest risk of injury and possible fatality on grading construction projects. The company recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site and that job site safety is the contractor's responsibility. However, it is, imperative that all personnel be safety conscious to avoid accidents and potential injury.

In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following precautions are to be implemented for the safety of our field personnel on grading and construction projects.

1. Safety Meetings: Our field personnel are directed to attend the contractor's regularly scheduled safety meetings.

2. Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for and are to be worn by our personnel while on the job site.

GEOTEK 2131

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-6
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR

3. Safety Flags: Safety flags are provided to our field technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicle when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits.

In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above, we request that it be brought to the attention of our office.

Test Pits Location, Orientation and Clearance
The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. The primary concern is the technician's safety.

However, it is necessary to take sufficient tests at various locations to obtain a representative sampling of the fill. As such, efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractors authorized representatives (e.g. dump man, operator, supervisor, grade checker, etc.), and to select locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferably outside of current traffic. The contractors authorized representative should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test period. Again, safety is the paramount concern.

Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away from oncoming traffic. The technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates that the fill be maintained in a drivable condition. Alternatively, the contractor may opt to park a piece of equipment in front of test pits, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access.

A zone of non-encroachment should be established for all test pits (see diagram below). No grading equipment should enter this zone during the test procedure. The zone should extend outward to the sides approximately 50 feet from the center of the test pit and 100 feet in the direction of traffic flow. This zone is established both for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration, which typically decreases test results. 50 ft Zone of
Non-Encroachment
50 ft Zone of
Non-Encroachment
Traffic Direction
Vehicle
parked here Test Pit Spoil
pile
Spoil
pile
Test Pit

SIDE VIEW

PLAN VIEW

TEST PIT SAFETY PLAN
10 0 ft Zone of
Non-Encroachment
- "I
'
./
-
~
--
GEOTEK 2132

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-7
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR Slope Tests
When taking slope tests, the technician should park their vehicle directly above or below the test location on the slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe operation distance (e.g., 50 feet) away from the slope during testing.

The technician is directed to withdraw from the active portion of the fill as soon as possible following testing.

The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location.

Trench Safety
It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is needed.

Trenches for all utilities should be excavated in accordance with CAL-OSHA and any other applicable safety standards. Safe conditions will be required to enable compaction testing of the trench backfill.

All utility trench excavations in excess of 5 feet deep, which a person enters, are to be shored or laid back.

Trench access should be provided in accordance with OSHA standards. Our personnel are directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment.

Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation which:

1. is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back,

2. exit points or ladders are not provided,

3. displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the trench, or

4. displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth.

If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy requires that the soil technician withdraws and notifies their supervisor. The contractors representative will then be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. All backfill not tested due to safety concerns or other reasons is subject to reprocessing and/or removal.

Procedures
In the event that the technician's safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractor's failure to comply with any of the above, the technician is directed to inform both the developer's and contractor's representatives. If the condition is not rectified, the technician is required, by company policy, to immediately withdraw and notify their supervisor. The contractor’s representative will then be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. No further testing will be performed until the situation is rectified. Any fill placed in the interim can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing, recompaction or removal.

GEOTEK 2133

GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX D
Wildomar 20-Acre Nature Park Page D-8
City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California Project No. 3901-CR In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety guidelines, we request that the contractor bring this to technicians attention and notify our project manager or office.

Effective communication and coordination between the contractors' representative and the field technician(s) is strongly encouraged in order to implement the above safety program and safety in general.

The safety procedures outlined above should be discussed at the contractor's safety meetings. This will serve to inform and remind equipment operators of these safety procedures particularly the zone of nonencroachment.

GEOTEK 2134
This page intentionally left blank.
2135
20-Acre Passive Park (CIP 099) IS/MND
PlaceWorks
Appendix 6 Soils Report
2136
4741 East Hunter Ave., Ste. A    Anaheim CA  92807
(714) 282‐8777       (714) 282‐8575 fax
www.waypointanalytical.com
Anaheim Office
Lab No: 23‐223‐0020
August 17, 2023
Architerra Design Group, Inc.
10221‐A Trademark Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Attn: Peter Dalman
Project: Wildomar 20 Acre Park – Wildomar Job #:  2329
Attached are the results of the analysis performed on two soil samples that were collected from the above mentioned project site from a 12‐inch depth by the client and received by our laboratory on August 11, 2023. These samples were analyzed for nutrient levels, agricultural suitability, and physical characteristics in preparation for a new landscape installation.

Analytical Results and Comments
The reaction of sample 1 is neutral and sample 2 is near neutral with readings in the range of 7.0‐7.1 on the pH scale with free lime favorably low. These levels are within the range preferred for most plants and no pH adjustment is suggested.

Salinity (ECe) and sodium are favorably low. The safely low sodium adsorption ratios (SAR) indicate that sodium is properly balanced by calcium and magnesium in regards to its effect on soil structure and water infiltration.

Boron is safely low for general ornamental plants and may be below optimum for plant nutritional purposes. Irrigation water in Southern California often supplies sufficient boron to meet plant nutritional requirements for that nutrient. However, if boron is low in the irrigation water and/or plants show symptoms of boron deficiency after they are well established, consider an application of a product containing boron at the manufacturer’s label rate. Boron deficiency symptoms often include stunted or deformed younger growth and “tight” internodes.

In terms of soil fertility, nitrogen is low in sample 1 and low optimum in sample 2. Phosphorus is low in both. For the minor elements, zinc and iron are moderately low. The remaining nutrients are well supplied.

The texture of the samples is ‘gravelly sandy loam’ with 20.4% of the samples being comprised of gravel in the 2‐12 mm range on average. This, along with a relatively wide distribution of particle sizes in the fraction of the sample passing the 2.0 mm sieve, indicates that these soils may have some tendency to compact. The estimated water infiltration rates, which may vary with the degree of soil compaction, are in the range of 0.26‐0.27 inches per hour. Organic content is low at 0.5% on a dry weight basis.

Page 1 of 4 ends

Waypoint..G

ANALYTICAL
2137
4741 East Hunter Ave., Ste. A Anaheim CA 92807
(714) 282‐8777 (714) 282‐8575 fax
www.waypointanalytical.com

Page 2 ends

Architerra Design Group, Inc.

August 17, 2023
Recommendations
Surface Soil Preparation for Turf, Groundcover, and Mass Planting If feasible, prior to amending the areas where severe compaction exists, the surface soil should be ripped or tilled to a 9‐inch depth. Uniformly broadcast and blend the following with existing soil to a 6‐inch depth in both locations.

Materials Amount per 1000 sq.ft.

Nitrogen fortified organic amendment 4 cu. yards (compost* or redwood or fir sawdust)
16‐20‐0 Ammonium Phosphate 9 lbs.
*Rates and fertilizers may have to be adjusted depending on analysis of selected compost.

Tree and Shrub Planting Guidelines

1. Excavate planting pits at least twice the diameter of the rootball.

2. The top of the rootball should be at or slightly above final grade.

3. Organic material is not required in the backfill; however, if you wish, the amended surface soil or a soil blend consisting of no more than 20% by volume organic matter can be placed in the upper 12 inches of backfill only. Soil below this depth should not contain any added organic matter because of the threat of plant disease and/or anaerobic soil conditions developing.

4. Place slow release fertilizer tablets in the upper 12 inches of backfill at manufacturer’s recommended rates. If fertilizer amended soil per the mass planting recommendation is used as a backfill the addition of slow release fertilizer tablets is not necessary.

5. Do not cover the original rootball with other soil. Ideally, a temporary soil berm is often constructed around the outer edge of the rootball to help channel water into the rootball and then into surrounding soil until roots are established in the backfill and the rootball is no longer the sole source of water for the plant.

6. Ideally, a weed and turf free zone, preferably 2‐3 ft. in diameter, should be maintained just beyond the diameter of the planting hole. A 2‐4 inch deep layer of coarse mulch can be placed around the tree or shrub; mulch should be kept a minimum 4‐6 inches from the trunk.

Page 2 of 4 ends

Waypoint..G

ANALYTICAL
2138
4741 East Hunter Ave., Ste. A Anaheim CA 92807
(714) 282‐8777 (714) 282‐8575 fax
www.waypointanalytical.com

Page 3 ends

Architerra Design Group, Inc.

August 17, 2023
Maintenance Fertilization
For turf, groundcover, and mass planting areas uniformly broadcast sulfur coated urea at the rate of 5 lbs. per 1000 sq. ft. The first application should occur approximately 45 days after planting or at the first mowing in turf areas, with repeat applications every 60‐90 days or as growth and color dictate. In early fall and spring, substitute a complete fertilizer such as 16‐6‐8, or equal, for the sulfur coated urea at the rate of 6 lbs. per 1000 sq. ft. to ensure continuing supplies of phosphorus and potassium. Tree and shrub plantings can be maintained with the above fertilizers; however, the frequency between applications should be every 120 days, with the first application 60‐90 days after planting. Follow each fertilization with a thorough irrigation. When plants have become well established, fertilizer applications can be less frequent.

As noted above, zinc and iron are below optimum. When micronutrients are low, deficiencies can sometimes show in the plants. If deficiencies show once plants have become established, they may be addressed upon the first sign of deficiency. Iron and zinc deficiency symptoms are often characterized by yellow, almost white, interveinal chlorosis on the youngest growth. If these symptoms are apparent once plants are established, then application of iron and/or zinc chelate at the manufacturer’s label rate may improve appearance. Chelates are generally more effective than some of the other forms of trace elements. These can be either foliar or soil applied at manufacturer’s rates if deficiencies begin to show.

If we can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Joe Kiefer, CCA

Page 3 of 4 ends

Waypoint..G

ANALYTICAL
2139
Architerra Design Group, Inc.
10221-A Trademark Street
Rancho Cucamonga
Page :

Report No :

Date Recd :

Purchase Order :

Date Printed :
23-223-0020
08/11/2023
08/16/2023
1 of 1
Project :

Job #: 2329
Wildomar 20 Acre Park - Wildomar

COMPREHENSIVE SOIL ANALYSIS
CA 91730
Lab No. Organic
% dry wt.

ECe
dS/m
pH
Qual
Lime TEC
Half Sat
%
Sufficiency Factors
Sample Description - Sample ID
NO -N 3 NH4-N PO -P4 K Ca Mg Cu Zn Mn Fe
ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm

0.58 00501
11 48 Low

7.0 0.2
6 7

0.6 0.6
8 143

2.0 0.9
703 114

1.1 1.7

1.0 1.0

0.4 1.4
7 13

0.6 Wildomar 1

0.56 00502
12 46 Low

7.1 0.3
10 10

0.8 0.6
9 212

2.7 0.9
656 95

0.9 1.8

1.1 1.1

0.5 1.6
8 12

0.5 Wildomar 2
Saturation Extract Values
Ca
meq/L
Mg
meq/L
Na
meq/L meq/L
K B
ppm meq/L
SO4 SAR
Coarse
5 - 12
Fine
2 - 5
Gravel %
Very Coarse
1 - 2
Coarse

0.5 - 1
Med. to Very Fine

0.05 - 0.5
Sand
Percent of Sample Passing 2 mm Screen
Silt
.002-.05
Clay
0-.002
USDA Soil Classification Lab No.

1.4 0.9 0.9 0 0.09 0.2 0.8 5.8 16.6 11.6 14.0 43.9 18.2 12.2 Gravelly Sandy Loam 00501

1.7 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.09 0.2 0.6 4.2 14.2 12.6 18.0 40.9 18.2 10.2 Gravelly Sandy Loam 00502 Sufficiency factor (1.0=sufficient for average crop) below each nutrient value. N factor based on 200 ppm constant feed. SAR = Sodium adsorption ratio. Half Saturation %=approx field moisture capacity. Nitrogen(N), Potassium(K), Calcium(Ca) and Magnesium(Mg) by sodium chloride extraction. Phosphorus(P) by sodium bicarbonate extraction. Copper(Cu), Zinc(Zn), Manganese(Mn) & Iron(Fe) by DTPA extraction. Sat. ext. method for salinity (ECe as dS/m),Boron (B), Sulfate(SO
* LOW , SUFFICIENT , HIGH
4 ), Sodium(Na). Gravel fraction expressed as percent by weight of oven-dried sample passing a 12mm(1/2 inch) sieve. Particle sizes in millimeters. Organic percentage determined by Walkley-Black or Loss on Ignition.

Page 4 of 4 ends

WaypointG ~,

ANALYTICAL
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I I
I
I

I I I I
4741 East Hunter Ave. Suite A
Anaheim, CA 92807
Main 714-282-8777 ° Fax 714-282-8575
www.waypointanalytical.com

I I I I

I I I I
I I I
I I
I ]
I ]
l
2140
This page intentionally left blank.
2141
20-Acre Passive Park (CIP 099) IS/MND
PlaceWorks
Appendix 7 Noise Modeling
2142
Fundamentals of Noise
NOISE
Noise is most often defined as unwanted sound; whether it is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable. Although sound can be easily measured, the perception of noise and the physical response to sound complicate the analysis of its impact on people. People judge the relative magnitude of sound sensation in subjective terms such as “noisiness” or “loudness.”
Noise Descriptors
The following are brief definitions of terminology used in this chapter:
 Sound. A disturbance created by a vibrating object, which, when transmitted by pressure waves through a medium such as air, is capable of being detected by a receiving mechanism, such as the human ear or a microphone.
 Noise. Sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable.  Decibel (dB). A unitless measure of sound, expressed on a logarithmic scale and with respect to a defined reference sound pressure. The standard reference pressure is 20 micropascals (20 µPa).  A-Weighted Decibel (dBA). An overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear.
 Equivalent Continuous Noise Level (Leq); also called the Energy-Equivalent Noise Level. The value of an equivalent, steady sound level which, in a stated time period (often over an hour) and at a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound. Thus, the Leq metric is a single numerical value that represents the equivalent amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor over the specified duration.
 Statistical Sound Level (Ln). The sound level that is exceeded “n” percent of time during a given sample period. For example, the L50 level is the statistical indicator of the time-varying noise signal that is exceeded 50 percent of the time (during each sampling period); that is, half of the sampling time, the changing noise levels are above this value and half of the time they are below it. This is called the “median sound level.” The L10 level, likewise, is the value that is exceeded 10 percent of the time (i.e., near the maximum) and this is often known as the “intrusive sound level.” The L90 is the sound level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is often considered the “effective background level” or “residual noise level.”
 Maximum Sound Level (Lmax). The highest RMS sound level measured during the measurement period.
 Root Mean Square Sound Level (RMS). The square root of the average of the square of the sound pressure over the measurement period.
2143
 Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn or DNL). The energy-average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.
 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 5 dB added from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10 dB from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. NOTE: For general community/environmental noise, CNEL and Ldn values rarely differ by more than 1 dB (with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive – that is, higher than the Ldn value). As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are interchangeable and are treated as equivalent in this assessment.
 Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). The peak rate of speed at which soil particles move (e.g., inches per second) due to ground vibration.
 Sensitive Receptor. Noise- and vibration-sensitive receptors include land uses where quiet environments are necessary for enjoyment and public health and safety. Residences, schools, motels and hotels, libraries, religious institutions, hospitals, and nursing homes are examples.

Characteristics of Sound
When an object vibrates, it radiates part of its energy in the form of a pressure wave. Sound is that pressure wave transmitted through the air. Technically, airborne sound is a rapid fluctuation or oscillation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure that creates sound waves.

Sound can be described in terms of amplitude (loudness), frequency (pitch), or duration (time). Loudness or amplitude is measured in dB, frequency or pitch is measured in Hertz [Hz] or cycles per second, and duration or time variations is measured in seconds or minutes.

Amplitude
Unlike linear units such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale. Because of the physical characteristics of noise transmission and perception, the relative loudness of sound does not closely match the actual amounts of sound energy. Table 1 presents the subjective effect of changes in sound pressure levels. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Changes of 1 to 3 dB are detectable under quiet, controlled conditions, and changes of less than 1 dB are usually not discernible (even under ideal conditions). A 3 dB change in noise levels is considered the minimum change that is detectable with human hearing in outside environments. A change of 5 dB is readily discernible to most people in an exterior environment, and a 10 dB change is perceived as a doubling (or halving) of the sound.
2144
Table 1 Noise Perceptibility
Change in dB Noise Level
± 3 dB Barely perceptible increase
± 5 dB Readily perceptible increase
± 10 dB Twice or half as loud
± 20 dB Four times or one-quarter as loud
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013, September. Technical Noise Supplement (“TeNS”).

Frequency
The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies. Sound waves below 16 Hz are not heard at all, but are “felt” more as a vibration. Similarly, though people with extremely sensitive hearing can hear sounds as high as 20,000 Hz, most people cannot hear above 15,000 Hz. In all cases, hearing acuity falls off rapidly above about 10,000 Hz and below about 200 Hz.

When describing sound and its effect on a human population, A-weighted (dBA) sound levels are typically used to approximate the response of the human ear. The A-weighted noise level has been found to correlate well with people’s judgments of the “noisiness” of different sounds and has been used for many years as a measure of community and industrial noise. Although the A-weighted scale and the energy-equivalent metric are commonly used to quantify the range of human response to individual events or general community sound levels, the degree of annoyance or other response also depends on several other perceptibility factors, including:
 Ambient (background) sound level
 General nature of the existing conditions (e.g., quiet rural or busy urban)  Difference between the magnitude of the sound event level and the ambient condition  Duration of the sound event
 Number of event occurrences and their repetitiveness
 Time of day that the event occurs
Duration
Time variation in noise exposure is typically expressed in terms of a steady-state energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called Leq), or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period. For example, the L50 noise level represents the noise level that is exceeded 50 percent of the time; half the time the noise level exceeds this level and half the time the noise level is less than this level. This level is also representative of the level that is exceeded 30 minutes in an hour. Similarly, the L2, L8 and L25 values represent the noise levels that are exceeded 2, 8, and 25 percent of the time or 1, 5, and 15 minutes per hour, respectively. These “n” values are typically used to demonstrate compliance for stationary noise sources with many cities’ noise ordinances.

Other values typically noted during a noise survey are the Lmin and Lmax. These values represent the minimum and maximum root-mean-square noise levels obtained over the measurement period, respectively.

Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law and many local jurisdictions use an adjusted 24-hour noise descriptor called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn). The CNEL descriptor requires that an artificial increment (or “penalty”) of 5 dBA be added to the actual noise level for the hours from 7:00 PM to 10:00 2145
PM and 10 dBA for the hours from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. The Ldn descriptor uses the same methodology except that there is no artificial increment added to the hours between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Both descriptors give roughly the same 24-hour level, with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive (i.e., higher). The CNEL or Ldn metrics are commonly applied to the assessment of roadway and airport-related noise sources.

Sound Propagation
Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. This phenomenon is known as “spreading loss.” For a single-point source, sound levels decrease by approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source (conservatively neglecting ground attenuation effects, air absorption factors, and barrier shielding). For example, if a backhoe at 50 feet generates 84 dBA, at 100 feet the noise level would be 79 dBA, and at 200 feet it would be 73 dBA. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by on-site operations from stationary equipment or activity at a project site. If noise is produced by a line source, such as highway traffic, the sound decreases by 3 dB for each doubling of distance over a reflective (“hard site”) surface such as concrete or asphalt. Line source noise in a relatively flat environment with ground-level absorptive vegetation decreases by an additional 1.5 dB for each doubling of distance.

Psychological and Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA.

Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system.

Extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA results in permanent cell damage, which is the main driver for employee hearing protection regulations in the workplace. For community environments, the ambient or background noise problem is widespread, through generally worse in urban areas than in outlying, lessdeveloped areas. Elevated ambient noise levels can result in noise interference (e.g., speech interruption/masking, sleep disturbance, disturbance of concentration) and cause annoyance. Since most people do not routinely work with decibels or A-weighted sound levels, it is often difficult to appreciate what a given sound pressure level number means. To help relate noise level values to common experience, Table 2 shows typical noise levels from familiar sources.
2146
Table 2 Typical Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise Level
(dBA) Common Indoor Activities
Onset of physical discomfort 120+

110 Rock Band (near amplification system)
Jet Flyover at 1,000 feet
100
Gas Lawn Mower at three feet
90 Diesel Truck at 50 feet, at 50 mph Food Blender at 3 feet 80 Garbage Disposal at 3 feet
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
70 Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial Area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy Traffic at 300 feet 60
Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime 50 Dishwasher Next Room

Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Theater, Large Conference Room (background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime
30 Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) 20 Broadcast/Recording Studio
10 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 0 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing

Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013, September. Technical Noise Supplement (“TeNS”).

Vibration Fundamentals
Vibration is an oscillatory motion through a solid medium in which the motion’s amplitude can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Vibration is normally associated with activities stemming from operations of railroads or vibration-intensive stationary sources, but can also be associated with construction equipment such as jackhammers, pile drivers, and hydraulic hammers. As with noise, vibration can be described by both its amplitude and frequency. Vibration displacement is the distance that a point on a surface moves away from its original static position; velocity is the instantaneous speed that a point on a surface moves; and acceleration is the rate of change of the speed. Each of these descriptors can be used to correlate vibration to human response, building damage, and acceptable equipment vibration levels. During construction, the operation of construction equipment can cause groundborne vibration. During the operational phase of a project, receptors may be subject to levels of vibration that can cause annoyance due to noise generated from vibration of a structure or items within a structure.

Vibration amplitudes are usually described in terms of either the peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity. PPV is the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal and RMS is the 2147
square root of the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. PPV is more appropriate for evaluating potential building damage and RMS is typically more suitable for evaluating human response.

As with airborne sound, annoyance with vibrational energy is a subjective measure, depending on the level of activity and the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Persons accustomed to elevated ambient vibration levels, such as in an urban environment, may tolerate higher vibration levels. Table 3 displays the human response and the effects on buildings resulting from continuous vibration (in terms of various levels of PPV).

Table 3 Human Reaction to Typical Vibration Levels
Vibration Level,
PPV (in/sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.006–0.019 Threshold of perception, possibility of intrusion Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of any type

0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible Recommended upper level of vibration to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected

0.10 Level at which continuous vibration begins to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural” (i.e. not structural) damage to normal buildings

0.20 Vibrations annoying to people in buildings
Threshold at which there is a risk to “architectural”
damage to normal dwelling – houses with plastered
walls and ceilings

0.4–0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant by people
subjected to continuous vibrations and unacceptable
to some people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than normally expected
from traffic, but would cause “architectural” damage
and possibly minor structural damage
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020, April. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Prepared by ICF International. 2148
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 1/6
Wildomar Municipal Code
Up Previous Next Main Collapse Search Print No Frames
Title 9 PUBLIC PEACE AND WELFARE
Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION

9.48.010 Intent.

At certain levels, sound becomes noise and may jeopardize the health, safety or general welfare of the City of Wildomar residents and degrade their quality of life. Pursuant to its police power, the City Council declares that noise shall be regulated in the manner described in this chapter. This chapter is intended to establish City-wide standards regulating noise. This chapter is not intended to establish thresholds of significance for the purpose of any analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act and no such thresholds are established. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.010)

9.48.020 Exemptions.

Sound emanating from the following sources is exempt from the provisions of this chapter:

A. Facilities owned or operated by or for a governmental agency; B. Capital improvement projects of a governmental agency; C. The maintenance or repair of public properties;
D. Public safety personnel in the course of executing their official duties, including, but not limited to, sworn peace officers, emergency personnel and public utility personnel. This exemption includes, without limitation, sound emanating from all equipment used by such personnel, whether stationary or mobile; E. Public or private schools and school-sponsored activities; F. Agricultural operations on land designated “agriculture” in the City General Plan, or land zoned A-l (light agriculture), A-P (light agriculture with poultry), A-2 (heavy agriculture), A-D (agriculture-dairy) or C/V (citrus/vineyard), provided such operations are carried out in a manner consistent with accepted industry standards.

This exemption includes, without limitation, sound emanating from all equipment used during such operations, whether stationary or mobile;
G. Wind energy conversion systems (WECS), provided such systems comply with the WECS noise provisions of Title 17;
H. Private construction projects located one-quarter of a mile or more from an inhabited dwelling; I. Private construction projects located within one-quarter of a mile from an inhabited dwelling, provided that:

1. Construction does not occur between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September, and

2. Construction does not occur between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May;
J. Property maintenance, including, but not limited to, the operation of lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc., provided such maintenance occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.; K. Motor vehicles, other than off-highway vehicles. This exemption does not include sound emanating from motor vehicle sound systems;
L. Heating and air conditioning equipment;
M. Safety, warning and alarm devices, including, but not limited to, house and car alarms, and other warning devices that are designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; N. The discharge of firearms consistent with all state laws. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.020)

9.48.030 Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
2149
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 2/6
“Audio equipment” means a television, stereo, radio, tape player, compact disc player, mp3 player, iPod or other similar device.
“Decibel (dB)” means a unit for measuring the relative amplitude of a sound equal approximately to the smallest difference normally detectable by the human ear, the range of which includes approximately 130 decibels on a scale beginning with zero decibels for the faintest detectable sound. Decibels are measured with a sound level meter using different methodologies as defined below:

1. “A-weighting (dBA)” means the standard A-weighted frequency response of a sound level meter, which de-emphasizes low and high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear for moderate sounds.

2. “Maximum sound level (Lmax)” means the maximum sound level measured on a sound level meter. “Governmental agency” means the United States, the State of California, Riverside County, any city within Riverside County, any special district within Riverside County, the City of Wildomar or any combination of these agencies.
“Land use permit” means a discretionary permit issued by the City pursuant to Title 17. “Motor vehicle” means a vehicle that is self-propelled. “Motor vehicle sound system” means a stereo, radio, tape player, compact disc player, mp3 player, iPod or other similar device.
“Noise” means any loud, discordant or disagreeable sound. “Occupied property” means property upon which is located a residence, business or industrial or manufacturing use. “Off-highway vehicle” means a motor vehicle designed to travel over any terrain. “Public or private school” means an institution conducting academic instruction at the preschool, elementary school, junior high school, high school, or college level.
“Public property” means property owned by a governmental agency or held open to the public, including, but not limited to, parks, streets, sidewalks, and alleys.
“Sensitive receptor” means a land use that is identified as sensitive to noise in the noise element of the City General Plan, including, but not limited to, residences, schools, hospitals, churches, rest homes, cemeteries or public libraries.
“Sound-amplifying equipment” means a loudspeaker, microphone, megaphone or other similar device. “Sound level meter” means an instrument meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 or Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument that provides equivalent data. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC §

9.52.030)

9.48.040 General sound level standards.

No person shall create any sound, or allow the creation of any sound, on any property that causes the exterior sound level on any other occupied property to exceed the sound level standards set forth in Table 1.

TABLE 1
Sound Level Standards (Db Lmax)

GENERAL PLAN

FOUNDATION

COMPONENT

GENERAL PLAN

LAND USE

DESIGNATION

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE

DESIGNATION NAME

DENSITY

MAXIMUM DECIBEL LEVEL
7 am—10 pm 10 pm—7 am
Community Development EDR Estate Density Residential 2 AC 55 45 VLDR Very Low Density Residential 1 AC 55 45
LDR Low Density Residential 1/2 AC 55 45
MDR Medium Density Residential 2—5 55 45
2150
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 3/6
MHDR Medium High Density Residential 5—8 55 45
HDR High Density Residential 8—14 55 45
VHDR Very High Density Residential 14—20 55 45
H’TDR Highest Density Residential 20+ 55 45
CR Retail Commercial 65 55
CO Office Commercial 65 55
CT Tourist Commercial 65 55
CC Community Center 65 55
LI Light Industrial 75 55
HI Heavy Industrial 75 75
BP Business Park 65 45
PF Public Facility 65 45
SP Specific Plan-Residential 55 45
Specific Plan-Commercial 65 55
Specific Plan-Light Industrial 75 55
Specific Plan-Heavy Industrial 75 75
Rural Community EDR Estate Density Residential 2 AC 55 45 VLDR Very Low Density Residential 1 AC 55 45
LDR Low Density Residential 1/2 AC 55 45
Rural RR Rural Residential 5 AC 45 45
RM Rural Mountainous 10 AC 45 45
RD Rural Desert 10 AC 45 45
Agriculture AG Agriculture 10 AC 45 45
Open Space C Conservation 45 45
CH Conservation Habitat 45 45
REC Recreation 45 45
RUR Rural 20 AC 45 45
W Watershed 45 45
MR Mineral Resources 75 45
(Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.040)

9.48.050 Sound level measurement methodology.

Sound level measurements may be made anywhere within the boundaries of an occupied property. The actual location of a sound level measurement shall be at the discretion of the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.48.080 of this chapter. Sound level measurements shall be made with a sound level meter. Immediately before a measurement is made, the sound level meter shall be calibrated utilizing an acoustical calibrator meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute. Following a sound level measurement, the calibration of the sound level meter shall be re-verified.

Sound level meters and calibration equipment shall be certified annually. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.050)

9.48.060 Special sound sources standards.
2151
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 4/6
The general sound level standards set forth in Section 9.48.040 of this chapter apply to sound emanating from all sources, including the following special sound sources, and the person creating, or allowing the creation of, the sound is subject to the requirements of that section. The following special sound sources are also subject to the following additional standards, the failure to comply with which constitutes separate violations of this chapter:

A. Motor Vehicles.

1. Off-Highway Vehicles.
a. No person shall operate an off-highway vehicle unless it is equipped with a USDA-qualified spark arrester and a constantly operating and properly maintained muffler. A muffler is not considered constantly operating and properly maintained if it is equipped with a cutout, bypass or similar device. b. No person shall operate an off-highway vehicle unless the noise emitted by the vehicle is not more than 96 dBA if the vehicle was manufactured on or after January 1, 1986 or is not more than 101 dBA if the vehicle was manufactured before January 1, 1986. For purposes of this subsection, emitted noise shall be measured a distance of 20 inches from the vehicle tailpipe using test procedures established by the Society of Automotive Engineers under Standard J-1287.

2. Sound Systems. No person shall operate a motor vehicle sound system, whether affixed to the vehicle or not, between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., such that the sound system is audible to the human ear inside any inhabited dwelling. No person shall operate a motor vehicle sound system, whether affixed to the vehicle or not, at any other time such that the sound system is audible to the human ear at a distance greater than 100 feet from the vehicle.

B. Power Tools and Equipment. No person shall operate any power tools or equipment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. such that the power tools or equipment are audible to the human ear inside an inhabited dwelling other than a dwelling in which the power tools or equipment may be located. No person shall operate any power tools or equipment at any other time such that the power tools or equipment are audible to the human ear at a distance greater than 100 feet from the power tools or equipment.

C. Audio Equipment. No person shall operate any audio equipment, whether portable or not, between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. such that the equipment is audible to the human ear inside an inhabited dwelling other than a dwelling in which the equipment may be located. No person shall operate any audio equipment, whether portable or not, at any other time such that the equipment is audible to the human ear at a distance greater than 100 feet from the equipment.

D. Sound-Amplifying Equipment and Live Music. No person shall install, use or operate sound-amplifying equipment, or perform, or allow to be performed, live music unless such activities comply with the following requirements. To the extent that these requirements conflict with any conditions of approval attached to an underlying land use permit, these requirements shall control:

1. Sound-amplifying equipment or live music is prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.

2. Sound emanating from sound-amplifying equipment or live music at any other time shall not be audible to the human ear at a distance greater than 200 feet from the equipment or music. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC §

9.52.060)

9.48.070 Exceptions.

Exceptions may be requested from the standards set forth in Section 9.48.040 or 9.48.060 of this chapter and may be characterized as construction-related, single-event or continuous-events exceptions.

A. Application and Processing.

1. Construction-Related Exceptions. An application for a construction-related exception shall be made to and considered by the Director of Building and Safety on forms provided by the Building and Safety Department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required.

2. Single-Event Exceptions. An application for a single-event exception shall be made to and considered by the Planning Director on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required.

3. Continuous-Events Exceptions. An application for a continuous-events exception shall be made to the Planning Director on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate 2152
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 5/6
filing fee. Upon receipt of an application for a continuous-events exception, the Planning Director shall set the matter for public hearing before the Planning Commission, notice of which shall be given as provided in Title

17. Notwithstanding the above, an application for a continuous-events exception that is associated with an application for a land use permit shall be processed concurrently with the land use permit in the same manner that the land use permit is required to be processed.

B. Requirements for Approval. The appropriate decision-making body or officer shall not approve an exception application unless the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. In determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the appropriate decision-making body or officer shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If an exception application is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours.

C. Appeals. The Director of Building and Safety’s decision on an application for a construction-related exception is considered final. The Planning Director’s decision on an application for a single-event exception is considered final. After making a decision on an application for a continuous-events exception, the appropriate decision-making body or officer shall mail notice of the decision to the applicant. Within 10 calendar days after the mailing of such notice, the applicant or an interested person may appeal the decision to the City Council. Upon receipt of an appeal and payment of the appropriate appeal fee, the City Clerk shall set the matter for hearing not less than five days nor more than 30 days thereafter and shall give written notice of the hearing in the same manner as notice of the hearing was given by the appropriate hearing officer or body. The City Council shall render its decision within 30 days after the appeal hearing is closed.

D. Effect of a Pending Continuous-Events Exception Application. For a period of 180 days from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, no person creating any sound prohibited by this chapter shall be considered in violation of this chapter if the sound is related to a use that is operating pursuant to an approved land use permit, if an application for a continuous-events exception has been filed to sanction the sound and if a decision on the application is pending. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.070)

9.48.080 Enforcement.

The Chief of Police and Code Enforcement Department shall have the primary responsibility for enforcing this chapter; provided, however, the Chief of Police and Code Enforcement Department may be assisted by the Public Health Department. Violations shall be prosecuted as described in Section 9.48.100 of this chapter, but nothing in this chapter shall prevent the Chief of Police, Code Enforcement or the Department of Public Health from engaging in efforts to obtain voluntary compliance by means of warnings, notices, or educational programs. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.080)

9.48.090 Duty to cooperate.

No person shall refuse to cooperate with, or obstruct, the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.48.080 of this chapter when they are engaged in the process of enforcing the provisions of this chapter. This duty to cooperate may require a person to extinguish a sound source so that it can be determined whether sound emanating from the source violates the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.090)

9.48.100 Violations and penalties.

Any person who violates any provision of this chapter once or twice within a 180-day period shall be guilty of an infraction. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter more than twice within a 180-day period shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day a violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Penalties shall not exceed the following amounts:

A. For the first violation within a 180-day period, the minimum mandatory fine shall be $500.00.

B. For the second violation within a 180-day period, the minimum mandatory fine shall be $750.00. 2153
8/27/2020 Chapter 9.48 NOISE REGULATION
qcode.us/codes/wildomar/?view=desktop 6/6
C. For any further violations within a 180-day period, the minimum mandatory fine shall be $1,000.00 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or both. (Ord. 18 § 2, 2008, RCC § 9.52.100) View the mobile version.
2154
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 05/05/2024
Case Description: WILD‐0.19 Construciton
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐              ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐        ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐Residence to the East Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0 Equipment
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader No 40 85.0 150.0 0.0 Dozer No 40 81.7 150.0 0.0
Excavator No 40 80.7 150.0 0.0
Results
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader 75.5 71.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 72.1 68.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 71.2 67.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 75.5 74.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A **** Receptor #2 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐              ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐        ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐Residence to the West Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0 Equipment
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader No 40 85.0 250.0 0.0 Dozer No 40 81.7 250.0 0.0
Excavator No 40 80.7 250.0 0.0
Results
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 2155
Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader 71.0 67.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 67.7 63.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 66.7 62.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 71.0 69.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A **** Receptor #3 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐                       ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐        ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐Senior Apartments to the North Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0 Equipment
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader No 40 85.0 175.0 0.0 Dozer No 40 81.7 175.0 0.0
Excavator No 40 80.7 175.0 0.0
Results
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader 74.1 70.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 70.8 66.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 69.8 65.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 74.1 72.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A **** Receptor #4 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐               ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐        ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐Residence to the South Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0 Equipment
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader No 40 85.0 275.0 0.0 Dozer No 40 81.7 275.0 0.0
Excavator No 40 80.7 275.0 0.0
Results
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 2156
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐Grader 70.2 66.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 66.9 62.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 65.9 61.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 70.2 68.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2157
This page intentionally left blank.
2158
February 2025 | Response to Comments
State Clearinghouse No. 2024101272
20-ACRE PASSIVE PARK PROJECT (CIP 099)
City of Wildomar
Prepared for:

City of Wildomar
Matthew Bassi, Community Development Director
23873 Clinton Keith Road, Suite 110
Wildomar, California 92595
951.677.7751
Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Mark Teague, AICP, Managing Principal
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, CA 92707
714.966.9220
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
~ PLACEWORKS
2159
2160
20 - ACRE PASSIVE PARK PROJECT (CIP 099) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

CITY OF WILDOMAR
Table of Contents
February 2025 Page i
W
Section Page

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 DOCUMENT FORMAT ..................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES .................................... 1

2. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ......................................................................................................... 3

3. REVISIONS TO THE IS/MND........................................................................................................ 27

3.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 27

3.2 IS/MND REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS ................................................ 27

APPENDICES
Appendix A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
2161
20 - ACRE PASSIVE PARK PROJECT (CIP 099) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

CITY OF WILDOMAR
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
2162
February 2025 Page 1

1. Introduction

1.1 BACKGROUND
This document includes a compilation of the public comments received on the 20-Acre Passive Park Project Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (collectively, IS/MND or MND; State Clearinghouse No. 2024101272) and the City of Wildomar’s (City’s) responses to those comments.

Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a lead agency is not required to prepare formal responses to comments on an MND. However, CEQA requires the City to have adequate information on the record explaining why the comments do not affect the conclusion of the MND that there are no potentially significant environmental effects. In the spirit of public disclosure and engagement, the City, as the lead agency, has responded to all written comments submitted on the MND during the 30-day public review period, which began October 30, 2024, and ended November 28, 2024.

1.2 DOCUMENT FORMAT
Section 1, Introduction. This section describes CEQA requirements and the content of this document.

Section 2, Response to Comments. This section provides a list of agencies and persons commenting on the MND, copies of comment letters received during the public review period, and individual responses to written comments. To facilitate review of the responses, each comment letter has been reproduced and assigned a letter. Individual comments within each letter have been numbered, and the letter is followed by responses with references to the corresponding comment number.

Section 3. Revisions to the IS/MND. This section contains revisions to the IS/MND text and figures as a result of the comments received by agencies and interested persons as described in Section 2, and/or errors and omissions discovered subsequent to release of the IS/MND for public review.

Appendix A, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. This document lists all the mitigation measures required for implementation of the project, the phase in which the measures would be implemented, and the enforcement agency responsible for compliance. The monitoring program provides (1) a mechanism for giving the lead agency staff and decision makers feedback on the effectiveness of their actions; (2) a learning opportunity for improved mitigation measures on future projects; and (3) a means of identifying corrective actions, if necessary, before irreversible environmental damage occurs.

1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15204(b), outlines parameters for submitting comments on negative declarations, and reminds persons and public agencies that the focus of review and comment of MNDs should be on the proposed findings that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If the commenter 2163
20 - ACRE PASSIVE PARK PROJECT (CIP 099) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

CITY OF WILDOMAR

1. Introduction

Page 2 ends

Wildomar City CouncilJune 11, 2025

Wildomar City Council
June 11, 2025