Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC - GEOTECHNICAL INVEST PM 37393 PCL 1 THE COTTAGES
owl G3SORWorks GEOLOGY-GEOTECH•GROUNDWATER PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC /GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT—COTTAGES AT MISSION TRAIL APN NOS. 365-030-004 THRU 365-030-007, 365-030-16 THRU 365-030-023, AND 365-030-027 THRU 365-030-037 LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA i PREPARED FOR: I CIVIC PARTNERS 7777 CENTER AVENUE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 PREPARED BY: I G3SOILWORKS, INC. 350 FISCHER AVENUE COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626 I i AUGUST 3, 2017 PROJECT NO. 1-1110 I 350 Fischer Ave. Front Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com 1 Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page �I ' 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK............................................................................................................................. 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION......................................................................................................................... 1 4.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND UNDERSTANDING..................................................................2 5.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION................... .......3 6.0 GEOLOGY.........................................................................................................................................3 6.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING.................................................................................................3 6.2 LOCAL FAULTING..........................................................................................................................3 6.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS..........................................................................................................4 6.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS....................................................................................................4 7.0 SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION................................................................................................ 5 7.1 SURFACE RUPTURE AND STRONG GROUND MOTION..........................................................5 7.2 LIQUEFACTION............................................................................................................................... 5 7.3 EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LANDSLIDES.....................................................................................6 7.4 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE..................................................................................................................6 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................................6 j8.1 GENERAL.......................................................................................................................................... 6 8.2 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS..........................................................................................6 8.3 SITE GRADING................................................................................................................................. 7 8.3.1 Site Clearing and Preparation..................................................................7 8.3.2 Remedial Grading....................................................................................8 1 8.3.3 Excavation Procedures............................................................................8 8.3.4 Excavation Bottom Preparation...............................................................9 8.3.5 Fill Placement..........................................................................................9 8.3.6 Fill Materials ...........................................................................................9 8.3.7 Slope Construction .9 8.3.8 Testing and Observations......................................................................11 8.4 FOUNDATIONS.............................................................................................................................. 12 j8.4.1 General ..................................................................................................12 8.4.2 Post-Tensioned Slab/Footing Criteria.................................................12 8.4.3 Ancillary Foundations...........................................................................12 8.4.4 General Foundation Remarks................................................................13 8.4.5 Settlement..............................................................................................13 8.4.4 Seismic Design Considerations.............................................................14 8.4.5 Setbacks.................................................................................................14 8.4.6 Lateral Extension/ Slope Creep............................................................14 8.5 EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK.......................................................................................... 15 1 350 Fischer Ave. Front @ Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 m www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Paae 8.6 MOISTURE/WATER VAPOR RETARDER SYSTEM................................................................ 16 8.7 EXPANSIVE SOILS........................................................................................................................ 17 8.8 SOIL CORROSION AND CONCRETE DESIGN........................................................................... 17 8.9 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL...................................................................................................... 18 8.10 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT........................................................................................ 18 8.11 SITE DRAINAGE............................................................................................................................ 19 8.12 LANDSCAPE,IRRIGATION AND MAINTENANCE..................................................................20 8.13 PLAN REVIEW, OBSERVATIONS,AND TESTING...................................................................21 9.0 LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................................................21 LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES.......................................................................................................23 1 Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Boring Location Map Figure 3 Regional Geologic Map Figure 4 Local Geologic Map Conceptual site plan Appendix A Geotechnical Boring Logs Appendix B Laboratory Test Results Appendix C Seismic Design Parameters l ` 350 Fischer Ave. Front ® Costa Mesa, CA 92626 9 P: 714 668 5600 www.G3SoilWorks.com . l Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 1 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California 1.0 INTRODUCTION This document presents the results of the preliminary geologic and geotechnical investigation performed for a proposed residential housing development located in the city of Lake Elsinore, California. The purpose of this investigation is to provide geologic information, including regional and local geologic setting, seismicity and seismic hazards, and address geotechnical factors and criteria for use in the design and construction of the proposed development at the subject site. The results of the geologic / geotechnical investigation, including preliminary recommendations for grading and foundation design and construction of the proposed project, are presented herein. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK The scope of services for the Geologic/Geotechnical Engineering Investigation included the following: • Site reconnaissance, including layout of boring locations and coordination with Underground Service Alert; • Field subsurface exploration consisting of the drilling of two (2) borings to depths of 51.5 feet, and related soil sampling and logging by our geologist/engineer; • Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained in the field, including moisture / density of relatively undisturbed samples, direct shear, consolidation, maximum density /optimum moisture content, grain size, and sulfate; • Office and desktop review of geologic and geotechnical published and documented site conditions; • Geologic / geotechnical evaluation and analyses of the findings relative to the currently planned development, including geologic hazards assessment and seismic design criteria; and • Preparation of written report, presenting a summary of our field findings and laboratory test results, and preliminary recommendations for remedial site grading, discussions of geologic hazards, seismic design criteria, structure foundations, and preliminary asphalt pavement construction. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION Location The site is located west of the Interstate 15 and east of Lake Elsinore, on the westerly side of Mission Trail, northerly of the Olive street intersection (APN Nos.365-030-004 thru 365-030-007, 365-030-16 thru 365-030-023, and 365-030-027 thru 365-030-037). Review of published maps indicates that the elevations of the property range from approximately 1270 to 1255 from east to west, respectively. 350 Fischer Ave. Front . Costa Mesa, CA 92626 4 P: 714 668 5600 * www.G35oilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 2 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California The site is located roughly in the northeast portion of the northwest / southeast trending Elsinore Valley, which is bounded by the Santa Ana Mountains, approximately 10 miles northwest of the site, the Elsinore Mountains (part of the Santa Ana Mountains), approximately 4.5 miles southwest of the site, the Temescal Mountains, approximately 0.9 miles east of the site, Sedco Hills, approximately 0.5 miles east, and Temecula Valley, approximately 9 miles southeast of the site. The main body of Lake Elsinore lies approximately 2.6 miles west of the site, while San Jacinto River's entry into Lake Elsinore is located approximately 1.2 miles north- northwest of the project site. Canyon Lake is located approximately 2.9 miles to the north-northeast. As of July 19, 2017, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District website indicates Lake Elsinore's water level is Elevation 1,238.2 feet and Canyon Lake's water level is Elevation 1,377.6 feet. The site vicinity is shown on the attached Site Location Map, Figure 1. Site Conditions / Background The project site is a rectangular shaped, undeveloped, parcel of land encompassing approximately 19.5 acres. The site surface currently supports a growth of vegetation, including groves of trees. Remnant foundations from a former nursery center are present across a portion of the site. 4.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND UNDERSTANDING Based on the information provided, the proposed residential development will be of two- story construction and include 143 units, a recreation center, a park, and associated parking / drive areas. We understand that site grades will be raised in the area of planned residential construction to elevations above 1267 as required by the city of Lake Elsinore and the Army Corps of Engineers. Borrow material to facilitate raising grades will be sourced from the western portion of the property in the area designated for future 6.8-acre open space area. Final grades in this open space area are understood to be on the order 1240 feet, and will receive storm water runoff from the development. Based on the existing site grades, grade cuts and fill placements on the order of 10 feet are anticipated across the open space and residential pad areas, respectively. In order to accommodate the fill placements, it will be necessary to construct fill slopes along the northerly, southerly, and westerly limits of the residential portion of the development. Required grade cuts across the western portion of the site will result in cut slopes along the north, south, east, and west sides of the proposed open space area. The transition between the planned grade cuts and fill placements will create a westerly facing fill-over- cut slope on the order of 27 feet high between the open space and residential areas of the development. A preliminary geotechnical investigation /feasibility study was previously performed for a condominium development on this site by Neblett & Associates (NA) in October 2005 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 + www.G35oilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 3 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California (Reference No. 6). This study was based on a preliminary plan similar to the current conceptual site plan, with the exception that a park site is now designated on the westerly portion of site in lieu of the previously shown open space area. As part of this feasibility study, 5 exploratory borings were drilled across the site to maximum depths of 50t feet below existing site grades. The logs of their geotechnical borings are included as an attachment in Appendix A of this report. 5.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION On July 6, 2017, two (2) exploratory borings (G313-1 and G313-2) were each excavated to 51.5 feet below existing site grades using truck mounted 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger equipment. The approximate locations of these borings are shown on the attached Field Exploration Map, Figure 2. Subsurface materials were logged and soil samples were obtained at selected depths and transported to our office for laboratory testing. At completion of exploration, the borings were backfilled with soil cuttings. The logs of the exploratory borings are included in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples obtained during the field exploration in order to determine the engineering properties of the subsurface materials. The laboratory test results are included in Appendix B. 6.0 GEOLOGY 6.1 Regional Geologic Setting The Lake Elsinore area and the Elsinore Trough are located in the northwestern portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, which is characterized by northwest-southeast trending mountain ranges and intervening basins and valleys. This area is also situated adjacent to the northwest-trending Elsinore Fault Zone (EFZ), which separates the relatively stable Perris block on the northeast from the Elsinore Mountains (part of the Santa Ana Mountains) to the southwest. The EFZ is made up of several sub-parallel, right-lateral strike-slip faults that dominate the geomorphology, forming a trough separating low hills on the northeast side and the rugged and steep Elsinore Mountains on the southwest side. Lake Elsinore is controlled largely by a system of subfaults within the local area that have created a "sag pond" due to the extensional right stepping nature of the Wildomar Fault to the southwest relative to the Glen Ivy North Fault which runs northwesterly beginning from just southeast of Lake Elsinore towards Corona. The "sag pond" condition of the Elsinore valley creates a local low point in which water and sediments from the surrounding mountains, hills, and rivers generally move toward and deposit. 6.2 Local Faulting A review of published geologic fault mapping by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS) indicates the nearest mapped "active" faults are the Glen Ivy North Fault, which is shown crossing as near as 0.25 350 Fischer Ave. Front . Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 � www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 4 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California miles southwest from the subject site and the Wildomar Fault, shown 1.4 miles southwest from the subject site. Both of these faults are associated with the Elsinore Fault Zone. The Southern California Earthquake Center indicates that the Elsinore Fault Zone in the area of Lake Elsinore has had only one historic earthquake greater than M5.2: the 1910 Temescal Valley M6.0 event which produced no known surface rupture and little damage. 6.3 Subsurface Conditions The site is situated in the perimeter area of the Elsinore valley, close to the bounding mountains / hills of the valley. Valley perimeters generally represent transition zones for deposition and as such can be underlain by anastomosed, interfingered, and interbedded layers of a variety of depositional environments. Review of published geologic mapping by USGS indicates the project site is underlain by a transition between lacustrine deposits to Quaternary wash deposits (unconsolidated boulders to sandy alluvium of active and recently active washes). Subsurface exploration indicates the near surface soils at boring location G313-1 consist of fill material generally comprised of brown sandy silt, to depths of approximately 3.5 feet bgs. Review of historical imagery indicates structures had previously existed in the vicinity of boring G3B-1. These upper subsurface soils are generally underlain by predominantly silty fine to coarse grained sands and clayey sands depths approximately 3.5 to 30 feet bgs. From depths 30 feet to 50 feet the material is generally comprised of silty clay material. Subsurface exploration at the G313-2 boring location indicates the site near surface materials are generally comprised of silty sands and silty clays. Below a depth of 5 feet to 50 feet bgs, the material in generally comprised of silty clays with minor sandy zones, with the exception of a sand layer at a depth between approximately 27 to 45 feet bgs. Review of boring logs from previous study by NA also indicates that borrow materials generated from the park site area are likely to be comprised of expansive soils. 6.4 Groundwater Conditions At the time of our field exploration, groundwater was encountered at approximately 36 feet and 30 feet bgs. in borings G3B-1 and G3B-2, respectively, with these groundwater depths correlating to approximate Elevations ranging from approximately 1223 to 1233 t feet. Based on review of available boring logs by NA, groundwater was encountered at elevations ranging from approximately 1236 to 1242 feet during their field exploration in September 2005. 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 . P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 5 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Generally, depth to groundwater can be affected due to seasonal fluctuations in rainfall, irrigation, pumping, lithology, or other factors. Therefore, deviation from our findings may occur. 7.0 SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION 7.1 Surface Rupture and Strong Ground Motion Literature review, site mapping, and aerial photo analysis indicate that active faults do not appear to be present across the subject property. However, the site is proximate to the EFZ, which has sections that are mapped approximately 0.25 and 1.4 miles southwest (Glen Ivy North and Wildomar Faults, respectively) of the site. Although both faults are mapped as "active" on USGS and CGS fault activity maps, the Glen Ivy North Fault in this vicinity is not mapped as an Alquist-Priolo Fault on the CGS Special Studies Zones Map for the Elsinore Quadrangle. It is unlikely the subject site will experience fault related surface rupture, based on the relative locations of active faulting. However, strong ground motion as a result of activity within the EFZ, and other nearby fault zones, is anticipated to occur during the project life and represents the main seismic hazard. Seismic design parameters based on ASCE 7-10 (with March 2013 errata) is included in Appendix C. 7.2 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils lose strength during relatively severe earthquake ground motions. Liquefaction has potential for adversely affecting buildings and road structures. In general, saturated fine sands and silty sands tend to compact and decrease in volume during ground motion, and if drainage is impeded will result in an increase in pore water pressure. If the pore water pressure becomes equivalent to the overburden pressure, the effective stress becomes zero and, consequently, the cohesionless soil loses its strength and is considered to be in a liquefied state. Factors known to influence the potential for liquefaction include soil type and depth, grain-size, relative density, groundwater level, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of ground shaking. A CGS Seismic Hazard Evaluation Report / Map is currently unavailable for this area. However, the subject site is underlain by intervening layers of silty / clayey / sandy materials, potential shallow groundwater levels, and seismic ground accelerations resulting from faulting on regional fault systems are expected. Liquefaction analyses and assessment for the project site considered the SPT blow counts, laboratory testing, and soil profiles obtained in the site borings, and utilized computerized analyses based on the methodology presented by Seed and Idriss. Based 350 Fischer Ave. Front - Costa Mesa, CA 92626 4 P: 714 668 5600 - www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 6 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California on USGS Seismic Hazard data, a peak ground acceleration of 0.963g and a maximum earthquake magnitude of 7.0 were used in our analysis Based on the results of liquefaction analysis, potential dynamic settlement for the existing site soil conditions under a major seismic event could be on the order of 0.61 inches (below about 32 feet Boring G313-1) and 1.21 inches (below about 27 feet in Boring G313-2). These dynamic settlements are expected to occur over a large area and would generally result in areal subsidence. Liquefaction analysis is included in Appendix D. 7.3 Earthquake-Induced Landslides Review of published geologic mapping, topographic map analysis, and field exploration indicate that landslides do not likely exist on or adjacent to the subject site. The site is part of the Elsinore 7.5' Quadrangle, which does not have a published Seismic Hazard Zone map by the CGS. However, as the subject site is located in a valley with general lack of relief, the potential for earthquake-induced large-scale landsliding at this site is considered very low. 7.4 Tsunami and Seiche Topographic and regional maps indicate the subject site is approximately 25 miles inland from the coast at 1,264 feet above mean sea level (msl). The site is not included as part of the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning prepared by CGS. Based on the above, the risk of potential inundation due to tsunami should be considered nil. Seiche is defined as a standing wave oscillation effect generated in a closed or semi- closed body of water caused by wind, tidal current, and earthquake, (i.e., "sloshing"). Seiche potential is highest in large, deep, steep-sided reservoirs or water bodies (OFR 79-8). A review of topographic and satellite imagery indicates the nearest such water bodies are Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake. Based on the relative locations and elevations of these water bodies to the site, the potential for seiche effects to the site should be considered low. 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 General Based upon our field exploration, visual observations, laboratory testing, and review of the current development information provided, the following recommendations for site grading (engineered fill processing and placement, including overexcavation, bottom processing, and backfilling) and foundation design are presented in the following sections. 8.2 Geotechnical Considerations The major geotechnical factors that should be considered during project design include the following: 350 Fischer Ave. Front * Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 f www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 7 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California • Presence of existing undocumented fill soils extending to depths on the order of three feet below existing site grades. • Soil disturbance resulting from the removal of existing remnant foundation elements on a portion of the site. • In order to accommodate anticipated grade elevations, cut slopes, fill slopes, and fill-over-cut slope construction will be necessary. • The presence of near surface expansive soils as excavated in boring G313-2 that may exhibit medium to high expansion potential. • Borrow fill material generated from the designated "open space area" for use in achieving pad grades is anticipated to be expansive. • Settlement due to foundation and improvement loading. • Potential for post-construction slope movements (slope creep and lateral fill extension) and associated vertical and lateral movements to construction superjacent to the slope. • Earthquakes have occurred in Southern California and will, undoubtedly, occur in the future, and high ground accelerations during seismic shaking may be experienced at the site. Therefore, the proposed structures should be designed and constructed to the prevailing standards and seismic design requirements, as appropriate. The following present general guidelines and recommendations for earthwork / grading and preliminary foundation design. 8.3 Site Grading The following grading recommendations are intended to produce more uniform foundation and slab-on-grade support. The remedial grading recommendations presented herein should be considered preliminary and may be subject to change, subject to our review of final design structural load conditions and additional evaluation, as appropriate. 8.3.1 Site Clearing and Preparation a) Site preparation and grading should be made under the observation of the Project Geotechnical Consultant. b) Proper measures should be implemented during the performance of grading work to protect the work site, particularly excavated areas, from flooding, ponding and inundation due to poor or improper temporary surface drainage. During periods of impending inclement weather, temporary provisions should be made to adequately direct surface drainage, from all sources, away from and off the 350 Fischer Ave. Front . Costa Mesa, CA 92626 o P: 714 668 5600 - www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 8 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California work site and to provide adequate pumps and sumps to handle any flow into the excavations. c) Prior to the start of the required earthwork and grading, all vegetation, surface trash, debris, abandoned foundation / slabs, and other deleterious materials should be removed from areas of planned grading and wasted away from the site. Vegetation removal should include root-balls and attendant root systems. d) Any pipelines or conduits encountered within the zone of planned grading that are designated for abandonment should be removed from the construction area and ends cut and plugged according to the applicable Code requirements but not less than 10 feet outside the perimeter of the proposed construction area, or as property line considerations dictate. Non-reinforced concrete or clay pipes may be crushed in-place and incorporated in the fill. e) Alternately, deep hollow lines may be left in place, provided they are filled with concrete. No filled line should be permitted closer than 2 feet from the bottom of footings. Local ordinances relative to abandonment of underground utilities, if more restrictive, will supersede the above minimum requirements. 8.3.2 Remedial Grading The subsurface investigation indicated the presence of existing fill soils at the site to maximum depths on the order of 3.5 feet (as encountered in the exploratory borings). During site grading, this fill should be removed full depth within the limits of planned development and replaced with engineered compacted fill. • In order to provide more uniform support for foundations / slabs and pavement, it is recommended that exposed native soils be overexcavated at least 5 feet beneath existing or planned finish grades, whichever depth is greater, and be replaced with approved engineered compacted fill. Lateral extent of over- excavation should be to a distance of 5 feet beyond the structure limits and footing edges or limits of new fill placements, whichever depth is greater. • Any surface or subsurface obstructions, or questionable materials encountered during grading should be brought immediately to the attention of the Project Geotechnical Engineer. After approval of the over-excavations discussed above, and prior to placement of any compacted engineered fill materials, the exposed bottoms should be prepared in accordance with Section 8.3.4 of this report. 8.3.3 Excavation Procedures Temporary excavations in site soils 4 feet or deeper should be shored or sloped in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements. Special construction techniques, such as slot 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 4 P: 714 668 5600 - www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 9 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California cutting, may be utilized if excavations are greater than 4 feet vertical and site constraints preclude use of temporary slope cuts. Excavations located along property lines and adjacent to existing structures (i.e. buildings, walls, fences, etc.) should not be permitted within two (2)feet from the existing foundations. Temporary slopes, if utilized, should be no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal: vertical) gradient with maximum height of slope not exceeding 10 feet. A representative of this firm should be present on-site during excavations to verify acceptability of temporary slopes. Acceptability will be dependent upon the soil conditions encountered, construction procedures and schedule. 8.3.4 Excavation Bottom Preparation The acceptability of excavation bottoms should be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing approved fill soils. Approved excavation bottoms should be thoroughly moisture conditioned, as necessary, to 1-3 percentage points above optimum moisture content depending on the soil type exposed, scarified to a depth of about 8 inches and compacted to minimum 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM: D 1557). 8.3.5 Fill Placement Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding thickness that can be adequately and thoroughly processed and compacted by the equipment and methods utilized. These materials should be processed by blending and moisture conditioning to 1-3 percentage points above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum dry density assigned —to the satisfaction of the Project Geotechnical Consultant. All grading should be performed under the observation and testing of the Project Geotechnical Consultant. 8.3.6 Fill Materials Fill materials should consist of clean onsite or imported soils and should be free of vegetation, hazardous materials, construction debris, rocks greater than 6-inches maximum dimension, and any other organic or deleterious materials. Import soils, if required, should consist of predominantly granular sandy soils, exhibiting an expansion index less than 20, and should be approved by a representative of this firm, at the borrow site, at least 48 hours prior to importing. 8.3.7 Slope Construction In order to achieve the understood proposed grades, both perimeter and interior graded slopes will need to be constructed along the north, west and south sides of the project site. The north and south descending slopes below the residential area are anticipated to be fill slopes. The south, east, and north slopes above the park site are projected as cut slopes. The west facing slope between the park site and the residential development will 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 � www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 10 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California create a fill-over-cut slope condition. All of the slopes should be constructed at gradients no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). The fill-over-cut slope should be constructed as a stabilization fill slope, as recommended below: • A drained fill keyway should be constructed at the base of this slope, with minimum keyway width equal to at least one-half the slope height, or 12 feet, whichever width is greater. Minimum keyway embedment should be 2 feet below the toe of slope and 3 feet at the heel. • Temporary backcuts for stabilization fill construction may be made a gradients no steeper than 1:1 (H:V). Temporary backcut excavations for stabilization fill construction should be coordinated to minimize the exposure time of these unsupported excavations. Once started, these excavations and subsequent fill operations should be maintained to completion without intervening delays imposed by avoidable circumstances. In cases where five-day workweeks comprise a normal schedule, grading should be planned to avoid exposing a grade or near-grade excavation through a non-work weekend. Where improvements may be affected by temporary instability, either on/offsite, further restrictions such as slot cutting, extending work day-weekend schedules, and/or other requirements considered critical to serving specific circumstances may be imposed. Removal of unsuitable materials also may be affected by the above requirements. • The keyway drain should consist of 4-inch diameter Schedule 40 perforated PVC pipe, encased in 4 cubic feet per lineal foot of 3/4-inch gravel, and wrapped in an appropriate geo filter fabric of non-woven character (e.g., Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent). Filter fabric should be lapped and sealed per the manufacturer's requirements and / or geotechnical consultant recommendations. The drain should assume a minimum of 1% slope to an approved outlet pipe. • Outlet pipes should be provided every 100 feet and joined to perforated backdrain pipe with a minimum 2% gradient. The outlet pipes should consist of blank (non- perforated) 4-inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC pipe and be surveyed and protected from damage or plugging. A grated animal-proof cover should be provided at the outlet locations. • All drains are to be installed under the observation, documentation, and testing of the geotechnical engineer / engineering geologist representative. The locations of drains should be surveyed, particularly for outlets. As with all drain systems, the more critical a drain is the more redundancy and conservatism should be incorporated into the design. Drains should be covered and protected from damage during subsequent grading and construction operations. 350 Fischer Ave. Front � Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ® P: 714 668 5600 ® www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 11 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California • Fill should be properly benched into acceptable native soil or compacted fill as directed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Typical benching should include four (4)-foot verticals exposing approved, compacted fill or acceptable native soil acceptable to support the proposed fills. • Where possible, fill slopes should be constructed by overfilling a minimum of three (3) horizontal feet and then trimming back to expose the dense inner core of the slope surface. Compacted fill slopes should be back-rolled during construction at intervals not exceeding four (4) vertical feet. Care should be taken to construct the slope in a workmanlike manner so that it is positioned at its designed orientation and slope ratio. Achieving a uniform slope surface by subsequent thin wedge filling must be avoided. Any add-on correction to a fill slope should be done by overfilling the affected area in horizontal, compacted lifts which must be benched into the existing fill prism. The overfilled slope may then be trimmed to the design gradient. • The grading contractor must take proper care to avoid spillage of loose material down the face of the slopes and damage to areas below, which may be sensitive habitat, during grading and during drainage terrace and down-drain construction. Fine grading operations for benches and down-drains should not deposit loose trimmed soils on the finished slope surfaces. Loose soil materials will require removal. This also applies to slope trim backs. • Seeding and planting and establishment of landscaped slopes should proceed as rapidly as possible to achieve a well-established and deep-rooted vegetative cover requiring minimal watering. The type of vegetation and watering schedule should be established by a landscape architect familiar with hillside maintenance. 8.3.8 Testing and Observations Site preparation, grading, compaction, and backfill operations should be performed under the observation and testing of the Project Geotechnical Consultant. An adequate number of field tests should be performed to verify compliance with recommendations presented in this report and local ordinances. If it is determined during grading that site soils require over-excavation to greater depths for proper structural support, this additional work should be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the Project Geotechnical Consultant. Fill materials should be compacted to the minimum 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum density determined in accordance with ASTM: D 1557. 350 Fischer Ave. Front * Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 a www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 12 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California 8.4 Foundations 8.4.1 General Presented below are preliminary foundation criteria for design and construction for the proposed residential development. The following post-tension slab foundation criteria are based on the premise that the borrow fill material, comprised of sandy and clayey soils, when blended will exhibit a "medium" soil expansion potential. 8.4.2 Post-Tensioned Slab/Footing Criteria Presented below are preliminary geotechnical criteria for post-tensioned slab/footings. These parameters are based on medium soil expansion and the "Design of Post- Tensioned Slabs-On-Ground (Third Edition with 2008 Supplement) by the Post- Tensioning Slab Institute: Thornthwaite Moisture Index : -20 Constant Suction (pF) Wettest : 3.0 pF Driest : 4.5 pF Center Lift Condition Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em : 7.8 feet Differential Swell, ym : 0.47 inches Edge Lift Condition Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em : 4.0 feet Differential Swell, ym : 1.10 inches Slab Thickness : 6 inches (minimum) Slab Thickened Edge : 18 inches (minimum) The above foundation criteria are based on climate-controlled soil conditions and do not take into account non-climatic factors, such as irrigation, drainage, vegetation, etc. Foundation design should consider anticipated post-construction settlements, as appropriate. The post-tension slab should be underlain by a moisture / vapor retarder as recommended hereinafter in section 8.6 8.4.3 Ancillary Foundations The following preliminary geotechnical criteria may be used for design of ancillary (e.g. screen walls)foundations supported on shallow conventional footings. Allowable Bearing Pressure (1) = 1,500 psf Minimum Footing Depth (2) = 2 feet Minimum Footing Width = Per 2016 CBC 350 Fischer Ave. Front o Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 9 www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 13 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Passive Soil Pressure (3) = 200 psf/ft., subject to a maximum of 2,000 psf Friction Coefficient = 0.30 (ultimate) Minimum Footing Reinforcement = For continuous footings, min. four No. 5 bars, two at top and two at bottom. (1) Allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for short term loading due to wind or seismic forces. (2) Footing depth is below lowest adjacent soil grade. (3) Passive soil pressure value is for level soil conditions adjacent to footings. 8.4.4 General Foundation Remarks • Foundation details such as concrete strength, reinforcements, etc. should be established by the Project Structural Engineer considering the loading conditions, soil expansion potential, and potential differential settlements. The recommended reinforcements should be considered minimum requirements. More restrictive criteria based on structural design considerations for Code requirements shall govern. • Foundation excavations should be observed and approved by the Project Geotechnical Engineer prior to the placement of reinforcement or concrete. Forming of footing excavations may be required. Excavations should be free of slough and debris and thoroughly moisture conditioned prior to placing concrete. • Excavated material from footing and utility trenches should not be placed in slab-on-grade areas unless properly compacted and tested. • Footing depths should not be allowed to be adversely affected, such as through erosion, softening, digging, landscaping, etc. • Isolated column footings should be tied together by grade beams in at least two (2) orthogonal directions. • Exposed footing excavations and slab subgrade should be pre-soaked and/or maintained at a soil moisture content of 1-3 percentage points wet of optimum moisture content to a depth of at least 12 inches. 8.4.5 Settlement Some settlement should be expected both during and following construction, even when supported on engineered compacted fill, due to various factors including, but not limited to: • Sequence of foundation and slab loading during construction; 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 - P: 714 668 5600 A www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 14 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Variation in structural loads along foundation elements; • Variation in underlying soil types with different compressibility indices and subsurface soil profile, and associated primary and long-term secondary consolidation settlements; and Dynamic settlement potential It should also be recognized that given construction tolerances, concrete floor slabs will not be cast perfectly level, and it has been our experience that floors slab elevations may vary by as much as an inch or more. Total static settlements for foundations designed in accordance with the above recommendations and supporting planned residential development are expected to be less than 1-inch. Differential settlements under static load conditions are not expected to exceed about 1/2-inch. In addition to the above static settlements, there is some potential for dynamic settlement during a major seismic event. For design purposes, total and differential settlements under static plus seismic conditions should be taken as 1.5 inches and 1.0 inches in 30 feet, respectively. 8.4.4 Seismic Design Considerations The site, as is all of Southern California, is within a zone of seismic activity. Strong ground motion from an earthquake generated along active faults should therefore be anticipated at this site. The proposed residence should be designed and constructed to the prevailing standards regarding seismic design. Seismic design should be based on current and applicable CBC requirements, as appropriate. Seismic design parameters based on ASCE 7-10 (with March 2013 errata) are included in Appendix C. 8.4.5 Setbacks Structure Foundations Structure foundations should be deepened, as necessary to satisfy minimum foundation setback distances from descending slope face in accordance with the 2016 CBC and local jurisdictional requirements. Screen Walls/Ancillary Construction For screen walls located adjacent to descending slopes, wall footings should be deepened, as necessary, to provide minimum 10 feet horizontal setback distance between the bottom edge of footings and adjacent slope face. 8.4.6 Lateral Extension/Slope Creep Fill slopes and adjacent rear yard areas are expected to have some vertical and horizontal movement due to slope creep and lateral fill extension. Slope creep is a 350 Fischer Ave. Front + Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ® P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 15 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California process that occurs on slopes underlain by expansive soils exposed to long term repeated wetting and drying which causes the surficial soil to move downhill. Lateral fill extension is a long-term phenomenon which can occur when water from irrigation and rain slowly soaks deep into the soil and causes expansion of the fill slope. Lateral extension effects tend to be greater near the top of the slope. Refer to the slope stability section of this report for more information regarding LFE / slope creep. It should be noted that that above provided minimum criteria for screen walls, pools, and other ancillary construction will help mitigate, but not completely eliminate the potential for post-construction movement / distress due to lateral fill extension / slope creep. Additional recommendations can be provided at a later date, pending review of precise grading plans. 8.5 Exterior Concrete Flatwork Exterior concrete slabs should be properly designed for the construction and service loading conditions, and potential differential movements. The structural details, such as slab thickness, concrete strength, reinforcing criteria, joint spacing, etc. should be established by the Project Civil / Structural Engineer. The recommended minimum reinforcements for concrete slabs provided above are intended for preliminary design only. More restrictive criteria as dictated by structural design or regulatory requirements shall govern. From a geotechnical standpoint, the minimum criteria for slab-on grade are shown below: o Sidewalks, walkways and patio slabs should be 4 inches thick (minimum) and should be reinforced with No. 4 bars at 18 inches on center, each way at mid height. • Prior to concrete placement, the prepared soil sub-grade should be moisture conditioned to and maintained at about 1 to 3 percentage points wet of optimum moisture contents to a depth of 12 inches and exhibit at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM: D1557. • All reinforcement must be appropriately spaced and supported / maintained during the pouring /finishing work such that it remains in proper condition. • Unless specifically allowed for and approved as such by the project Civil Engineer, no water is to be added to the concrete mix after the truck leaves the plant. It should be cautioned that addition of water to the concrete mix will change the water-cement ratio of the plant design mix and can lead to undesirable shrinkage cracking, curling, etc. of concrete slabs during curing. • All concrete to be properly finished per American Concrete Institution / Portland Cement Association standards and moist cured (for preferably at least 7 days). If moist curing is not feasible, an appropriate curing compound / sealant should be applied in accordance with the timing and methodology specified by the curing compound manufacturer. 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 4 P: 714 668 5600 . www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 16 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California • Truck tickets to include mix design, time leaving plant, time of site arrival, and time onsite / location of pour to be documented and copies sent to the project engineer. • All poured concrete should be protected from loading and traffic for at least 7-days without written approval of the project engineer. 8.6 Moisture /Water Vapor Retarder System It should be recognized that, even with site surface and sub-drainage measures, there is potential for saturation of ground beneath concrete floor slabs due to water infiltration from irrigation, rain, and run-off or flow through the soil subgrade. The upward migration of moisture in vapor phase from soil subgrade through the slab-on-grade is inevitable. It is imperative that the Contractor properly install the recommended site drainage measures, utility trench backfill, and the moisture / water vapor retarder system in accordance with the project design requirements and specifications to mitigate potential moisture /water vapor transmission into the structures. In order to reduce the potential for moisture / water vapor migration up through the slab in moisture sensitive areas, and possibly affecting floor covering, wood cabinets and other objects, a moisture/vapor retarder is recommended under concrete slab-on-grade in these areas. The recommendations provided below are based on the guidelines of the American Concrete Institute. • The moisture / water vapor retarder should consist of high strength membrane and should meet or exceed the ASTM: E-1745-97 Class A material requirements for water vapor permeance, tensile strength, and puncture resistance. The vapor retarder should consist of "Stego Wrap 15-mil" (Stego Industries, LLC) or "Vapor Block" VB 15 (Americover, Inc.), or approved equal. The vapor retarder should be underlain by a capillary break comprised of minimum 4 inches thick pea gravel layer. The gravel layer should be placed and compacted on approved soil sub-grade. • The installation of the moisture / water vapor retarder system requires specialized knowledge and experience and should be accomplished with the technical assistance and supervision of retarder system manufacturer and/or supplier. The membrane should be placed on approved gravel layer and properly lapped and sealed. Membranes intersecting utility pipes, sewer lines, ducts or drains must be properly wrapped around the penetrations and sealed. All punctures and rips in the membrane should be repaired prior to placement of concrete, following manufacturer's recommendations. • The vapor retarder should be installed in general accordance with the procedures outlined in ASTM: E-1643, and in conformance with the installation procedures recommended by the manufacturer. • To minimize slab curling, a low shrinkage / low slump concrete (concrete mix 350 Fischer Ave. Front 4� Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 17 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California with a 4,500 psi compressive strength and water cement ratio of 0.45) should be used for the slab construction, as determined by the Project Structural Engineer. The mix design should be verified by the project Civil / Structural Engineer, and placement of concrete should be observed and certified by the Concrete Deputy Inspector. In addition, floor coverings (e.g., wood, tile, etc.) and other built-in features should be carefully selected with vapor transmission in mind, and include proper preparation and installation in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. It should be recognized that, even with site surface and sub-drainage measures, there is potential for saturation of ground beneath concrete floor slabs due to water infiltration from irrigation, rain, and run-off or flow through the soil subgrade. The upward migration of moisture in vapor phase from soil subgrade through the slab-on-grade is inevitable under normal living conditions as they exist within a closed environment (e.g., structure). It is imperative that the Contractor properly install the recommended site drainage measures, utility trench backfill, and the moisture / water vapor retarder system in accordance with the project design requirements and specifications to mitigate potential moisture / water vapor transmission into the structures. It should be emphasized that proper control of irrigation and landscape water adjacent to the structure and maintaining proper site drainage is very important to minimize problems caused by moisture and water vapor intrusion. 8.7 Expansive Soils The near surface site soils underlying the subject site consist of sands and silty sands; however, the material to be sourced from the borrow area consists of silty sands / clays, and these clays exhibit potential medium to high soil expansion potential. Additional testing should be performed during the rough grading phase of construction to substantiate the soil expansion potential of the as-graded materials. 8.8 Soil Corrosion and Concrete Design Based on the laboratory test results presented in Appendix B, sulfate exposure for concrete is considered not applicable. However, it has been our experience that post- construction factors such as the use of fertilizers in lawn / landscape areas, near surface soil wetting and drying cycles, and other changes with time can increase the concentrations of soluble sulfate and other derogatory salts and these conditions predispose them to being highly corrosive to both concrete and buried metals. Higher strength concrete with lower water / cement ratio will improve overall slab performance, durability, and water and corrosivity resistance. 350 Fischer Ave. Front + Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 18 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California In an abundance of caution and to account for potential future conditions, we recommend concrete in contact with soils be designed for a compressive strength of 4,500 psi and w:c = 0.45. Laboratory tests to evaluate the potential soil corrosivity to metallic installations were not performed. In the absence of such testing, the soils along with any transient waters flowing through them should be considered to be highly corrosive to metals in contact with them. Attention to minimizing galvanic / chemical corrosivity (i.e., protective coatings, dielectric couplings, eliminating mixing metal types in contact or in near vicinity to each other)where in contact with soil and soil moisture can minimize these effects. An experienced corrosion consultant should be retained and their recommendations incorporated into the design if special / critical corrosive issues exist or further corrosion potential study is warranted. 8.9 Utility Trench Backfill a) Bedding material should consist of sandy material exhibiting a Sand Equivalent (S.E.) value of 30 or greater and should comply with the requirements of the controlling governing jurisdiction. The on-site soils are not considered suitable for use as bedding material. b) The site soils are considered suitable for trench backfill, provided they are free of organic material and rocks over 4 inches in maximum dimension. c) Backfill of all exterior and interior trenches should be placed in thin lifts of appropriate thickness and mechanically compacted to achieve a relative compaction of not less than 90 percent throughout, based on ASTM: D1557. Care should be taken not to damage utility lines during compaction. d) Utility trenches should not be located within the influence of footings. This is defined as a zone located below the footing and a line sloping at an inclination of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) outward from the outside edge of footings. If utility lines are located within the zone of footings, the backfill should be compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction or slurry backfilled (minimum 1-1/2 sack cement-sand mix). e) Trenches greater than 4 feet in depth should be shored or sloped back as required by the local regulatory agency, the State of California Division of Industrial Safety Construction Safety Orders, and Federal OSHA requirements. 8.10 Asphaltic Concrete Pavement The following preliminary pavement sections are recommended for the access drive and parking areas within the subject property. These pavement sections were computed based on California Test Method 301 procedures and considers a traffic index 6 and was based on an assumed "R" value of 10 for site soils compacted as subgrade material. 350 Fischer Ave. Front e Costa Mesa, CA 92626 . P: 714 668 5600 s www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 19 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Further analysis and evaluation are necessary, if the design traffic index(s) or the subgrade "R"-value are different from those used to develop these pavement sections. Asphalt Pavement Sections (inches) Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base Total Section Parking / Drives 4 10 14 The pavement section is to be confirmed based on the laboratory "R"-value testing of the on-site and import soil materials placed near planned grades. Aggregate base should consist of crushed aggregate base (CAB) or crushed miscellaneous base (CMB) and should comply with the specifications in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction ("Green book"). The base material should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, based on laboratory maximum density (ASTM: D1557). The soil subgrade should be compacted to minimum 90 percent relative compaction and should exhibit a firm and unyielding condition. Final compaction and testing of pavement subgrade soils should be performed just prior to the placement of aggregate base. When considering phased pavement construction (i.e. initial base course section to be followed by a cap layer at the completion of construction), it should be noted that some repairs / replacement of pavement should be anticipated, particularly in areas of concentrated construction traffic and along junctions prone to water seepage to the underlying pavement subgrade soils (e.g., pavement edges adjacent to curb / gutter construction). 8.11 Site Drainage It should be noted that potential problems may develop when drainage is altered through construction of retaining walls, paved walkways, and patios. Conditions which will lead to ground saturation must be avoided: • All roof and surface drainage should be directed away from structures and their appurtenances to approved drainage facilities. Ponding of water should be avoided. For graded soil areas, a minimum gradient of 2 percent away from structures should be maintained. • The recommended drainage patterns should be established at the time of fine grading and maintained throughout the life of the structure or, if altered, should be replaced with a properly designed area drain system. 350 Fischer Ave. Front � Costa Mesa, CA 92626 s P: 714 668 5600 . www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 20 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California • Irrigation activities at the site should be monitored and controlled to prevent over- watering. Planter areas adjacent to structures should be avoided. If utilized, such planters should include measures to contain irrigation water and prevent moisture migration into walls and under foundations and slabs-on-grade. Site drainage should also be designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with appropriate City, County, State, and other jurisdictional requirements. In addition to appropriate berms, swales, and related surface drainage controls to direct surface flows off / away from slope faces, it is recommended that the slopes be protected by a combination of suitable geo netting and both seeded (i.e. hydromulched) and "point' potted landscaping. The plant palates should be selected by the landscaping architect for use in erosion control for the local environment. The seed plants should be fast sprouting, deep rooting and long — lived / self-reseeding. It is important that the vegetation be irrigated and nurtured to develop / establish quickly and interweave into the geo netting to form and erosion resistant matting. Hand in hand with the above is the implementation of a prudent and vigilant maintenance program that includes strong focus on vegetation control and rodent eradication. Rodents are incredibly damaging to slopes, and it must be recognized that rodents will continually migrate from place to place, especially from "natural' areas into landscaped zones — and must be rigorously controlled /eradicated 8.12 Landscape, Irrigation and Maintenance General guidelines for landscape, irrigation and maintenance are shown below: a) Landscape planting should consist of appropriate drought resistant vegetation as recommended by the Landscape Architect. b) The property owner is responsible for proper irrigation and for maintenance and repair of installed irrigation systems. Leaks should be repaired immediately. Sprinklers should be adjusted to provide maximum coverage with a minimum of water usage and overlap. Over-watering with consequent excessive runoff and ground saturation must be avoided. c) If automatic sprinkler systems are installed, their use must be adjusted to account for natural rainfall conditions. d) All drainage devices that have been installed must be maintained and cleaned. e) If rodent activity is present, the property owner must undertake a program for the elimination of burrowing animals. 350 Fischer Ave. Front ® Costa Mesa, CA 92626 < P: 714 668 5600 - www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 21 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California With regard to foundation and slab / pavement performance adjacent to landscape areas, a key to maximum performance is landscaping and irrigation which minimizes soil moisture fluctuation over time. Avoiding saturation and ponding is also an important consideration. Diligent attention to maintenance is critical to adequate long term performance. 8.13 Plan Review, Observations, and Testing There are numerous geotechnical and engineering geologic conditions, phenomena, and issues present that will have considerable influence on the design, construction, and long-term performance of the proposed development. Therefore, it is considered of high importance and prudence that this firm be retained throughout the design and construction process to provide appropriate geotechnical and geologic support, input, review, and documentation services to assist the design and construction team with accounting for these issues appropriately. It is critical that the geotechnical and engineering geologic recommendations be properly taken into account and understood by the parties involved, and the intent of the recommendations properly incorporated into the final design, construction, and long-term maintenance of the project. Major milestones /areas of applicability include: • Grading and Foundation Plan Review • Building Design • Grading and Construction • Subsurface/ Underground Utilities Installation It is the responsibility of the owner / developer to ensure the findings of our studies and intents of our recommendations are forwarded to the appropriate consultants and contractors of the project - and that they are incorporated into the final plans and construction. 9.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Civic Partners and their design consultants relative to the design and construction of the proposed project. This report is not intended for other parties, and it may not contain sufficient information for other purposes. This report and the recommendations confirmed herein are made with the understanding that G3SoilWorks will be appropriately retained to assist with the design and construction team in proper interpretation, incorporation, and implementation of the intent of our report recommendations. Should a different firm be retained to perform the subsequent phases of design and construction, this report will be considered null and void. 350 Fischer Ave. Front � Costa Mesa, CA 92626 s P: 714 668 5600 P www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Page 22 of 22 Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California The Owner or his representative should make sure that the information and preliminary recommendations presented in this report are brought to the attention of the Project Architect and Project Engineer and incorporated into the project plans. This office should be provided with final grading and foundation plans for review to enable us to confirm the preliminary recommendations and update the report as necessary. The findings contained in this report are based upon our evaluation and interpretation of the information obtained from limited borings and the results of the laboratory testing and engineering analysis. The opinions and recommendations provided were based on the assumption at the geotechnical conditions, which exist across the site, are similar to those observed in the test excavations. The conditions and characteristics of the sub- surface materials at locations and depth other than those excavated and observed may be different and no representations are made as to their quality and engineering properties. Should any conditions encountered during construction differ from those described herein, this office should be contacted immediately for evaluation of the actual conditions and for appropriate recommendations prior to continuation of work. The findings and recommendations presented herein were developed in accordance with currently accepted professional engineering principles and practice in the field of geologic and geotechnical engineering, and reflect our best professional judgment. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, G3SoilWorks, Inc. QaoFESsroy� �'� G 85642 W By. - - .;V6 �� By: Dani 1"J. M ikawa, \cc/ Adam C. Rich, RE srarF civ«Fo�`�`P RGE 2726, Reg. Exp es 1 Q11, RCE 85642, Reg, Expi 350 Fischer Ave. Front F Costa Mesa, CA 92626 s P: 714 668 5600 www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES 1. California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Studies Zones, Elsinore Quadrangle, California, scale 1:24,000, 7.5-Minute Series, 1980 2. Morton, D.M., and Weber, F.H., Preliminary Geologic Map of the Elsinore 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside County, California, US Geological Survey, Open File Report OF-2003-281, dated 2003. 3. Morton, D.M., and Miller, F.K., Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangles, California, US Geological Survey, Open File Report OF-2006-1217, dated 2006. 4. Rockwell, T.K., McElwain, R.S., Millman, D.E., Lamar, D.L., Recurrent Late Holocene Faulting on the Glen Ivy North Strand of the Elsinore Fault at Glen Ivy Marsh, dated 1986 5. KTGY Group Inc., Conceptual Site Plan — The Cottages at Mission Trail, Lake Elsinore, California, dated April 25, 2017. 6. Neblett and Associates, Inc., Summery of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation/Feasibility Study, 20t Acre Parcel, Lake Elsinore, California, dated October 12, 2005. 350 Fischer Ave. Front . Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 4 www.G3SoilWorks.com ,I o P J�J 1 I 1 q OP,� �f CFNA t f l =- z l COS R pR @ \ a\vu LAKE EL,SIN,O .RE` ' . - • L i �'''�lgKfSNQRE-Dp J — i / I 1 Y 99 °o �y. r80o 5� !•� r 9!, ' J'r Will r r<'; Skylark — 1 f Field yi II 0 200 loan USGS "Lake`clslnore, CA" Quadrangle e�° Fysf 1 oft 500 2- o-ft ?S Minute Series (Topographic) 2012 -_. 77 Site Location Map Project No.1-1110 Aug. 350FischerAve.Front G3o Works Cost os Phone:(714)668 5600 ta Mesa,CA 92626 The Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Fig. 1 www,G35ollWorks.com '• '. Approximate Project Boundary J Y B 5 i B-4 B-3 4 �• ,. ` • 1+ e . . �,. ,t r 1 �►� i■•• j: �11. yV Im .� 016 rAk L �. t Approximate location of boring by Neblett and Associates 30 150 - -Oft 75 300 ft Approximate location of boring by G35oilWorks, Inc. Boring Location Map Project No.1-1110 Aug. 2017 350Fischer Ave.Front Costa Mesa,CA 92626 3 C il orkS Phone:(714)668 5600 The Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California I Fig. 2 www.G3Soi1Workscom QY� Ka i \ G11 QI-Very young lacustrine deposits(late Holocene)—Silt, Kwi K ._ eE sand,and gravel associated with sag ponds along San Andreas t Fault strands Qyfa-Youngalluvial-fan deposits(Holocene and late Pleistocene)— I13� Unconsolidated to moderately consolidated silt,sand,pebbly Qy% � r cobbly sand,and bouldery alluvial-fan deposits 1 �?U Kg" Qyft-Young alluvial-fan deposits,Unit 1 (early Holocene and late "':•.r '* j. Pleistocene)—Slightly to moderately consolidated silt,sand, °tiros �KO and coarse-grained sand to bouldery alluvial-fan C?of9 Qofg-Old alluvial-fan deposits(late to middle Pleistocene)— Moderately-to well-consolidated silt,sand,and gravel. Qyva-Youngalluvial-valley deposits(Holocene and late Pleistocene)—Fluvial deposits along valley floors + n Trmp-Phyllite—Fissle black phyllite Trmq-Quartz-rich rocks—Quartzite and quartz-rich metasandstone Kgd-Granodiorite,undifferentiated(Cretaceous)—Biotite and hornblende-biotite granodiorite,undifferentiated QVA- 7 Arno Khg-Heterogeneous granitic rocks(Cretaceous)—A wide variety of Khg heterogeneous granitic rocks gyve V ~, i v V�U Kpvg-Monzogranite to granodiorite—Pale gray,massive, Ll \ f1 medium-grained hypidiomorphic-granular biotite ♦. `� `. `. ? . ° monzogranite -A AMP Oyva ``� L� QY9� i. zr ��. � f` `♦ �,` �.: -�_>Az �"&�ca:`s��' ova 00 "MOW . l Jim. SITE LOCATION OTws 11 Owl' L+l 1 QPS f v ` \ LmQT u ��. - ( � � ��` . _ .,may `•. +- _ aF. �• Kgb ` �• _ . '.�'. ova t.-,rii OTws OTW9 ♦.:1 Nlumelu , (thni0,15 <rnl Tinu, Kgd opt Regional Geology Map Project No.1-1110 Aug. 2017 350 Fischer Ave.Front Costa Mesa,CA 92626 -� ®1p Phone:(714)668 S600 _1 The Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Fig. 3 www.G3SoilWorks.com i -- F..,��)f Jai% � •� '�- r��,'�;��t; �'�_ � ` {� -� of 4 Kh -- 7 Q: ai! • a IN, k of a a Q�a" QI ��',yam: ` -_ � � �� �' l � ,.. '�'• '-� . /' ® ` •:. Q tti �t1 der 16 cy A. 2.1 QI SITE LOCATION ` "a �� •+` `` ?�� \ ��8 � •:' �? as Skylark py,t S Airport dmin4im of faar. Catoasa prcdominutsly of gavd, sand, r'• hunk drulaVa and pntiimil pub td Gs conrsin highot oomc-gruial d wdimmi than di &parts. W-U rTan clyft Youtq{ u11ra.LtFtan drpaaJka Untt I (II hlueemr} llocomoll+tal(I fan Je O aril silt;Qk1 part of 00, In qrr 41111 uo 200 1000 trtkro ICY& ° a i���• CAI 0 ft 500 2000 ft am I 1260 Exerpted from Preliminary Geological Map of The Elsinore 7.5'Quadrangle,Riverside County,California,1998 t l Local Geology Map Project No.l-1110 Aug. G 3j. , :� Work Phone:(714)668 5600 350FischerAve.Front � Costa Mesa,CA 92626 } Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Fig. 4 www.G3SoilWorks.com o 99 F U W g o 0 o rn z o Q>� c o00 ¢ OZ Um �LU� �1 ul > U M M M Q Y O m W O M w Z M m 2 2 d K N 0 w>- OdN .0, zN Q aJ aU� YyyEO atD l� N K W>ZN W Z w w O �[m Z Z 00o p7 Xd'p mK W�.m O W OZjo o0o U W mZLU m W W LF w]w�W m Q Q O K Fl W h 9 u1 9 O m W� NNnno ^'R YSE: �m m mmM c7Fa�a O,Oza �Lu U�N�a • l� N ♦ y �• - n a - ^`vH mm rn Z o W �� w O " }�^ �Uc i E U w m N K w W ti A w5$ nnwn rvn E Q Q U"' �Q�o>�v -a 'ov (L U o vvi wad>O W Om + E� m n'y�,� z �OQQ in U>J W oZ Z d` 1 S� ti OK UW KW O ��a�X=aln pa7Ym� ac s E sP wm UFOmwW wzULCO U' � w>v� E dyCCy rr■■ !¢f� fI•al� Q f^ '� sr* -` �$ U): W D�o n� ¢U�~nOMY° rLrn �� tlVQ6 2 ,bY¢LLYI- d60G F N g eY h NYdaR d F U) JOB O J M J a f T az wv)wdwa 3w�oa a, Y Q Z m s KlSSlot TRAM I 06. W a Ea 3 c A H Lon 1 I Lu o IV - I DN, W a w to H 3 E 3 E z 3 E 3 E U - A A } w Iw a I I I GC I 1 a Z I � � II b � N N N II N W Q C.7 W t W > zam. 50 a U OMW c S� > a Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California ' APPENDIX A I FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM 1 r J -� 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM On July 6, 2017 two exploratory borings (G3B-1 and G31B-2) were each excavated to 51.5 feet below the ground surface utilizing truck mounted 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger excavating equipment. Representative bulk samples and relatively undisturbed samples retained within 2.42-inch I.D. brass rings were obtained of the subsurface materials present onsite. These samples were transported to the laboratory for classification and testing. Upon completion of field exploration, these borings were backfilled with excavated soils. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 3. Logs of the exploratory borings are attached to this appendix. 350 Fischer Ave. Front + Costa Mesa, CA 92626 * P: 714 668 5600 $ www.G3SoilWorks.com GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 1-1110-A PROJECT NAME Cottages On Mission Trail DATE STARTED 7/6/17 GROUND ELEV.(FT) BORING DESIG. G3B 1 DATE FINISHED 7/6/17 GW DEPTH(FT) 35.8 LOGGED BY DGS DRILLER Martini DRIVE WT 140 NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem DROP 30" r- W_ L\ J H J �� �- L W W 0� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION �Z z u~, W 2� ° 0>- 00 00 0 W co m gU BULK -Sivi' Artificial Fill(Af @0': Silty fine to medium SAND,orange brown, 1/2-2"gravels. R 27 SM rootlets,damp. - @Z5:Silty fine to coarse SAND, brown,carbonate deposits, 5.5 1260 s right moist,medium dense. �- Quaternary Alluvium(Qal) 5 BAG 11 SM - @5' Silty fine to coarse SAND, reddish brown,sub-angular grains, 8.0 moist, medium dense. R 33 SM @7 5': Silty fine to coarse SAND, reddish brown, micaceous, 4.6 1361 sub-angular grains,slightly moist,dense. 10- BAG 28 SM @10': Silty fine to coarse SAND,reddish brown,trace mica, 5.5 sub-angular grains,slightly moist,medium dense. - R 60 SM @12.5': Silty fine to coarse SAND,orange brown, sub-angular 3 3 1202 grains, 1/4-1/2"gravels,damp,very dense. 15- BAG 35 SP @15': Fine to coarse SAND,orange red,trace silt,sub-angular 3.0 grains,trace mica, damp,dense. R 73 SP @17.6: Fine to coarse SAND w/gravels,orange red,trace silt, 2.2 126.3 sub-angular grains,damp,very dense. 20- BAG 42 SM @20': Silty fine to coarse SAND,red brown,sub-rounded grains, 9.8 trace mica, moist,dense. R 88 SC @22 5': Clayey fine to coarse SAND,olive brown, 114"gravels, 9.3 1371 sub-angular grains, micaceous, moist,very dense. 25- BAG 30 SC @25':Clayey fine to coarse SAND,olive brown, 1/4"gravels, 7.3 sub-angular grains, micaceous,iron oxidation stains, moist,very dense. R 69 SC @27.5':Clayey fine to coarse SAND, red olive brown, sub-rounded 9.8 130.6 grains,micaceous, moist, very dense 30 BAG 6 CL @30':Silty CLAY,olive brown, iron oxidation stains,micaceous, 23.5 moist,firm R 28 5M/CL @32.5': Silty fine to medium SAND,olive brown, micaceous, trace 18.5 113.2 clay, 1/4"gravels, iron oxidation stains, sample transitions to sandy CLAY,olive brown, micaceous, iron oxidation stains, 1/4"gravels, 35 BAG 7 CL very moist,dense. jr @35': Silty CLAY,olive brown,charcoal deposits, iron oxidation 28.4 stains,micaceous, moist,firm. R 10 CL @37.5':Silty CLAY,olive brown, iron stains,micaceous,very moist, 33.3 894 stiff. SAMPLE TYPES: -V Water Seepage R RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE Groundwater i Wo DS Direct Shear S SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS-Grain Size Analysis LW BULK SAMPLE El-Expansion Index CONS-Consolidation PN 1-1110-A REPORT DATE 8/3/201 7 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 1-1110-A PROJECT NAME Cottages On Mission Trail DATE STARTED 7/6/17 GROUND ELEV(FT) BORING DESIG G36-1 DATE FINISHED 7/6/17 GW DEPTH(FT) 35.8 LOGGED BY UGS DRILLER Martini DRIVE WT 140 NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem DROP 30" J LL1^ w° as 3 �2 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION LDZ Z =U) W a� ° O� oO o0 0~ U m 20 @40': Silty CLAY,olive brown,iron stains,micaceous,very moist, 30.5 stiff. R 21 CL @42.5':Silty clay,olive brown,micaceous,trace fnie sand, 1/4" 23 8 105.7 gravels,iron oxidation stains,moist,very stiff. 45- BAG 4 CL @45':Silty CLAY,olive brown,trace fine sand, micaceous, iron 302 oxidation stains,very moist,firm. R 16 CL @47.5': Silty CLAY,gray olive brown, carbonate deposits, 285 956 micaceous,moist,very stiff. 50- BAG 10 CL @50':Silty CLAY,gray olive brown, micaceous,fine to medium 23.0 sand bleb,iron oxidations stains.moist,stiff. TD=51.5' Groundwater encountered at 35.75'. Boring backfilled with cuttings on 7/6/2017. SAMPLE TYPES: s Water Seepage R RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE 1 Groundwater DS-Direct Shear i G 3 S d I 1 WO r k S S SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS-Grain Size Analysis ®BULK SAMPLE El-Expansion Index CONS-Consolidation PN: 1-1110-A REPORT DATE 8/3/2017 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 1-1110-A PROJECT NAME Cottages On Mission Trail DATE STARTED 7/6/17 GROUND ELEV.(FT) BORING DESIG Q513-2 DATE FINISHED 7/6/17 GW DEPTH(FT) 30A LOGGED BY DGS DRILLER Martini DRIVE WT 140 NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem DROP 30" \ J W^ H am-' W 'O �af� of(n w_ as 0g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION COZ Z =U) O v W U� m 0� �° o0 0 BULK _SM_ Quaternary Alluvium(Qal) @0' Silty fine to coarse SAND,gray brown, 1/4-2"gravels, slightly damp. BAG 8 CL @2.5'Silty CLAY,olive gray,carbonate deposits,trace fine sand, 145 slightly moist,firm. 5- R 36 SM @5': Silty fine to coarse SAND,olive brown, sub-rounded grains, 27 119.3 damp,dense. BAG 66 SM @7 5'.Silly fine to coarse SAND,reddish brown,iron oxidation TO stains,sub-rounded grains,slightly moist,very dense. 10- R 24 CL @10':Silty CLAY, brown,trace mica, iron stains,slightly moist,very 164 1084 stiff. BAG 4 CL @12.5' Silty CLAY, olive brown,carbonate deposits.very moist, 399 soft. 15- R 11 CL @15' Silty CLAY.olive brown, large carbonate deposit,very moist, 302 81 3 stiff. BAG 15 CL @17.5':Silty CLAY. olive gray, large carbonate deposit, slightly 12.7 moist,stiff. 20 R 26 CLlML @20':Silty CLAY, olive brown,trace mica,carbonate deposits, 9 5 118.5 transitions to fine to medium sandy SILT,olive brown, iron stains, trace mica, slightly moist,very stiff. BAG 35 CL @22 5':Silty CLAY,olive brown,micaceous, trace mica, small 116 carbonate deposits,slightly moist, very stiff. 25 R 26 MIL @25':Clayey SILT,olive brown, micaceous,charcoal deposits, 109 1087 trace fine sand, slightly moist,very stiff. BAG 18 SM @275:Silty fine to medium SAND,olive gray,sub-rounded grains, 4.8 micaceous,slightly moist, medium dense. 30- R 43 SM IF @30': Silty fine to coarse SAND,olive gray,sub-rounded grains, 182 106.1 micaceous,wet,dense. BAG 19 SM @32.5': Silty fine to medium SAND,gray,sub-rounded grains, 15.7 1/4-1/2"gravels, ricaceous,wet,medium dense. 35- R 26 M/ML @35': Silty fine to medium SAND,gray brown, sub-rounded grains. 13.3 118.1 transitions to sandy SILT,olive brown, micaceous,charcoal deposits,clay blebs,wet, medium dense BAG 36 SM @375: Silty fine to medium sand,olive brown, micaceous, 259 sub-rounded to rounded grains,wet,dense. SAMPLE TYPES: i Water Seepage R RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE - Groundwater 1 , IDS-Direct Shear i `/1 J S SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS-Grain Size Analysis ®BULK SAMPLE El-Expansion Index CONS-Consolidation PN 1-1110-A REPORT DATE-8/3/2017 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 1-1110-A PROJECT NAME Cottages On Mission Trail DATE STARTED 7/6/17 GROUND ELEV.(FT) BORING DESIG. G313-2 DATE FINISHED 7/6/17 GW DEPTH(FT) 304 LOGGED BY DGS DRILLER Martini DRIVE WT 140 NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem DROP 30" LL J W— F=-^r J s (n �o �� U1 a W w 0 0 =U) � GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION U)Z Z 0 W 2� ° 05- 00 00 0 W rn m 20 NotSM @40': Silt fine to medium SAND,olive brown,micaceous, 21.5 102.3 Recorded sub-roun ed to rounded grainsk micaceous,silt blebs,trace clay, wet. BAG 19 SM @42.5' Silty fine to medium SAND,olive brown,sub-rounded 221 grains,micaceous silt blebs,wet, medium dense. 45- R 20 ISM/CL @45': Silty fine to medium SAND, olive brown,sub-rounded to 35.3 839 rounded grains, micaceous,transitions to silty CLAY,gray green, micaceous,oraganic odor,wet, medium dense. BAG 15 CL @47.5': Silty CLAY,green gray, micaceous,organic odor. moist. 28.0 stiff. 50- R 49 Cl @50': Sandy SILT w/clay,green gray, micaceous, moist, hard. 259 992 TD=51.5' Groundwater encountered at 30.4'. Boring backfilled with cuttings on 7/6/2017. I J J SAMPLE TYPES: Water Seepage R RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE Groundwater DS-Direct Shear i G 3 S [Works ', S SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS-Grain Size Analysis _ 1 ®BULK SAMPLE El-Expansion Index } CONS-Consolidation PN:1-1110-A REPORT DATE:8/3/2017 Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Logs of Borings by Others 3S0 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 S600 e www.G3SoilWorks.com GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 1 PROJECT NO. 545 000 06 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 9/9/05 GROUND ELEV.(FT) 1251 BORING DESIG, 8-1 DATE FINISHED 919105 GW DEPTH(FT) LOGGED BY RD DRILLER Cascade DRIVE WT, 140I6s NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG ._ Hollowstem DROP 30" � w-•. m �a N 2 �o ?� o GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION u,Z NZ ��a r a w �� o ° Xw g~ o � � �- rn q o m J Alluvium(gall: R 22/30 ML Clayey Silt,olive gray,dry to slightly moist, very stiff. 4.8 5 1246 SPT 18/250 Clayey Silt, pale olive to gray,dry to slightly moist, very stiff. 12.2 ..._. R 19/19/2 ML/CL Clayey Silt to Silty Clay, light olive brown and buff, moist,very 25.4 88.7 stiff. 10 1241 SPT 15/20/2 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay,light olive brown and buff,slightly 33,2 moist to moist, very stiff. I R 15/20 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay, light olive brown and buff,slightly 47A 64.3 moist to moist. 15 1236 / .......I..................... SPT 15115/if CL @ 15 Feet,Groundwater encountered, 58.9 Silty Clay,pale yellow to olive,moist,very stiff,local lean clays. ..... .. .. ..... ... ....... ...... ........... . .,.,...........,......... R 14117 CL Silly Clay to Sandy Clay,olive brown,very _ moist, stiff, local 17.2 111.1 white lean clays,occasional carbonates. 20 1231 - ............ . ..................................... SPT 11/14/li CL Silty Clay,olive brown,wet,very stiff,occasional carbonates. 20.1 Saturated. 25 1226- ................................ ....... . ..... R 17/20 SM Silty Sand,dark ... ...olive brown,wet,medium dense, 19.8 105.2 Total Depth 26.5 Feet. Water encountered at 15 Feet. SAMPLE TYPES: Water Seepage NEBI_ETT $�ASSOCIATES, INC. ®RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE Groundwater DS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 ®SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS-Grain Size Analysis HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714-840.8286 ®BULK SAMPLE ©TUBE SAMPLE EI•Expansion Index CONS•Consolidation PLATE A-1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 1 PROJECT NO, 545 000 05 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 9/9105 GROUND ELEV.(Fjt 1253 BORING DESIG. B-2 DATE FINISHED 919/05 GW DEPTH(FT) LOGGED BY RD DRILLER Cascade DRIVE WT. ®140 Ibs NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG _ Holl9wstgr DROP 30" w F 0 a Z 2 w a p GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o v W D Alluvium Mail: 1 SPT 8110/11 ML Clayey Silt,light olive brown,dry to slightly moist, stiff, 10.5 i R 19125 SM Silty Sand,pale olive brown, slightly moist, medium dense, 3.1 115.0 fine to medium grained,occasional pebble. SPT 14/1712 GP1ML Silty Sand with Gravel to Silty Clay, light olive brown,moist, 126 dense to stiff. 10 1243 R 20120 SM/CL Silty Sand to Silly Clay,' <.._...,<..., ...... light alive brown, moist, medium 242 100.4 dense to stiff. Q1 . $d................................ SPT 10/1411 CL 'Silty Clay 2.F.�Rt,light GfS?4tntiwa�l3f.Q�gOUnl6.olive brown,moist to very moist,very stiff. 53.3 15 1238 SHty Clay, g y R 14l1 S y,light olive brown,moist to very moist,stiff. 15.6 111.7 i @ 16 Feet,Saturated. 20 1233 _......................y. .,.y.i.. ........ .,.......,..- g y. ... SPT14/14/1 SP/CL Sand and interbedded Silt Cia olive brown to alive ra 23.6 wet, dense to stiff, coarse grained,while/buff Clay seams, very moist to wet. 25 1228 R 13/18 SP/MI- GravellySand, olive brawn,wet,dense, medium to coarse 13.2 118.3 grained, interbedded Clayey Silt,olive brown.very moist to yery stiff, I DeDbI9L local omanics h r oat. Total Depth 26.5 Feet. Water encountered at 12 Feet. SAMPLE TYPES; T Water Seepage NEBLETT &ASSOCIATES, INC. IR RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE � Groundwater ( OS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 i ®SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS Grain xp in Size ion Anallysis HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714-840-8286 Index ®BULK SAMPLE ©TUBE SAMPLE CONS-Consolidation PLATE A-2 I l GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 1 PROJECT NO 545 000 05 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 919/05 _T GROUND ELEV.(F?) 1259 BORING DESIG, B-3 DATE FINISHED 9/9105 GW DEPTH(FT) 17.0 LOGGED BY RD DRILLER Cascade DRIVE WT. 140lbs NOTE TYPE OF DRfLL RIG _.1i4tt"gglyt DROP 30" _ N =) b z w ¢ 0- LQ 5-z GEOTECNNICAL DESCRIPTION i2 1 Cr w LO �J 1-- to 2O ❑0 7 .� Alluvium Mal): ;MEMO R 12116 ML/GC Silly Clay to Gravelly Clay,dark olive brown to brownish gray, 89 118,0 moist to wet, stiff. 5 1254 . .. ............... SP 11111/1 SMIGM Silty Sand to Gravelly Sand with Clay,brown,moist, medium 7.2 dense. ti 7.F�Qt,.Perched w�tef................. . .:.. R 14/16 ;` SM/SP Ity Sand to Gravelly Sand, yellowish brown,'moist,rn ium 4.5 118.2 ' dense,occasional pebble. :.+s 10 1249 SPT 1111411 + Sp Gravelly Sand, yellowish brown,light olive brown, moist, 8.4 +•'• medium dense: R 17/21 GC Gravelly Sand with Clay,dark olive brown to orange-brown, 10,7 124.1 moist, medium dense. 15 1244 Gravelly g y SPT 11112/1 y Sand with Clay,olive brown to orange-brown, very 11.6 moist to wet,medium dense. @ 17 Feet, Groundwater encountered. 20-- 1239 ........................:..:..:..:......... .. R 19/25 Sp Gravelly Sand, yellowish brown to orange-brown,saturated 13.5 119-2 i (wet),dense, interbedded Clayey Silt,very moist. I Saturated, 25 1234 ........_. ... SPT 14118/1 E CL/SP Sandy Clay,olive brown,very moist to wet,very stiff,grades 13.1 Into Gravelly Sand,yellowish brown to orange-brown,wet, dense,medium to coarse grained. l 30- I R 10/10 SM/GC Silty Sanedium dense, velly ,.......with . • olive et, 229 Gravelly Sand with Clay,olive brown,wet, 36-7 80.9 interbedded Silty Clay,olive,very moist to wet,stiff. Gravelly Sand, orange brown,wet,dense. 35 1224 SPT 12114/1 SP Silty Clay,pale olive brown, moist to very moist, very stiff. 33.2 SAMPLE TYPES: T Water Seepage NEBLETT & ASSOCIATES, INC. CCR RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE 1� Groundwater DS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 ( SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE EIS Gra ion n Size Analysis HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714-840.8286 ®BULK SAMPLE TUBE SAMPLE CONS-Consolidation PLATE A-3 GEGTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 M 2 PROJECT NO. 545 1100 05 PROJECT NAME _ U*e Elsinore DATE STARTED — -- SN-tiOb GROUND ELEv.tt=T — oi— -BORING DESIG. -- Q13 DATE FINISHED 8105 GW DEPT14(FT) tT0 I-OGGED BY RD DRILLER 9-moe ORIVE WT, —140.Jba NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG tjgIbW&t@m DROP 30' _ W Z CL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION R 10112 / CL Silty Clay,olivo and buff/white,mottled,very moist,medium 33.8 88-B stiff,local loan clays,occasional carbonates. I 45 1214 ..- :SP lolttrt CL filly Clay to Sandy Clay,light olive brown to gray,very moist 24.4 to moist,occasional pebble,stiff,interbedded Silty Sand, grayish brown,very moist to wet,fine to modium grained. 50-1209- _. ._ ...... R 14)17 CL Silty Clay,light olive brown to olive gray,moist to very moist, 163 1143 f stiff,interbedded Silty Sand,light olive gray,vary moist to �wel, Total Depth 54.5 Feet Water encountered at 7 Font and 17 Feet. i I I J SAMPLE TYPES: Y Writer Seepage NEgLETT 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. DS-Direct I RING(!)RIVE!SAMPLE Gro ct She Shear or 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 fl ©SPT!SPLIT SPOON)SA064PLE GS-Grarn Size Analysis HUNTINGTON BEACH.CA 92649 11 a aaa 8286 EI- U BULK SAMPLE 0 TUBE SAMPLE F Index CONSS-Co ion nsohrlalwn I'l_r11 f_ A 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 545 000 05 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 919105 _ GROUND ELEV,(FT) 1252 BORING DESIG.. B-4 DATE FINISHED 919105 _ GW DEPTH(FT) LOGGED BY RD DRILLER Cascade DRIVE WT. _J40 Ibs NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollowslem DROP 30" _ c9 ao z j Ju3 1!: p a W I¢°a GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION }ZO© �� ¢aM pw 0 ao M `m A4 J Alluvium Mall: l , SPT 7/8110 ML Clayey Silt,olive gray,dry to slightly moist,stiff, roots. 11.3 I 5 1247 ....................... ................................ R 16120 MLICL Clayey Silt to Silty Clay,gray olive,slightly moist,stiff, roots. 9,5 91A I SPT 15120/2 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay,gray olive, moist,very stiff, 16.4 carbonate stringers. 10 1242- ...................... ......... R 17122 CL Silty Clay, light olive and white(buff), moist,stiff,mottled 21.3 101A appearance. .... SPT 9115/18 MLICLClayey Silt to Silty Clay, light olive brown, moist,very stiff, 28.1 local carbonates, white, mottled. 15 1237 Silt iff, local carbonates,mottled. . ,. R 14l23 CL st Clay to Sandy Clay,olive brown and olive gray, moist, 21.3 100.5 i I 20 1232 .................... ... ...................... PT 7/8/10 �. ; SP/CL Gravelly Sand,olive brown,wet,medium dense, medium to 12.1 1 coarse grained.Contact with Silty Clay,olive brown,very:,:•�` moist to moist,stiff. Saturated. 25 1227 R 17122 CL Silty Glay to Sandy Glay,olive grown, moist,stiff. 26-4 97,9 I 30 1222 .. ... .... .. ......................... .• ... SPT 1611811 CL Silly Clay,olive .. brown,moist,very stiff,while blebs 28.1 throughout(carbonates),occasional pebble. I l 35 1217 Silt Clay,gray olive and ale olive moist to very moist,very 22.1 102.2 R 25l26 Y Y:9 Y p rY ►Y st' occasional carbonates,occasional pebble. J SAMPLE TYPES: GWaterroupwaterSeepage NEBLETT & ASSOCIATES, INC. 181 RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE D Groundwater IDS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 � I SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS Gran Size Analysis HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714-840-8286 BULK SAMPLE Q TUBE SAMPLE CONS-Consolidation PLATE A-5 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 545 000 05 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 9/9105 GROUND ELEV.(FTI 1252 BORING DESIG. B-4 DATE FINISHED 9/9/05 _ GW DEPTH(FT) LOGGED BY RD DRILLER Caseade DRIVE WT. 1401bs NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG v Hollowstem DROP 30" Lij WA w -j 2r GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION wz >-z gt-e s ® u, �� F co c fE FDp a�® �7 F- SPT 13117/1 ;.J SMISP Silly Sand to Sand,olive gray and olive brown,very moist to 22.9 wet.dense,fine to medium grained. 45 1207 ................. . R 17/23 CL Silty Clay,dark olive gray and olive brown,very moist to 27.7 95.9 moist,very stiff,local fine grained Sand. i 50 1202 ..-. . P SM Silly Sand,dark olive gray,wet,dense,fine to medium 28,7 grained,interbedded Silly Clay and Clayey Silt,moist,olive ra e i otal Depth 51.5 Feet. Water encountered at 12 Feet. i i i . J SAMPLE TYPES: water Seepage NEBLETT&ASSOCIATES, INC, IR RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE Groundwater 1dex DS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 ®SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GS Grain r nsoze Analysis HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714.840.8286 ®BULK SAMPLE I.T�TUBE SAMPLE CONS.Consolidation PLATE A-6 J GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 1 PROJECT NO, 545 000 05 PROJECT NAME Lake Elsinore DATE STARTED 9/9105 GROUND ELEV.(FT) 1253 BORING DESIG. B-5 DATE FINISHED 9/9/05 GW DEPTH(FT) LOGGED BY RD 1 DRILLER _Cascade DRIVE WT, 1401bs NOTE TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollowstem DROP 30" ww F- t�7 O Fes- 7 iQ..,0. r j Q US a w ar}- o (n GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Z 60 =w 00 m ..I Alluvium(gall: 1 6.4 113.5 R 10/16 ML/CL Clayey Silt to Silty Clay,brownish gray,dry to slightly moist, stiff,occasional pebble,roots, 5 1248 SPT1411712 SM Silty Sand, a d,g light olive slightly .n,moist, d..,..,.,int • -...Silty brown,moist, dense,interbedded Silty 21.1 y g moist, stiff. .._ . R 18121 4. SM1SP Silty Sand to Gravelly Sand,yellowish brown and 9.8 l 17.3 orange-brown,moist,dense. 10 1243 ........ ...................................,.........._.. SPT 1811812 CLlML Silty Clay to Clayey Silt,brown, moist,very Stiff. 14.0 _................... ............... R 14/24 CL Silty Clay,pale yellow to light olive brown,moist, stiff, 40.7 791 SPT 15f 1512 CL1ti9L Silty Clay to Clayey Silt, olive brown, moist,very stifi. 28-9 @ 17 Feet; Groundwater encountered, 20 1233- / ............................................................................ . ... R 14/18 CL Silty Clay,olive brown,very moist,stiff. 244 96.1 i I I 25 1228 .I........ SPT 1 Ill Ill SM Silty Sand,olive gray,wet,dense,fine to medium grained, 24.6 Silty Clay,olive brown,very moist,stiff. Total Depth 26.5 Feet. Water encountered at 17 Feet. i SAMPLE TYPES: V Water Seepage RING(DRIVE)SAMPLE T Groundwater NEBLETT &ASSOCIATES, INC. DS-Direct Shear 4911 WARNER AVENUE,SUITE 218 JI ®SPT(SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE GIS E rain Size nalysls HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92649 714-840.8286 ® ndex BULK SAMPLE TUBE SAMPLE CONS-Consolidation PLATE A-7 J Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California APPENDIX B 1 LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS I 1 J . I �J J ` 350 Fischer Ave. Front = Costa Mesa, CA 92626 * P: 714 668 5600 a www.G3SoilWorks.com J Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS The samples obtained during the field investigation were transported to the laboratory for testing and analysis. The results of tests performed on selected samples and the test procedures are summarized below. Dry Density and Moisture Content Field dry density and moisture contents of undisturbed soils samples retained in 2 3/8—inch inside diameter by one-inch height rings were determined, and moisture test results were obtained for the small bulk samples. Dry density and moisture content testing were performed in accordance with ASTM: D2937 and ASTM: D2216, respectively. The test results are posted on the Log of Geotechnical Borings in Appendix A. Grain Size Particle size determination in accordance with ASTM: D422 was performed on a representative sample as an aid in classification of soil types. The test results are presented on Figure G-1. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content test was performed on a selected bulk soil sample in accordance with ASTM: D 1557. The results are shown below: Sample Identification Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Density (pcf) Content(/o) G313-1 @ 0-5' 135.5 6.5 G313-2 @ 0-5' 127.5 9.0 Expansion Index: A selected bulk soil sample was tested for expansion potential following the ASTM D-4829 Test Procedure. Test result is presented below: Sample Identification Expansion Index Expansion Potential (UBC 18-1-13) B-2 @ 0-5' 38 Low 350 Fischer Ave. Front � Costa Mesa, CA 92626 � P: 714 668 5600 w www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California Atterberg Limits Test The results of and Atterberg Limits test are shown below. This test was performed in accordance with ASTM: D 4318. Sample Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Identification % % % B-2 @ 0-3' 27 18 8 Sulfate Content A sample of near surface soil materials obtained at the site was tested for soluble sulfate content in accordance with the Hach method. The test result is shown below. Sample Identification Water Soluble Sulfate In Soil Sulfate Exposure (Percentage by weight(%)) (ACI 318-08, Table 4.2.1) B-2 @ 0-5' 0.0280 Not Applicable Direct Shear Direct shear testing (ASTM: D3080) was performed on a remolded soil sample, with a direct shear machine of the strain-controlled type. The soil specimens were remolded to 90% of the applicable laboratory maximum density and soaked in a confined state prior to shearing and then sheared under varied normal loads ranging from 1.0 ksf to 4.0 ksf. The test result is plotted on Figure S-1. Consolidation To determine the compressibility characteristics, consolidation tests were performed on selected soil samples. The test specimens were initially loaded to 0.2 tons per square foot and soaked during the tests to simulate possible adverse field conditions. Progressive loading was then applied to a maximum of 1.6 tons per square foot to simulate expected additional loading due to the proposed improvements. Loading was then reduced to determine rebound characteristics. Consolidation test results are presented on Figures C-1 through C-3. 350 Fischer Ave. Front * Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ® P: 714 668 5600 s www.G3SoilWorks.com Ill III I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III III I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII 1111111111111 IIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - ' IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlil11111illllll IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllll111111111111111 Illllllllllllllllllllllll l IIIII llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllllll ;■ 1111111111111111 1111111111 I1I111111I111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111 1111111111111111111111111111 1 IIIII 1 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111 Illlrrrll 11111111 111111111AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�Ir1A1111111r1111111111111111111111111 nnununn III oilunuuulrrnn uunlnuurn nuuunnuuulluuulr 111nm nnnnnnnuuunnnnnuuuunrnnunnrl■rnununuuuuuuuu uuu■ r unnu _ Ill llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllll � . � � - III IIIII II 11111111111111111111111111111111 (IIIIIIIIIIIIII II IIII (IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Illllllllllllllllllllll II II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111iililillllllll1111111111111111 Illlli►�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11111111I11111111111 r111111r1111rr1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111r111111111111111111111 Ilrlllll r1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111tr111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111I1111111111 IIII=IIr1111111A11111111111111111111111L1111111111r11rUA1�A uunuuuunouuunuuuunuuuu oral■■Innunnununuul�ur,uuu111�1�=rl■111 1 uuunuunnuuuunu■r,uunununnun nunununuuum m:,nnn ■ m u■ _ IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ill ni IIIIIIIIIII111111111jimumiumIIIIIII III I 1111111 111 I Illllllllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.Illiiilllllllllllllllllll IIII IIIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111 1 11111111111111II!"iilllll Illlilll1111111111111I IIII IIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIII(IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIl:iilll llllllllll IIII 111111111111111111111111 IIIIIIII 1 11 111111111111111111111111111111111�,::1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Illllllrlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll�illlrllllllllllltlllllllllllrllllllllllllllllllllllllr = r:r:c.,..c.�..=-.c.,..c.�..,..c.,_.c....,::c-a••crc:r.c•�-•r:..�:.c.,..,.,�•r-r�•:.�:-.•r:c•� Ii111r11111111ii1111111i11111111111r11111C111111111111111r1Ir11rir1111 III 1111111IN HIM ifi►11111111 uuuuuurrunnununnumum.u■ruun■■rmu■s.nu uunlrunur::uuu�uuuu Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll!lillllllllllllllllilillllllllilll!I!Illlii'i�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - III11111111111111111111111111111i1i11!;liiilll!!!:1111i1 HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl�llliIIlIlIIIII • IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.II!!!�!!IIIIIjIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.IIlllliil'llllllllllllllllll IIIII�l�iiilllllll!iIIIIIIIIrlllllllllllllll111111111 riil"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�llll11111 I - Iill,i11111111111�11111111111►,IIIIIIIIIIII!:'4iiillllllliillll�llllllllll IIIIIIII II Illlii i Dill • l��nnul r1�;w uuulr�mr:�iillru rl 1 n n 1 u r u n r n r rr n r Ir � rr r r r• u�rnnnr rr,uunuue;. Itnuuuuuw A uutruu rrumnut muu r IAtlrunnunur 1111111111111/�1111111:iIIII�111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIr11111�i1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111r1111r1111111 � ninnnunou■c�inur�uurrruunnururrnnnunnnuuuuuw■ru■rumrrun■ruum • • I'll 11 1 11111:1 11 1!�r 1 11 11 1 11 IIII 11 1 11 11 1 11 1 11 11 1 11 1 11 11 1 11 1 II 11 1 11 11 ��Illllnlill,lllll�IIiiIIlII11111111111111IIIIlIIIIIIII l I IIII1111II1�1IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIII1 Ijlllll,r�1111111f,11111111111111111111111111111111IIIII lililllll IIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11 �tlrl 1 '., 11 1 11 1 11 II 1 11 111 11 1 It 1� 1 11 1 �1 11 111 1 11 11 1 rl 1 ���;l►dllllr11.0iilillilillllfllillllillillll IIII II�Ilili1111lllillil�llillilil111�11i11llillill � � = •-i��.I,;11I11111111111111111111111111111 illllll IIIII IIIIII 11111I111111111111111111111111111111 I -- -l--li�nlnl�lnlglgn���nlnn IIII nln�� nl��iilnliliilgulu�gulg��lnl��nli, I11,1,1111111111 IM11111111111111111111111iW 1111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 „ , y,►,u'119111'll'1lunulnuuunntl BIZ unnuuuntrnuuuumnnuwuuuuuuuu norm 1 1 11 11111111111111111111 1 IA111111111r111111111111111111111IM 11111111111111111 ' ,,,, • 1.1,111�111111111111! I11�111111r1 Irn111 1 U1111111UIIrIl11111111111111r 1111111 r1111111111111111 : c_r_ erect_ _�_ rr_cr �.�_=r_•--r_-e-r•e--e-r_ce_aec:ececr_ee_r_=r__ccr_:c-r_-t--c-r-e-c uliiililiililnllililiililiilnlllnliliiliililiili' - liifgii111u1ii111n1i i iilniiliili n nli iililnluliliililn1i11iliililulnl9ii it'11IIIIIIIIII'llllllllllllllllllll IIIIII�II�IIIIIIII�1 �IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II111111111111111111111111111111111 IIIIII 11111111 ......1111111 lnlnlilii lnln19n19u1u19u1nm!1!!1n1i!1g i1i1n1nl11iMPHII Illn111111! Ign19 IIII 111 ill I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIII111i1111l111I1llllllllll 1111111111IIIIIIIIII 111111111111111III11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Illlllllllllllltlllllllllllllllllllllllrll�11111�11111111111111 ■ unnunnuunnnuuuunu■uuuurnuuuuunnuunnuununnnrnnnw ■ �. DIRECT SHEAR TEST Remolded to 90% of Maximum Density 4,000 7-7:-7.7-77 7-7.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,750 ....... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 T T 7 7 V 3,500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 3,250 ........... . . . . . Z-1-;.;44 1. ............ . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 3,000 . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . .— . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,750 ......... . . . . . . . . . . . LL 2,500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z.Z. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . ... . .... .. 2,250 ....... ........................ .............�. c/) LLI 2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ................... ..... T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 1,750 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lu 1,500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,250 7 t ..... ......... 4. .................. ....... 1,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 T ........... 750 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 4. ... ............ ......... . . .. ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . -7-7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 0 . . . . . . . . . 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL STRESS, PSF COHESION 150 psf. FRICTION ANGLE 31.0 degrees symbol boring depth(ft.) symbol boring depth(ft.) FIGURE S-1 0 G313-2 0-51 DIRECT SHEAR TEST PN:1-111 O-A REPORT DATE:8/3/2017 E A G3S01 [Wo r k s (iflj�-- L FIG. S-1 COMPRESSIVE STRESS IN TSF 0.01 2 3 4 5 6780.1 2 3 4 5 67891 2 3 4 5 678910 0.0 77::: ... ... :i: ... :�. ;i 1.0 ... ... ... ... ::: ... ......................................................_...._ ... . ..,.. 2.0 ... ... 3.0 ... ... `..-,.. 2 C� ... W ... ::: 4.0 •'• ;•i<•;;•::• 2 ........•......•. .:.:..:....::...........,....,...... .......,.,:.,:.,;,.::....... . .,..;:.;...,. ..��,; ..... Z ::: . w :: (7 ::. ... :i: ............. Z 5.0 .._ . i;... Q :ia yir.......... ::': ::: 2 is ... U Z ::: ....................... w 6.0 ..... ;; : %:'s::::::;' :�: U ......,:..:•... ... w :.. ... ... ... ... ... :;: :y: ;t: ... 7.0 .. . _....._............:.......... ...... _.............................._......................_...... ... 8.0 ...... :...;..........:....:..:.::..:.................,...:.,..,...,:.,:..;;.:.:.:;..... .:.... ::. . :i: :}: ... ...•,•::.:•:....... 9.0 ... . ii' :.. ... 10.0 :i: ............................ :i: �I Boring Depth(ft.) DeDnsi Moist sieve Symbol Soil Description G3B-1 12.5 120.2 3.3—F] SM WATER ADDED AT 0.8 TSF. FIGURE C-1 CONSOLIDATION CURVE i G3SQ [Works PN:1-1110-A REPORT DATE:8/3/2017 FIG. C-1 i COMPRESSIVE STRESS IN TSF 0.01 2 3 4 5 6780.1 2 3 4 5 67891 2 3 4 5 678910 -4.0 ... . % ..: ::: -3.0 ... ... .. ...i. . .;. ;;.; ... ... %tl 11• ... -1.0 ... . ... _ ... W .. ..;.. ...................i-:•:iii•:•iii:.. ..;.. i i 'e ti•i:i•... :......:::::::::: :: .............: _ ..............,.,.i.r•.t{..J:.;,..;......t....,...f..:..l..\.\.:,•.t:.tt .................t..t•;.:.:.t•t.;:..t!t'! Z Lu .. ... ... ... : U ;. :::. .<............; ::.. Z 10 ........... ..._.............._............. ..............._._..........?: ... Q .. _ ... U Z ............. ....... ............................ ! w 2.0 :•:,•:Jli,ii......:.... U ;....1..1..a.r.:.t.\:.,f1.1..........I....J...I..i..f..1.\.\:.1:.\:Jl.;.;.......�....\...l..J..t.:. •.r.t!:.l t:tit......t.... W a ... :,. ..................... ..._ .. 3.0 . :;: :;: .. :;::;: ;...,..;..; . ;: ..: . :......... ......................_..•• ...........:....... ;.;..; 5.0 HHH : . 6.0 i" : Boring Depth(ft.) DeDnsi Moist sie0ve Symbol Soil Description G3B-2 10.0 108.4 16.4 CL WATER ADDED AT 0.8 TSF. FIGURE C-1 CONSOLIDATION CURVE wo PN:1-1110-A REPORT DATE:8/3/2017 FIG. C-2 COMPRESSIVE STRESS IN TSF 0.01 2 3 4 5 6780.1 2 3 4 5 67891 2 3 4 5 678910 -1.0 ,. .. _ 0.0 ... .. ... .. .. .... ..................................... . . ........:.. :.,.::.. ....................................................... ... 1.0 ......;.................. i;::.......;....;...;...;..:..;.;. ;.. ... :: :.. 2.0 .... ...........:.... .. _ • (� w 3.0 :;::: :: :;: :;: :;: .. .......; ........ ,. .. .... w z4.0 ..........._....,...........................HHHHHH..._....... ...:::: .:� :i• iiiii Q ... ... ... ... U . F- ... Z ... w 5.0 .. w a ,.. ..:...:• :•. ,...,...:.,..,., ... 6.0 . .. :...... . ... i.....:.......;..i.:.:.: ..... ...... . ... 7.0 ::...: ...: ...................... 8.0 ... . .. .................................... ... ..... ............. ;...;..:..:........::• :•::•::.................:..:..:..,.,..:.,.:,,,,::........ ... ;.:..::.:.;;: .. 'f: .. ........ . ... _ 9.0 r.r: ::: Boring Depth(ft.) Des Moist sieve Group i Soil Description G3B-2 15.0 81.3 30.2 TCL WATER ADDED AT 0.8 TSF. FIGURE C-1 CONSOLIDATION CURVE - Goo ��/Or�CS . PN:1-1110-A REPORT DATE:8/3/2017 FIG. C-3 Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California . J APPENDIX C �. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS i J J 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com ,sign Maps Summary Report https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/desigmnaps/us/summary.php?template=... USGS Design Maps Summary Report User-Specified Input Report Title Cottages at Mission Trail Tue July 25, 2017 20:00:23 UTC Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.6420N, 117.292°W Site Soil Classification Site Class D — "Stiff Soil" _ Risk Category I/II/III turT[ Awe ' WuxhtSte� ,Lake Elsinore ,vitir S lipMl�iAVh ' Cho Santa �► «.+� I _; N��p, Lakeland CCC���-� � garita -t►' Village dco Hills " y,� 40A '� y .'J ►.r, Ll+ r' _ A 4 •+ � - rX 1r Ab n Murriet, USGS-Provided Output t Ss = 2.428 g SMs = 2.428 g SDs = 1.619 g S1 = 0.981 g Sh,, = 1.472 g SDl = 0.981 g For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the"2009 NEHRP"building code reference document. IMCERResponse Spectrum Desgwl Rrspcnse Spectrum 11 ... C,i:: [li .J� r�1�; 133 Fi.?7 i`.i2:1 a 4u:f 0 1'W 8.23 1.111 1 1.11 €x, (i3 IAUS Ow LIDO 1:11 1.Lo 1,01 1.83 ."-W IPeriad,T sec:) Pere T(se:j For PGAM,TL, CRs, and CR1 values, please view the detailed report. fAlthough this information is a product of the U.S.Geological Survey,we provide no warranty,expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein.This tool is not a substitute for technical subject-matter knowledge. 1 l 7/25/17 1:00 PM ""sign Maps Detailed Report https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template=mi... US(3'a" Design Maps Detailed Report ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.6420N, 117.2921W) Site Class D — "Stiff Soil", Risk Category I/II/III Section 11.4.1 — Mapped Acceleration Parameters Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric mean ground motions computed by the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain SS) and 1.3 (to obtain S,). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B. Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3. From Figure 22-1. Ill Ss = 2.428 g From Figure 22-212I S1 = 0.981 9 Section 11.4.2 — Site Class The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or the default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance with Chapter 20. Table 20.3-1 Site Classification Site Class vs N or N,h s„ A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A B. Rock 2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A IC. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf D. Stiff Soil 600 to 1,200 ft/s 15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf E. Soft clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the characteristics: • Plasticity index PI > 20, • Moisture content w >— 40%, and • Undrained shear strength s. < 500 psf F. Soils requiring site response See Section 20.3.1 analysis in accordance with Section 21.1 For SI: Ift/s = 0.3048 m/s 1lb/ft2 = 0.0479 kN/mz 1 A6 7/25/17, 1:01 PM sign Maps Detailed Report https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template=mi... Section 11.4.3 - Site Coefficients and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE ) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Table 11.4-1: Site Coefficient Fa 1 Site Class Mapped MCE RSpectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period SS :5 0.25 SS = 0.50 SS = 0.75 SS = 1.00 SS >: 1.25 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 . l C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of Ss For Site Class = D and SS = 2.428 g, Fe = 1.000 Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient F 1 Site Class Mapped MCE a Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period S1 5 0.10 S1 = 0.20 Sl = 0.30 S1 = 0.40 S, >- 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 I C 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 t D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of Sl For Site Class = D and S, = 0.981 g, F = 1.500 _ J i _ 1 2 6 7/25/17 1:01 PM n?sign Maps Detailed Report https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template==Tni... Equation (11.4-1): S,s = F,,Ss = 1.000 x 2.428 = 2.428 g Equation (11.4-2): SM1 = F S1 = 1.500 x 0.981 = 1.472 g Section 11.4.4 — Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters Equation (11.4-3): SpS = % SMs = % x 2.428 = 1.619 g Equation (11.4-4): Spl = % SM1 = % x 1.472 = 0.981 g Section 11.4.5 — Design Response Spectrum From Figure 22-12[33 Tt = 8 seconds Figure 11.4-1: Design Response Spectrum T4T.:S.=S.(0.4*8.BT1Ta) To 5T5 Ta:S.=SD8 Ts<T5Tt:S.=S,,1T T>Tt:So=S,,Tt1T2 -t-----------t IN,od.]( e.j _ 1 .J 3`;6 7/25/17, 1:01 PM sign Maps Detailed Report https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template=mi... Section 11.4.6 — Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum The MCER Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by 1.5. 2$28 , , , ---__-__-- -- --- - - , ` P,Vfaj,I(lee) I --I J J J i 4b 6 7/25/17, 1:01 PM ".!sign Maps Detailed Report https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template=mi... Section 11.8.3 - Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design Categories D through F From Figure 22-7141 PGA = 0.963 Equation (11.8-1): PGA, = FPGAPGA = 1.000 x 0.963 = 0.963 g Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient FPGA Site Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA Class -- PGA <- PGA = PGA = PGA = PGA >_ 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.963 g, FPGA = 1.000 Section 21.2.1.1 - Method 1 (from Chapter 21 - Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design) From Figure 22-17151 CRS = 0.904 From Figure 22-18161 CRl = 0.891 _J . 1 J 51 7/25/17, 1:01 PM "esign Maps Detailed Report https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cn2/designmaps/us/report.php?template=mi... Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter RISK CATEGORY VALUE OF SDS I or II III IV Sps < 0.167g A A A 0.167g <_ Sps < 0.33g B B C 0.33g <_ SDS < 0.509 C C D 0.50g <_ Sps D D D For Risk Category = I and SDS = 1.619 g, Seismic Design Category = D Table 11.6-2 Seismic Design Category Based on 1-S Period Rc,ponse Acceleration Parameter RISK CATEGORY VALUE OF SDI } I or II III IV SDI < 0.067g A A A 0.067g <_ SDI < 0.133g B B C 0.133g <_ SDI < 0.20g C C D 0.20g <_ SDI D D D For Risk Category = I and SDI = 0.981 g, Seismic Design Category = D Note: When SI is greater than or equal to 0.75g, the Seismic Design Category is E for buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of the above. Seismic Design Category - "the more severe design category in accordance with Table 11.6-1 or 11.6-2" = E Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category. References 1. Figure 22-1: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-1.pdf 2. Figure 22-2: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf 3. Figure 22-12: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE- 7_Figure_22-12.pdf 4. Figure 22-7: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf 5. Figure 22-17: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE- 7_Figure_22-17.pdf 6. Figure 22-18: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE- 7_Figure_22-18.pdf 6 of 6 7/25/17, 1:01 PM Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/ Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California APPENDIX D LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS 350 Fischer Ave. Front ® Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 ® www.G3SoilWorks.com Civic Partners August 3, 2017 Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 1-1110 Proposed Residential Development Cottages at Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, California LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Seismic settlement analyses for the project site were performed based on the soil profiles, SPT blow counts, and laboratory data obtained from our investigation, utilizing the LiquefyPro (Version 5.9a) computer program developed by CivilTech Software. The following design earthquake parameters were considered in the analyses: • Magnitude (M) = 7.0 • Peak horizontal ground acceleration = 0.963g (USGS Design Maps) • Potential soil liquefaction settlements to depths of 50 feet below existing site grades. • Groundwater depth of 20 feet below ground surface. The results of the computer analysis are attached in this Appendix D. 350 Fischer Ave. Front + Costa Mesa, CA 92626 + P: 714 668 5600 + www.G3SoilWorks.com LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Cottages at Mission Trail Hole No.-G3B-1 Water Depth-20 ft Magnitude=7.0 Acceleration-0.963g Raw Unit Fines Shear Stress Ratio Factor of Safety Settlement {h)O SPT Weight % 0 1 0 1 5 0(in.) 1 �— —r 18 132.9 11 147 22 142.4 10 28 126.8 l 40 124.2 1 35 123.8 I 49 129.1 20 42 138.7 59 149.9 30 140.1 46 143.4 30 6 110.4NoLq 19 134.1 33.0 7 114.8NoLq 7 119.2NoLq 40 8 116.7 NoLq 14 130.9NoLq 4 124.5NoLq 11 122.8NoLq 1 50 10 117.E NoLq fsi=1.00 S=0.61 in. Jf CRR CSR tS1— Saturated g Shaded Zone has Liquefaction Potential Unsaturat. U N Q —60 N L U N F 2 70 d Q . � J MSoilWoft 1-1110 Plate A-1 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Cottages at Mission Trail Hole No.-G3B-2 Water Depth-20 ft Magnitude-7.0 Ground Improvement of Fil1=15 ft Acceleration-0.963g 1 Raw Unit Fines Shear Stress Ratio Factor of Safety Settlement (kJ0 SPT Weight % 0 1 0 1 5 0(in.) 10 F 8 122.5NoLq 24 122.5 NoLq 1` 66 127.7NoLq 1 — 10 24 126.2 NoLq l/ 4 113.7NoLq r I 11 107.3 NoLq 15 133.5NoLq 20 17 129.8 NoLq 35 132.2 NoLq 17 120.5 NoLq 18 111.27.6 30 29 125.47.6 l 19 136.67.6 17 133.87.6 36 128.810.4 40 30 124.310.4 I 19 124.910.4 { 13 113 510.4 111 15 127 NoLq J fs1=1.00 S=1.21 in. 50 49 124.9NoLq CRR CSR fS1 Saturated U E Shaded Zone has Liquefaction Potential Unsaturat. L �J 2SzSz' 5 Q 60 N lU J2 70 I07 G3SOWorks Plate A-1 J