HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR 31920-5 SUMMERLY GEOTECHNICAL APPROVED
FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
SC TT FAZEKAS&ASSOCIATES,INC.
Leighton and Associates Inc. �-L- D.X l2
E -� _2'a
These plans haze --en revic-vv d for adlhererce to the
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY a'npliva file Codes ind or,d;•,nance. AL'thorizatlon is
here-L�y janted to issue a buiir,•ina permit pending
approval by al:applicaalr: --fty arpancies.
Nov,, r 1
or grant`n,yn of a permit based on
approval of these plans s1h.a.1i not be construed to
permit or al:i;prove any violPiojec-1DINblel
codes or ordinance. N13 pormrt presumed to give
h�pri• c tr siit:Inzte or cancel the provisions of such
To: John Laing Homes, Southern •�� Wl',ial zvJ-�l°�?
19520 Jamboree Rd.. Suite 400
Irvine, CA 92612
Attention: Linda Valia
Subject: Geotechnical Earthquake Design Parameters in Accordance with California
Building Code 2007, Tract 31920-5, Summerly Development Site, Lake Elsinore;
California
Reference: Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report, Parcel 5, Stage 1, Tract 31920,
Summerly Development Site, Lake Elsinore, California, by Neblett & Associates,
Inc, Project No. 420-000-07, dated November 8, 2006.
In accordance with your request, Leighton and Associate, Inc. is providing the following
geotechnical earthquake design parameters calculated in accordance California Building Code
(CBC), 2007, Chapter 16, Section 1613 for the subject site:
DesignersDesign
CBC 2007
Site Class Table 1613.5.2 D
Mapped Spectral Acceleration at Sliort Period (Ss) for Site Class B Figure 1613.5(3) 1.65 g
Mapped Spectral Acceleration at I Second (SI) for Site Class B Figure 1613.5(4) 0.60 g
Site Coefficient, f;,, Table 161 3.5.3(1) 1.0
Site Coefficient, F,. Table 1613.5.3(2) 1.5
MCE Acceleration at Short Period (SNrs) for Site Class D Equation 16-37 1.65 g
MCE Spectral Acceleration at 1 Second (S;»t) for Site Class D Equation 16-38 0•9 g
Design Spectral Acceleration at Short Period (S,)s) for Site Class D Equation 16-39 1.1 g
Design Spectral Acceleration at 1 Second (SDI) for Site Class D Equation 16-40 0.6 g
41715 Enterprise Circle N., Suite 103 o Temecula, CA 92590-5661
951.296.0530 o Fax 951.296.0534 a www.leightongeo.com
r �
112142-002
November 12, 2008
The design parameters presented in Table 1 above supersede the design values presented in
Appendix A of the referenced As-graded report (Neblett & Associates, Inc., 2006). The design
values were calculated utilizing a software program published by United State Geological Survey
(USGS) Department which follows the procedures stated in American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) Publication ASCE 7-05 and CBC Chapter 16, Section 1613.
If you have questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We
appreciate this opportunity to be ol.continued service to you on this project.
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 14AL (3F
'Sy o�
�,I�".!�/_.•..fir,. �
:4�Q1'�CSS�� 4'T�
ii Q Na. 19�1 y
CERTIFIED
.•':' .i1' '�✓ ��. +; * ENGINEERING
Zaiid
GEOLOGIST
NO.2641 rn Simon ;1+ •, Robert F. Riha qr oQ�
GE 2641 (Exp. 12/31/09)�r Eft11€B w >r;'f' CEG 1921 (Exp. 02/28/10) F OF C PA Y
Principal Engineer Principal Geologist/Vice President
Distribution: (3) Addressee
2 Leighton
t
r
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
September 23,2008
Project No. 112142-002
To: John Laing Homes, Inland Division
255 East Rincon Street, Suite 100 t
Corona, California 92879-1330
t
Attention: Damon Tanaka
I
Subject: Geotechnical Update Letter for Lots 2 through 10 and 59 through 62,Tract 31920-
5,Phase 1, Summerly Development Site,Lake Elsinore,California
Reference: Neblett & Associates, Inc, 2006, Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report, Parcel
5, Stage 1, Tract 31920, Summerly Development Site, Lake Elsinore, California,
Project No.420-000-07,dated November 8,2006.
Leighton & Associates, Inc., 2008, Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation for
Expansion Potential, Tract 31920-5, Summerly, Lake Elsinore, California, Project t
No. 112142-002, dated January 3, 2008.
In accordance with your request, Leighton and Associates, Inc. has made a field reconnaissance k
visit on September 22, 2008 to observe the current surficial conditions of Lots 2 through 10 and 59
through 62, of Tract 31920-5, Phase 1 of the Summerly Development, Lake Elsinore. Rough
grading of the subject Lots was completed under the observation and testing of Neblett &
Associates,Inc. (Neblett,2006). At the time of our visit the lots had minimal erosion rills along the
front of the lots and were dotted with sporadic vegetation and weeds. It is our recommendation that
prior to footing excavation the upper six inches of the lots are scarified, moisture conditioned to at
least 2 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to 90 percent relative
compaction. There are no significant geotechnical changes since the Lots were rough graded and
geotechnical recommendations presented in the referenced reports remain applicable.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to call this office. We
appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service.
Respectfully submitted, -
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,INC. ,eoFEssta`4�
NAL Q :�QFg1tSGgnq�
�¢ a No. 67160
a � a
4 rA * EXP.
* No.7e56 ArastianayaharnAvi W. Schwartzq �
PG 7856(Exp. 11/30/08) �. tr RICE 67160(Exp.09/30/08) rFOF cAt,F�
Project Geologist OF C A �� Project Engineer
Distribution: (2) Addressee
41715 Enterprise Circle N. Suite 103 4 Temecula CA 92590-5626
(951)296-0530. Fax(951)296-0534. www,leightongroup.com i
I
r
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
January 3, 2008
Project No. 1 12142-002
To: John Laing Flomes, Inland Division
255 East Rincon Street, Suite 100
Corona, California 92879-1330
Attention: Ms. Linda Valia
Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation for Expansion Potential, Tract 31920-5,
Summerly, Lake Elsinore, California.
References: Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report, Parcel 5, Stage 1, Tract 31920,
Summerly Development Site, Lake Elsinore, California, by Neblett & Associates,
Inc., Project No. 420-000-07, dated November 8, 2006.
Introduction and Investigation
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton & Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has
completed this supplemental geotechnical study consisting of limited field soil sampling and
laboratory testing within Tract 31920-5, Summerly, Lake Elsinore, California. The purpose of
this testing was to supplement and update the expansion potential test results of the proposed
single family detached home sites. The subject tract was previously rough graded under the
geotechnical observation and testing services of Neblett and Associates, Inc (Neblett, 2006) and
results of site expansion potential and foundation design parameters were previously presented in
the above referenced report. The structural foundations for the subject home sites were
recommended to be designed for Low Expansion potential (as classified in California Building
Code, 2001, Table 18-1-13).
On October 1, 2007, Leighton conducted a field exploration, which consisted of the sampling of
near surface soils of twenty representative home sites within Tract 31920-5. Representative
samples were delivered to our laboratory for visual review and selected testing. Based on our
review, nine samples were selected to be tested for expansion potential to represent the overall
tract area. Laboratory test results and test procedures are summarized in Appendix A.
41715 Enterprise Circle N.,Suite 103 a Temecula,CA 92590-5661
951.296.0530•Fax 951.296.0534 a www.leightongeo.com
112142-002
January 3, 2008
Findings and Recommendations
Based on our laboratory testing and review of previous site testing (Neblett, 2006), the finish
grade soils of the home sites are found to be in the Very Low to Low expansion potential (per
CBC, 2001, Table 18-1-B).
Based on our supplemental geotechnical expansion test results of individual home sites, and
additional engineering analysis, the conventional or post tensioned foundation/slab design
recommendations provided in the referenced as-graded report remain applicable for this project.
The proposed foundations and slabs should be designed in accordance with the structural
consultants' design, the minimum geotechnical recommendations presented in the referenced as-
graded report (Neblett, 2006), and the City of Lake Elsinore requirements. Foundation plans
should be reviewed by Leighton and Associates, Inc. to confirm that geotechnical design
parameters are implemented appropriately in the foundation design. Further, the building pads
should be presoaked as recommended in the geotechnical report (Neblett, 2006) and should be
verified in the field by Leighton and Associates, Inc.
If you have any questions regarding this letter report, please do not hesitate to contact this office,
we appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Respectfully submitted,
ttat. cF
�rrss; oc��O�rGRT F9 !0
LEIGHTON AND ASS
No.1921 q rP
CERTIFIED
ENGINEERING yk
e s No. 6 1 C Q y J,� GEOLOGIST
rxl1�9130 D�
Arasan Singa yaham,�RCQ�67�;JQ. Robert F. Riha, CE0 1921 F°F��L °
Project Engineer ' �cnL N Senior Principal Geologist
Appendix A Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Distribution: (3) Addressee
- 2 - Leighton
1
112142-002
January 3, 2008
APPENDIX A
Laborato Testing Procedures and Test Results
Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the
Expansion index Test, ASTM test method D4829. Specimens are molded tinder a given
compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50
percent saturation or approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The prepared I-inch thick
by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated
with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The laboratory test results from current
supplemental evaluation are attached:
A - 1 Leighton
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D4829
Project Name: IAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/8/07
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9107
Boring No: Depth(ft.) "
Sample No.: EI-5 Location: LOT 2/LOTS(1-3)
Sample Description: SM,BROWN SILTY SAND WITH FEW GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 3008.2
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 3008.2
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 213.0
Percent Passing#4 92.9
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0244
Wt.Comp.Soil+Mold m. 624.4 654.7
Wt.of Mold m. 199.4 199.4
Specific Gravity(Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. #15 #15
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.6 654.7
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 300.4 393.5
Wt.of Container m. 22.6 199.4
Moisture Content 8.0 15.7
Wet Density 128.2 137.2
Dry Density 118.7 118.6
Void Ratio 0.420 0.455
Total Porosity 0.296 0.313
Pore Volume cc 61.2 66.3
Degree of Saturation % S meas 51.4 93.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time -7-Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (In.)
10/8/07 13:44 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 13:54 1.0 10 0.4994
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9/07 7:48 1.0 1074 0.5244
1019/07 1 8:48 1.0 1134 0.5244
Expansion Index(El meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)l Initial Thick.)x 1000 25.0
Expansion Index(El )s = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)/(220-S meas)) 26
Rev.08-04
1 y
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/8/07 I
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9107
Boring No: " Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : El-6 Location: LOT 18/LOTS(16-19)
Sample Description: SM,BROWN SILTY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL.
Dry Wt. of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 2829.6
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 2829.6
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 101.4
Percent Passing#4 96.4
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height (in.)_ 1.0000 1.0145
Wt.Comp.Soil +Mold(gm. 618.8 649.1
Wt.of Mold ( m.) 188.6 188.6
Specific Gravi (Assumed)_ 2.70 2.70
Container No. #11 #11
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. Ignj 322.6 649.1
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 299.1 396.5 i
Wt.of Container m. 22.6 188.6
Moisture Content % 8.5 16.1
Wet Densi 129.8 138.7
Dry Density c 119.6 119.4
Void Ratio 0.410 0.430
Total Porosity. 0.291 0.301
Pore Volume cc 60.1 63.1
De ree of Saturation % S mess 56.0 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8107 11:28 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 11:38 1.0 10 0.4988
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9/07 7:48 1.0 1210 0.5145
10/9/07 8:48 1.0 1270 0.5145
Expansion Index(El meas) = ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 15.7
Expansion Index(El )50 - El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)!(220-S meas)) 19
Rev.00-04
®` EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 1018/07
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 1019/07 j
Boring No: '" Depth(ft.)
Sample No. : EI-7 Location: LOT 25/LOTS(24-27)
Sample Description: (SC-SM),OLIVE BROWN SILTY,CLAYEY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 2892.4
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 2892.4
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 67.0
Percent Passing#4 97.7
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height in. 1.0000 1.0480
Wt.Comp.Soil+Mold m. 602.6 639.5
Wt.of Mold m. 178.1 178.1
Specific Gravity Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-10 E-10
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.6 639.5
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. m.) 300.4 393.1
Wt.of Container m. 22.6 178.1
Moisture Content % 8.0 17.4
Wet Density 128.0 139.0
Dry Density 118.6 118.4
Void Ratio 0.422 0.490
Total Porosity 0.297 0.329
Pore Volume cc 61.4 71.4
,Degree of Saturation % S mess 51.2 95.8
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8/07 15:22 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8107 15:32 i 10 0.5000
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9/07 7:50 1.0 978 0.5480
10/9/07 1 8:50 1.0 1038 0.5480
Expansion Index(El meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 48.0
Expansion Index(El )5 = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)/(220-S meas)) 49
Rev,W04
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D4829
Project Name: EAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/6/07
Project No. : 1 1 21 42-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9/07
Boring No: '" Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : EI-8 Location: LOT 33/LOTS(32-35) #
Sample Description: (SC,SM),OLIVE BROWN SILTY,CLAYEY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 2799.7
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 2799.7
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 77.0
Percent Passing#4 97.2
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0386
Wt.Comp. Soil+Mold m. 594.6 636.9
Wt.of Mold (gm.)- 181.3 181.3
Specific Gravity Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-21 E-21
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.6 636.9
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont.( m.) 300.4 382.7
Wt.of Container ( m.) 22.6 181.3
Moisture Content % 8.0 19.1
Wet Density c 124.7 137.3
Dry Density pc 115.4 115.3
Void Ratio 0.460 0.517
Total Porosity 0.315 0.341
Pore Volume cc 65.3 73.2
Degree of Saturation % I S measl 46.9 99.5
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8/07 14:45 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 14:55 1.0 10 0.5000
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9/07 7:47 1.0 1012 0.5386
10/9/07 1 8:47 1.0 1072 0.5386
Expansion Index(El meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 38.6
Expansion Index(El)50 - El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+Ei meas)/(220-S meas)) 37
Rev,M04
. J
1
f
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/8/07
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9/07
Boring No: Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : EI-9 Location: LOT 421 LOTS(41-44)
Sample Description: (SC-SM), BROWN SILTY,CLAYEY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 3189.6
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 3189.6
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 71.6
Percent Passing#4 97.8
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0423
Wt.Comp.Soil+Mold m. 607.2 647.4
Wt.of Mold ( m.) 190.1 190.1
Sp,ecific Gravity Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-20 E-20
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont (gm) 322.6 647.4
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont.(gm.) 300.4 386.2
Wt.of Container m. 22.6 190.1
Moisture Content(%) 8.0 18.4
Wet Densi c 125.8 137.8
Dry Density( cf) 116.5 116.3
Void Ratio 0.447 0.508
Total Porosity 0.309 0.337
Pore Volume cc 64.0 72.7
-Degree of Saturation % S meal 48.3 97.8
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
1018/07 15:03 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8107 15:13 1.0 10 0.5002
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9107 7:48 1.0 995 0.5423
10/9/07 1 8:48 1.0 1055 0.5423
Expansion Index(Ei meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 42.1
Expansion Index(El )50 = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)/(220-S meas)) 41
Rev.°°-04
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/8/07
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9107
Boring No: ** Depth(ft.)
Sample No. : EI-10 Location: LOT 49/LOTS(48-50,63) i
Sample Description: SM,OLIVE BROWN SILTY SAND WITH FEW GRAVEL. i
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 2945.8
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 2945.8 I
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 160.0
Percent Passing#4 1 94.6
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height in. 1.0000 1.0246
Wt.Comp.Soil+Mold gm. 628.0 653.8
Wt.of Mold (gm.) 191.1 191.1
Specific Gravity Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-18 E-18
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.0 653.8
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. gm. 299.8 404.5
Wt.of Container m. 22.0 191.1
Moisture Content(°Yo 8.0 14.4
Wet Density 131.8 139.4
Dry Density(pD 122.0 121.9
Void Ratio 0.382 0.416
Total Porosity 0.276 0.294
Pore Volume cc 57.2 62.3
De ree of Saturation S meas 56.6 93.4
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate c 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8/07 15:40 1 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 15:50 1 1.0 10 0.4999
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
1019/07 7:49 1.0 959 0.5246
10/9107 8:49 1.0 1019 0.5246
Expansion Index(El meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 24.7
Expansion Index(El )50 = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)1(220-S meas)) 28
Rev.0"4
-don EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
*V Leighton ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 10/8/07
Project No. : 1 1 2 1 42-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9/07
Boring No: Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : EI-11 Location: LOT 53/LOTS(51-54)
Sample Description: SM.BROWN SILTY SAND WITH FEW GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 3133.0
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt,of Soil (gm.) 3133.0
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 163.0
Percent Passing#4 94.8
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in.) 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0303
Wt. Comp.Soil+Mold m. 604.1 642.4
Wt.of Mold (gm.) 180.8 180.8
Specific Gravity Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-6 E-6
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.6 642.4
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. ( m.) 300.4 391.9
Wt.of Container ( m.) 22.6 180.8
Moisture Content % 8.0 17.8
Wet Densi (pcf) 127.7 139.1
Dry Densi 118.2 118.1
Void Ratio 0.426 0.469
Total Porosity 0.299 0.319
Pore Volume cc 61.8 68.1
Degree of Saturation % S measl 50.7 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in.1h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
1018/07 12:18 1.0 0 0,5000
10/8/07 12:28 1.0 10 0.4991
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9107 7:48 1.0 1160 0.5303
10/9107 1 8:48 1.0 1220 0.5303
Expansion Index(El meas) = ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 31 .2
Expansion Index(El )w = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+EI meas)/(220-8 meas)) 32
Rev,0"4
'I
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
i
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 1018/07
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 1019/07
Boring No: "' Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : EI-12 Location: LOT 70/LOTS 70-71
Sample Description: SM, BROWN SILTY SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 2938.0
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt,of Soil (gm.) 2938.0
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 69.4
Percent Passing#4 1 97.6
I
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height in. 1.0000 1.0326
Wt.Comp. Soil+Mold(gm.) 612.6 651.9
Wt.of Mold (9m.).. 189.9 189.9
Specific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-7 E-7
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont. m. 322.6 651.9
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont.( m.) 300.4 391.4
Wt.of Container m. 22.6 189.9
Moisture Content % 8.0 18.0
Wet Density 127.5 139.2
Dry Densi (pcQ 118.1 117.9
Vold Ratio 0,428 0.475
Total Porosity 0.300 0.322
Pore Volume cc 62.0 1 68.8
,Degree of Saturation %)[S measl 60.5 1 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8107 14:14 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 14:24 1.0 10 0.5000
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9/07 7:47 1.0 1043 0,5326
10/9/07 1 8:47 1.0 1103 0.5326
Expansion Index(EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)/Initial Thick.)x 1000 32.6
Expansion Index(El )5 = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+El meas)/(220-S meas)) 33
Rev.W04
Pot EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
Leighton ASTM D 4829
MW
I
Project Name: LAING HOMES TR 31920-5 Tested By: JAP Date: 1018/07 i
Project No. : 112142-002 Checked By: JMB Date: 10/9/07
Boring No: Depth(ft.) "
Sample No. : EI-13 Location: LOT 761 LOTS(75-77)
Sample Description: SM,OLIVE BROWN SILTY SAND WITH FEW GRAVEL.
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont. (gm.) 3244.8
Wt.of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt.of Soil (gm.) 3244.8
Weight Soil Retained on#4 Sieve 249.9
Percent Passing#4 1 92.3
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
Specimen Height in. 1.0000 1.0232
Wt.Comp.Soil+Mold m. 622.6 658.4
Wt.of Mold (gm.) 201.9 201.9
Specific Gravity Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. #13 #13
Wet Wt.of Soil+Cont.(gm.) 322.6 658.4
Dry Wt.of Soil+Cont.(gm.) 300.4 389.5
Wt.of Container m.) 22.6 201.9
Moisture Content(% 8.0 17.2
Wet Density c 126.9 137.5
Dry Densi cQ 117.5 117.4
Void Ratio 0.435 0.468
Total Porosi 0.303 0.319
Pore Volume cc 62.7 67.5
Degree of Saturation S meas 49.7 99.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate<0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure Elapsed Time Dial Readings
(psi) (min.) (in.)
10/8/07 15:53 1.0 0 0.5000
10/8/07 16:03 1.0 10 0.5000
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
10/9107 7:49 1.0 946 0.5232
10/9107 1 8:49 1.0 1006 0.5232
Expansion Index(El meas) = ((Final Rdg-Initial Rdg)l Initial Thick.)x 1000 23.2
Expansion Index( El )w = El meas -(50-S meas)x((65+Ei meas)/(220-S meas)) 23
Rev°sot
N17A
Xcott Fazelc:ic & A%morketes, laic. 1.TYPE OF PLAN (check)
❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial
SFA would appreciate your input. By 2. PLANS PREPARED BY
taking a few minutes to complete this ❑ Architect ❑ Engineer ❑ Draftsman
questionnaire,you will participate in
the following procedures: 3. RE-CHECK
❑ Person to Person ❑ Delivered to SFA
•Evaluation of staff& services
4. METHOD OF TRANSMITTAL
•Evaluation of applicant needs ❑ Mailed to Applicant J Picked Lip in Parson
•Improvement of services
PLEASE EVALUATE OUR SERVICE
• Forvi,aiclii7g your corrarrrents to the Poor Excellent
government agency A. Employee Availability 1 2 3 4 5
B. Employee Professionalism 1 2 3 4 5
All responses will be forwarded on a C. Employee Knowledge 1 2 3 4 5
quarterly basis to the respective client D. Overall Service 1 2 3 4 5
for review. This will improve your
ability to communicate your needs and Comments
opinions to SFA as well as the key staff
members in the govenment agencies.
Thank you,
Name
Scott R. Fazekas,AIA, CBO Telephone
President Job Address -TRi%C"C 2-aD' - L :TrS�,�.�6$ 69
P.C. # L.A*< ELsv34-e
9 Corporate Park, Suite 200 APPLICANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Irvine, CA 92606-5173
N 14"A
Scold 1 azeka% J� Ammocialex, Inr.
Building Safety for Government
IRVINE Scott Fazeka% .0 Asxoriatcc, Inc.
Building Safety for Government
9 Corporate Park.Suite. 200
Irvine,CA 92606-5173
�R Phone 949/475-2901
CG r
c— rax 949 /475-2560
V) k}
f � c
J
N o; Providing Ser0ces E.echisively
Q fiv Values
Governniew Agencies
U '>
Your
�= Building Safety
• Adnninistration Comments
• Plan Check
• Inspections
• Code C011SUlt�M011
• Stafhing SupI_)ort
i
i
r � T
INTERIM ROUGH GRADE
COMPACTION REPORT
PARCEL 4, STAGE 1
SUMMERLY DEVELOPMENT SITE
TRACT 31920
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
Project No. 420-000-07
September 12, 2006
Prepared For:
LAING-CP, LAKE ELSINORE, LLC.
31881 Corydon,Suite 130
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Prepared By:
NEBLETT & ASSOCIATES, INC.
4911 Warner Avenue, Suite 218
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
NX
Neblett&Assoeiates
Laing -- CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC. September 12, 2006
31881 Corydon, Suite 130 Project No. 420-000-07
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Attention: Mr. Michel A. Filler, Vice President
Subject.. Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report
Parcel 4, Stage 1
Surnmerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
References: See attached List of' References
Dear Mr. Filler:
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our field observations and density tests performed during
the rough grading operations in Parcel 4 of Stage I at the Summerly Development site in
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California. The subject project consists of the development of 74
residential pads, and is located within the overall project as shown on the Site Location Map
(Figure 1).
Pertinent geologic and geotechnical information are provided on the attached Geotechnical
and Geologic Maps utilizing the Grading Plan prepared by Wilson-Mikami Corporation, the
Project Civil Engineer. The approximate locations of field density tests and limits of
compacted fill are shown on the Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 3). Soil type and
laboratory maximum density information are presented in Table II, and field density test
results are tabulated in Table II1, appended to this report.
P.O. Box 1159 • Huntington Beach, CA 92647
4911 Warner Avenue, Suite 218 • Huntington Beach • CA • 92649 • tel (714) 840-8286 •fax(714) 840-9796
o0aa�o��o4a$ddaaD ��
Qar QV ,
Qooa p°po 444 oaa�a� ad►�� �r , > :�
�+o
14
BAN p
_� ► w;„�p�eQa� ���ti o 4a�p'�od�` ���4�dnn A .-� �4 �� a
a FOQrP-3 Owns Q0� ° neat
t
lama
, .� •Y :� air a,oa�O���o� '�'g; �..�a
n .tea !.�MGM
v �::,:: 9Q dodgy ��
• �Q�°'-,�.arooaav►'�a
j� ��da� no:�. a v �44� add
'PIN is
Son
,`: ,����4'�p00�•;Q'0��,���040'��4�p000 a y�"; lion
° 4�0mom
Qom• ��QC,�n
OAF
• '°4444Q�444 q!�laa``.r�`�off• oo a�o0-5 Lim a
a�
a► •� o Qo ao oo�9tio �,
�aaaaa�aaa . of aAo oo� � mum a:
VI A414444a.
i
IN
1 �
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Proieci No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 2 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
Rough grading observations and testing covered in this report were performed from
November 22, 2005 to .tune 19, 2006. The grading operations associated with the placement
of structural fill for support of the proposed residential structures are described below.
Soil Types
The on-site soils encountered during grading are summarized in Table II_ The soils typically
consisted of silty sand, clayey sands, and gravelly sands.
Geologic Conditions
Alluvial deposits underlie the subject site to the depths excavated. These alluvial materials
are generally sandy, but include localized fine-grained and coarse-grained strata, indicative
of alternating flow regimes influenced by the nearby San Jacinto River on its progression to
the Elsinore Basin.
A fault attributed to the Glen Ivy North Fault Zone was inferred to bisect the project area by
Weber, et at (1977 — Reference No, 1). Based on the results of this firms previous fault
investigations (Reference 2), this fault was not found in the vicinity inferred by Weber, et at
(1977). A fault zone was found south of the subject site, which may be the Glen Ivy North
Fault Zone. Faults within the Summerly development sphere were proven to be inactive. No
evidence of faulting was noted during grading activities for Parcel 4 or surrounding parcels.
A detailed description of the site and regional geology is included in Reference No. 1.
Site Clearing and Over-excavation
Vegetation, trash, debris and other deleterious materials were cleared and removed from the
site prior to grading.
Existing site soils were removed to approximately 3 to 5 feet below grade to expose
competent strata and the excavation bottoms were observed by the Project Geologist. In
areas where roots, dessication or voids were noted, removals extended to expose more
Neblett & Associates, Inc.
' Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 3 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
competent material. Removal bottom elevations are shown on the attached Geotechrtical
Maps (Plates 1 through 3) and, in general, ranged'from 3 to 6 feet below original ground
surface. In the area of Lots 14 through 20, cuts on the order of 3 feet were programmed to
accomplish proposed grade. These lots were overexcavated an additional 5 to 14 feet below
proposed grades.
Fill Placement
Prior to placement of engineered fill, the exposed excavation bottoms were observed by a
representative from this firm, scarified and moisture-conditioned and compacted. Lots 14
through 20 were planned as cut lots and were over-excavated to at least 5 feet below
proposed grade. Thickness of engineered, compacted fill placed on this site ranged from
approximately 8 to 15 feet.
Fill consisting of the soil types indicated in Table Il was placed in loose lifts on the order of 6
to 8 inches thick, moisture-conditioned to generally 1 to 3 percentage points above optimum
moisture contents and compacted to minimum 90 percent of the laboratory maximum
density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method: D 1557.
The maximum depth of fill placed within the limits depicted on the attached grading plan is
approximately 15 feet. In-situ density tests were performed utilizing the nuclear density
(ASTM: D 2922) method. Test results are summarized in Table Ill.
Equipment used for compaction included Terex T-24 scrapers, Caterpillar 660 scrapers,
Caterpillar D-10 and D-7 dozers, Caterpillar 834 dozers, and a 660 tractor equipped with a
back grader. Caterpillar water tankers were used for moisture conditioning.
Soil Expansion and Soluble Sulfate
Soil expansion and soluble sulfate tests were performed on representative samples collected
from the finish grade soils. The expansion test consists of remolding the soil sample and
placing it under a surcharge load of 144 psf in accordance with UBC Standard No. 29-2. The
samples were tested for sulfate content in accordance with the Hach procedure. Based on the
Neblett car Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4, Stage I Page 4 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
results of laboratory testing, soil sulfate exposure is negligible and expansion potential is
considered to be low to very low. Results of the expansion and sulfate testing are
summarized in Table I.
Table I
Expansion and Sulfate Test Results
(Parcel 4, Stage 1, Tract 31920)
Lot Expansion Expansion Sulfate Sulfate
No. index Potential Exposure
(UBC Table 18-1- Content (UBC Table 19-
B) (%) A-4)
2 0 Very Low 0.0098 Negligible
8 18 Very Low 0.0528 Negligible
14 18 Very Low 0.0488 Negligible
20 35 Low 0.0544 Negligible
28 18 Very Low 0.0392 Negligible
33 17 Very Low 0.0188 Negligible
41 0 Very Low 0.0110 Negligible
51 13 Very Low 0.0496 Negligible
56 0 Very Low 0.0056 Negligible
63 23 Low 0.0264 Negligible
69 0 Very Low 0.0544 Negligible
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our field observations and testing, it is our opinion that the grading and fill
compaction for Parcel 4 were performed in accordance with the recommendations presented
in the referenced reports, project plans and grading requirements of the City of Lake
Elsinore.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
• Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 5 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
For project planning purposes, the preliminary geotechnical design criteria presented in
Reference No. 1, with the revisions and exceptions as discussed below, may be used. These
criteria will be evaluated and revised, as necessary during the precise grading plan review
based on the results of additional laboratory testing.
At the time of this report preparation, foundation details and loads were not available. These
should be reviewed during the precise grading plan review to confirm the geotechnical
recommendations provided herein and to develop supplemental recommendations, if
required.
The preliminary geotechnical design criteria applicable to the subject development are
summarized below:
Conventional Foundation Design Criteria
The planned residential structures may be supported on conventional continuous and spread
footings bearing on compacted engineered fill. The continuous and spread footings for these
structures may be designed based on the preliminary criteria shown in Table 2.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 6 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore, California
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CRITERIA FOR LOW SOIL EXPANSION
(Ex _ansion Index = 0-50)
{ Allowable Bearing Pressure (1) 1,500 psf
Minimum Footing Depth (2) ]-Story: 12 inches (All Footings)
2-Story: 18 inches (All Footings)
Width of Continuous Footings Per 1997 UBC
Footing Reinforcement For continuous footings, two No. 4 bars, one
at top and one at bottom
Lateral Soil Resistance (3) 250 psf per ft. depth, subject to a maximum
E of 2,000 psf
Friction Coefficient 0.35 (Ultimate)
Sub-grade Pre-saturation Soak 2-3 percentage points above optimum
moisture content to a depth of 12 inches
Garage Door Grade Beam 12 inches square with two No. 4 bars, one at
i top and one at bottom. The grade beam
should be tied to the adjacent footings
Notes:
(1) The allowable bearing value shown above applies to footings minimum one
foot wide at a depth of one foot below lowest adjacent soil grade. This may be
increased by 250 pound per square foot (psf) for each additional foot of
footing embedment or width, subject to a maximum of 2,500 psf. Also, the
allowable soil bearing value may be increased by one-third to resist transient
loads such as wind or seismic forces.
(2) Below lowest adjacent exterior soil grade.
(3) Passive soil pressure value is for level soil conditions adjacent to footings with
a maximum value not to exceed 2,500 psf.
Neblett & Associates, Inc.
f 1
' Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 7 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore,California
Post-Tension Slab/Footings
A post-tensioned slab/footing system may be considered as an alternate to conventional
foundations for residence support. Presented below are preliminary geotechnical criteria for
post-tensioned slab/footings based on Table 18-III-L and Table 19-III-AA of the 1997 UBC.
These criteria are based on low expansive soil subgrade condition and assume a 40-percent
montmorillonite clay fraction.
Thornthwaite Moisture Index -20
Climatic Rating (C,v) 15
Depth to Constant Suction 7 ft.
Constant Suction (pF) 3.6
Velocity of Moisture Flow 0.7 inch/month
Center Lift em= 5.6 ft. ym= 2.9 in.
Edge Lift em=2.7 ft. yn,= 0.62 in.
Minimum Depth of Footings 24 inches (perimeter)
Slab Thickness 5 inches thick (minimal).
Sub-grade Pre-saturation Presoak approximately 4-5 percentage
points above the optimum moisture
content to a depth of 18 inches.
General Remarks
(1) Adequate laboratory tests should be performed during precise grading to
verify the soil expansion potential of the near grade compacted engineered fill,
and the foundation criteria provided herein should be confirmed on a lot-by-
lot basis.
(2) The reinforcements shown above should be considered as minlli1ulrl
requirements. More restrictive criteria based on structural design and/or
regulatory or Code requirements shall govern.
Neblett &Associates, Lic.
• • Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage U Page 8 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore,Califomia
(3) All foundation excavations should be inspected 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.
(4) Excavated material from footing trenches should not be placed in slab-on-
grade areas unless properly compacted and tested.
(5) Isolated exterior post/column footings should be tied-back to the main
foundation system in at least two (2)orthogonal directions.
(6) Footing depths should not be allowed to be affected adversely, such as
through erosion, softening, digging, landscaping, etc.
(7) Where foundations encroach closer than five (5) feet horizontally from the
flow line of drainage swales, the footing should be deepened sufficiently to
maintain the required embedment depth below the adjacent flow line.
Neblett & Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Projecl No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4, Stage I Page 9 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
Seismic Design
A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and 1997 UBC seismic design parameters were
provided in Reference No. I and these remain applicable for the project. The probabilistic
seismic hazard analyses and the UBC seismic design parameters, excerpted from Reference
No. 1, are included in Appendix A for reference.
Foundation Settlement
Structures bearing on compacted engineered fill will undergo settlements due to structural
loads. Total static settlements for continuous and spread footings designed in accordance
with the above recommendations and with structural loading typical for the residential-type
construction (column and wall loads not exceeding 30 kips and 3 kips/lineal foot,
respectively), are not anticipated to exceed 1-inch. In general, differential settlement between
similarly loaded column footings and continuous footings over a distance of 30 feet is not
expected to exceed 3/4 inch. A majority of these settlements will occur during construction,
with the remaining settlements expected to be long-(erm.
Stab-On-Grade
Recommended criteria for slab-on grade are shown below:
a) Living Area Floor Slabs
Living area concrete floor slabs should be 4 inches thick (minimum) and
should be reinforced with No. 3 bars at 18 inches on center, each way at mid
height. No. 3 bars at 18 inches on center should be provided connecting floor
slabs to footings. In order to minimize migration of moisture up the concrete
slab from soil sub-grade and damage to floor coverings, a moisture/water
vapor retarder should be installed beneath floor slabs, as hereinafter
recommended.
Neblett &Associates, /tic.
' Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 10 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore, California
b) Garage Floor Slabs
Garage floor slabs should be 4 inches thick (minimum) with No. 3 bars at 18
inches on center, each way at mid-height. The slabs should be quartered or
saw-cut. The floor slab should be. isolated from stem wall footings. Provide 4
inches gravel or sand base below slab. Generally, no moisture barrier is
considered necessary for the garage floor slab.
c) Driveway
Driveway concrete slabs should be 4 inches thick (minimurn) with No. 3 bars
at 24 inches on center, each way at mid-height. The slab may be placed
directly on properly prepared sub-grade. No moisture barrier is required under
driveway slabs.
d) Exterior Flatwork
Exterior concrete flatwork and concrete walkways should be 4 inches thick
(nominal). Hardscape areas within two feet of the descending slopes should
include a thickened edge, deepened to provide a minimum five (5) feet
horizontal setback between the bottom outside face of the thickened edge and
slope face.
e) Curb and Gutter
Curb and gutter should be supported on approved compacted engineered fill.
Prior to concrete placement, the sub-grade should be moisture conditioned to
approximately 2 percentage points above the optimum moisture contents to a
depth of 12 inches.
e) Sub-grade Pre-saturation
Prior to concrete placement, the soil sub-grade beneath slabs and curb and
gutter should be thoroughly wetted to about 12 inches depth to a moisture
condition of about 2 percentage points above the optimum moisture content
and exhibit firm and unyielding condition.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page I 1 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore,California
f) General
Interior floor slabs and exterior concrete flatwork, including driveway, should
be properly designed for the construction and service loading conditions, and
potential settlements. The structural details, such as slab thickness, concrete
strength, reinforcing criteria, joint spacing, etc. should be established by the
Project 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,
Moisture/Water Vapor Retarder for Concrete Slab-on-Grade
In order to reduce the potential for moisture/water vapor migration up through the slab and
possibly affecting floor covering, a moisture vapor retarder is recommended under interior
concrete floor slab-on-grade. As a minimum, this moisture vapor retarder should consist of
10-mil thick polyethylene ("Visqueen"), properly lapped and sealed, and placed mid-height
within a 4-inch coarse sand layer.
The following alternate recommendations are based on the tentative guidelines by the
American Concrete Institute (ACI, April 2001) to reduce the potential moisture/water vapor
intrusion in concrete slab-on-grade. Based on our review of available literature, it appears
that the ACI procedure would be more effective to help reduce potential moisture/water
vapor migration up through concrete slab-on-grade.
Recommendations based on the ACI guidelines are presented below:
• The rrtaisture/water vapor retarder should consist of high strength
polyethylene membrane and should meet or exceed the ASTM: E-1745-97
Class C material requirements for water vapor permeance, tensile strength and
puncture resistance. The vapor retarder should consist of "Moistop Plus"
(Fortifiber Building Products Systems) or"Vapor Block" VB 15 (Americover,
Inc.), or approved equal. The vapor retarder should be underlain by a capillary
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 12 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore,California
break comprised of minimum 4 inches thick pea gravel layer. The gravel layer
should be placed and compacted on approved soil sub-grade.
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 slump concrete (low shrinkage mix design)
should be used for the slab construction, as determined by the Project
Structural Engineer.
The moisture/water vapor protection for concrete slab-on-grade should be selected based on
cost and construction considerations, and considering potential future problems resulting
from increased soil moisture as well as improper and uncontrolled landscape irrigation
practices. Regardless of the moisture/water vapor retarder system selected, it should be
emphasized that proper control of irrigation and landscape water adjacent to the structure is
of paramount importance.
Buildin Set-back
Where foundations for buildings and retaining structures are located adjacent to slopes, the
footing depths and setbacks should be in accordance with the 1997 UBC and the
requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore. The horizontal distance from the outside edge of
the footing to the face of slope, however, shall in no case be less than ten feet..
For minor masonry walls, it is our opinion that minimum horizontal setback of 5 feet from
the outer edge of footings to the slope surface may used.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Pa-e 13 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
Retaining Walls
(a) Retaining wall footings should be supported on compacted engineered fill. The wall
footings may be designed based on a maximum allowable soil pressure of 1,500 psf.
For retaining walls, the recommended minimum footing depth is 2 feet below the
lowest adjacent soil grade.
(b) Retaining walls should be adequately designed to resist the lateral soil pressures and
the anticipated construction loadings and service conditions. The earth pressure acting
on retaining walls depends primarily on the allowable wall movement, type of
backfill materials, backfill slopes, wall inclination, surcharges, and any hydrostatic
pressure. The following minimum lateral earth pressures are recommended for
vertical walls with no hydrostatic pressure and no surcharge:
Wall Condition Backfill Slope Lateral Earth Pressure
(Equivalent Fluid Pressure)
( cf)
Active Condition Level 40
(Cantilever Walls)
2HA V 55
The above values are applicable to non-expansive, granular backfill (sands) placed
between the wall stem and an imaginary plane rising at 45 degrees from below the
edge (heel) of the wall footings.
(c) The surcharge effect of anticipated adjacent loads on the wall backfill (e.g., traffic,
footings) should be included in the wall design. If the wall is free to deflect,
additional lateral pressure equal to 33 percent of the maximum surcharge load located
within a distance equal to the height of the wall should be used in design.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
' Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 14 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
(d) The wall design should include water-proofing (where appropriate) and weep holes or
back-drains for relieving possible hydrostatic pressure. The back-drain should consist
of perforated Schedule 40 PVC pipe, minimum 4-inch diameter, embedded in
minimum 3 cubic feet/foot of gravel and enveloped in MIRAFI 140 geo-fabric or
approved equal. The drain pipe should be installed at a minimum gradient of 1
percent and should discharge into suitable outlet.
(e) No backfill should be placed against concrete until minimum design strengths are
attained, as determined by concrete compression tests.
(f) Retaining wall backfill should be mechanically compacted to minimum 90 percent
relative compaction (ASTM: D 1557). No ponding, jetting or flooding, should be
permitted.
Utility Trench Backfill
Bedding material should consist of on-site sandy or imported materials exhibiting a Sand
Equivalent (S.E.) value of 30 or greater, and should comply with the requirements of the City
of Lake Elsinore.
The fill soils derived from on-site excavations are considered suitable for trench backfill,
provided they are free of organic material and rocks over 4 inches in maximurn dimension.
Backfill of all exterior and interior trenches should be placed in thin lifts and mechanically
compacted to achieve a relative compaction of not less than 90% based on ASTM: D1557.
Care should be taken not to damage utility lines.
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).
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 15 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore, California
To prevent water migration into building sub-grade through the granular bedding layer and/or
trench backfill, utility trenches should be backfilled with clayey soils or sand-cement slurry
to minimum 3 feet length at their entry points.
Trenches greater than 4 feet in depth should be shored or sloped back in accordance with the
requirements of local regulatory agency, the State of California Division of Industrial Safety
and Construction Safety Orders, and Federal OSHA requirements.
Concrete Design
The results of soluble sulfate testing (Table 1) indicate negligible sulfate concentration.
Based on the laboratory test results presented in Table 1I1, sulfate exposure for concrete is
considered negligible (UBC Table 19-A-4). Concrete mix design, including water-cement
ratio should be in accordance with negligible sulfate exposure as presented in 1997 UBC
Table 19-A-4 and the requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore. Based on Table 19-A-4,
special sulfate resistant concrete is not required.
Site Drainage
(1) The landscape architect and Owner should be aware of the potential problems, which
may develop when drainage is altered through construction of paved walkways and
patios. Conditions which will lead to ground saturation must be avoided.
(2) No alteration of pad gradients should be allowed which will prevent pad and roof
runoff from being directed to approved disposal areas.
(3) Finish grades should be designed and constructed to maintain positive drainage away
from structures at all times. Recommended minimum gradient away from structures
for graded soil areas and hardscape areas is 2 percent and 1 percent, respectively.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
i
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 16 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
Slone Planting,Irrigation and Maintenance
General guidelines for slope planting, irrigation and.maintenance are shown below:
(1) Slope planting should consist of appropriate drought resistant vegetation as
recommended by the Landscape Architect. Landscaping of slopes should be
completed as soon as possible and properly maintained.
(2) 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.
(3) If automatic sprinkler systems are installed, their use must be adjusted to account for
natural rainfall conditions.
(4) All interceptor ditches, drainage terraces, down-drains, and any other drainage
devices that have been installed must be maintained and cleaned.
(5) If rodent activity is present, the property owner must undertake a program for the
elinunation of burrowing animals. This must be an ongoing program in order to
promote slope stability.
(6) Water must not be allowed to flow over the constructed or natural slopes. This may
require the construction of berms or ditches along the top of slopes, if such devices
are not in place.
PLAN REVIEW, OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
As precise grading and foundation plans are completed, they should be forwarded to the
Project Geotechnical Engineer for review for conformance with the intent of these
recommendations or to develop additional recommendations, as necessary.
Neblett & Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 17 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
This firm should observe construction, grading and backfill operations at the site including
the following:
♦ Footing excavations
♦ Slab sub-grade preparation and moisture conditioning
♦ Utility trench backfill
♦ Area drain installation
♦ Retaining wall footings, back-drain systems, and backfill.
♦ Concrete flatwork sub-grade
♦ Storm drain and sewer line excavation and backfill
Prior to the commencement of finish grading operations on-site, including backfilling of
trenches and construction of flatwork, the Project Geotechnical Engineer should be notified
at least two working days in advance in order to schedule appropriate observations and
testing services as needed.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 18 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore,California
LIMITATIONS
This report presents information and data relative to the subject grading and placement of
compacted fill within the limits shown on the attached map. A representative of this firm
conducted periodic tests and made observations during grading in an effort to determine the
compliance of the work with project specifications. During grading, our personnel did not
direct or supervise the contractor or the contractor's work forces. Professional and technical
advice and suggestions were provided to the Owner and/or the Owner's designated
representative based on the results of the tests and observations.
The results of field density tests reported herein are valid at the locations and depths tested
and at the time of testing only. Changes in the condition and properties of compacted fill can
occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or human activities
(such as soil expansion, shrinkage, rainfall, landscape irrigation, and other factors) at or
adjacent to the property. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly
or partially by changes outside our control.
Our observations and testing services as well as the findings and conclusions presented in
this report are in accordance with the currently accepted principles and practice in the field of
geotechnical engineering. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the
conclusions and professional opinions provided herein.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
' Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 19 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
This report is subject to review by the controlling authority for the subject property. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office.
Respectfully submitted,
NEBLETT & ASSOCIATES, INC.
(,WEEA/ 1.N� QRO S51oNq
�• M
t O p O r,
By: (T) c� 2 y, y:
t cn
A. Guesnon, * b49-30-07 * Daniel J. o ika E.rxp•9-30-06
CEG 2361, Reg. Ex 9/30/07 \q RGE 2726, Fleg. E� c �
Project Geologist 9TF0 CA�� Senior Project Engin 9lf OF CP��F��
QPOFESSIpNR
�0 S.SR grslF�
Reviewed By: L aP z
Vas S. , ivat .11. rc
RGE 2043, Re 's'373'1/Q
Chief Engineer �FOTECON�°P��P
-1 FO
OP CAX1F�P
Attachments:
List of References
Table I - Maximum Dry Density/Optimum Moisture Content Test Results
Table II - Summary of Field Density Test Results
Appendix A - Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses and the 1997 UBC Seismic
Design Parameters (Excerpted from Reference No. 1)
Plates 1 through 3 - Geotechnical Maps
Distribution: Addressee (6 copies)
Wilson-Mikami, Scott Wilson (I Copy)
File: 420-000-07 091206 Laing, Parcel 4, Int. RG Comp. Report.doc
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP,Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 20 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920,Lake Elsinore, California
LIST OF REFERENCES
(1) Neblett & Associates Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and 40-scale
Grading Plan Review, Tentative Tract 31920, Phase I Residential and Golf Course
Development, City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside California, dated December
15, 2004 (Project No. 420-000-05).
(2) Neblett & Associates Inc., Additional Fault Investigation and Response to County of
Riverside Report Review, Tentative Tract 31920, Summerly Site, City of Lake
Elsinore, California, dated October 18, 2005 (Project No. 420-000-03).
(3) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and 40-Scale Grading Plan Review,
Tentative Tract 31920, Stage 2 of Summerly Development, City of Lake Elsinore,
County of Riverside, California, dated February 7, 2006, Project No. 420-001-05,
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing, CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4, Stage I Page 1 of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
TABLE I
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS
Laboratory Standard: ASTM: D 1557
Classification Optimum Maximum
Soil Moisture Content Dry Density
Type (°Io} (Pei)
A Silty Sandy Gravel 9.5 130.0
B Silty Sand 8.5 132.0
C Silty Sandy Gravel 8.5 132.0
E Olive Grey Silly Sand 11.5 124.0
1 Yellow Grey Clayey Sand 10.5 126.5
J Olive Grey Silty Sand 10.5 129.5
L Yellow Brown Silty Sand 9.5 129,0
M Grey Olive Silty Sand w/Gravei 8.5 135.0
TABLE 11
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
REL.
UNIT REL. COMP. PASS
TEST TEST ELEV. MOIST. DRY WT. COMP. STD SOIL or
DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (per) (%) {%) TYPE FAIL
1 1/22/05 1 Tract 4/Lot 50 1259.0 11.4 121.5 93 90 A PASS
2 Tract 4/Lot 48 1260.0 10.8 120.4 93 90 A PASS
3 Tract 4/Lot 11 1259.0 10.7 118.8 91 90 A PASS
4 Tract 4/1-ot 12 1261.0 11.2 122.6 94 90 A PASS
5 AO Street 1260.0 12.3 124.2 96 90 A PASS
6 AO Street 1261.0 11.5 123.7 95 90 A PASS
7 Tract 4/1-ot 9 1262.0 l L6 121.8 94 90 A PASS
8 Tract 4/1_.ot 12 1262.0 12.2 122.3 94 90 A PASS
13 AK Street 1261.0 10.6 125.5 95 90 B PASS
14 AK Street 1262.0 113 126.2 96 90 B PASS
Laing, CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4, Stage I Page 2of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
1 1/23/05 17 Tract 4/Lot 51 1258.0 1 1.2 123.4 93 90 B PASS
18 Tract 4/Lot 48 1260.0 10.5 121.3 92 90 B PASS
19 Tract 4/Lot 24 1262.0 10.7 122.5 93 90 B PASS
20 Tract 4/Lot 46 1263.0 1 1 A 124.6 94 90 B PASS
21 Tract 4/Lot 47 1264.0 11.8 119.4 92 90 A PASS
1 1/28/05 33 Tract 4/Lot 13 1268.0 10.7 123.6 94 90 B PASS
34 Tract 4/1-ot 16 1269.0 10.2 121.4 92 90 B PASS
35 F Tract 4/1-ot 18 1264.0 9.3 118.2 89 90 B FAIL
" 35 R Tract 4/Lot 18 1264.0 10.5 122.6 93 90 B PASS
36 Tract 4/1-ot 19 1265.0 11.2 123.5 94 90 B PASS
37 Tract 4/1-ot 49 1264.0 10.4 121.8 92 90 B PASS
38 Tract 4/Lot 14 1269.0 11.3 123.2 93 90 B PASS
" 39 Tract 4/Lot 15 1270.0 10.7 120.5 91 90 B PASS
" 40 Tract 4/1-ol 21 1260.0 10.7 125.4 95 90 C PASS
" 41 Tract 4/1-ol 20 1262.0 11.5 126.3 96 90 C PASS
42 Tract 4/Streei 1264.0 11.2 127.7 97 90 C PASS
43 Tract 4/Street 1266.0 10.8 128.3 97 90 C PASS
44 "Tract 4/l_ot 20 1265.0 1 1.3 121.5 92 90 B PASS
45 Tract 4/Street 1263.0 10.6 123.6 94 90 B PASS
46 Tract 4/Street 1265.0 #i 10.5 122.2 93 90 B PASS
47 Tract 4/Lot 20 1264.0 11.4 124.3 94 90 B PASS
1 1/29/05 56 Tract 4/1-ol 21 1266.0 10.7 124.8 95 90 C PASS
57 Tract 4/Streel 1268.0 11.2 126.5 96 90 C PASS
58 Traci 4/Loi 20 1269.0 10A 125.3 95 90 C PASS
59 Tract 4/Street 1268.0 10.5 124.7 94 90 C PASS
60 Tract 4/Lot 21 1269.0 12.3 120.2 92 90 A PASS
" 61 Tract 4/Street 1270.0 11.8 119.6 92 90 A PASS
62 Tract 4/Lot 23 1260.0 11.7 121.5 93 90 A PASS
63 Tract 4/1-ot 22 1263.0 12.4 123.2 95 90 A PASS
1 1/30/05 64 Tract 4/Street 1266.0 11.2 122.8 93 90 B PASS
65 Tract 4/1-ot 47 1267.0 10.7 123.4 93 90 B PASS
66 Tract 4/1-ot 48 1269.0 10.8 121.7 92 90 B PASS
67 F Tract 4/1-ot 50 1265.0 8.3 117.2 89 90 B FAIL
67 R Tract 4/Lot 50 1265.0 10.6 121.5 92 90 B PASS
68 Tract 4/Lot 46 1267.0 11.4 122.6 93 90 B PASS
69 Tract 4/1-ol 24 1265.0 10.5 124.3 94 90 B PASS
70 Tract 4/1-oi 23 1267.0 11.3 123.4 93 90 B PASS
Laing, C,P, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4, Stage 1 Page 3of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
12/02/05 91 Tract 4/Street 1256.0 12.2 120.4 93 90 A PASS
92 Tract 4/1-ot 53 1256.0 11.4 122.2 94 90 A PASS
" 93 Tract 4/Lot 45 1258.0 11.7 119.8 92 90 A PASS
94 Tract 4/Street 1257.0 10.8 120.6 93 90 A PASS
95 Tract 4/Lot 27 1255.0 10.6 124.7 94 90 B PASS
" 96 Tract 4/1-ot 25 1258.0 11.3 122.5 93 90 B PASS
97 Tract 4/Lot 26 1260.0 11.5 123.4 93 90 B PASS
98 Tract 4/Lot 44 1261.0 10.7 121.8 92 90 B PASS
12/05/05 99 Tract 4/Lot 54 1254.0 10.7 121.4 92 90 B PASS
100 Tract 4/Lot 52 1260.0 10.3 123.7 94 90 B PASS
" 101 Tract 4/Street 1261.0 11.2 122.5 93 90 B PASS
102 Tract 4/Lot 43 1262.0 10.4 124.6 94 90 B PASS
" 103 Tract 4/Lot 28 1263.0 1 L6 123.3 95 90 A PASS
" 104 Tract 4/Street 1265.0 12.4 119.8 92 90 A PASS
105 Tract 4/1-ot 55 1255.0 12.2 121.5 93 90 A PASS
106 Tract 4/Lot 42 1257.0 11.8 120.6 93 90 A PASS
" 107 Tract 4/Street 1255.0 11.5 119.6 92 90 A PASS
108 Tract 4/Street 1257.0 11.3 122.4 94 90 A PASS
" 109 Tract 4/Lot 56 1256.0 12.2 121.5 93 90 A PASS
110 Tract 4/Lot 5 1255.0 10.8 119.7 91 90 A PASS
III Tract 4fLot 6 1257.0 11.4 120.3 93 90 A PASS
112 Tract 4/Lot 8 1260.0 11.7 119.8 92 90 A PASS
12/06/05 115 Tract 4/Lot 4 1260.0 9.8 125.4 95 90 B PASS
1 16 Tract 4/1-ot 3 1262.0 10.6 125.7 95 90 B PASS
117 F Tract 4/Lot 59 1259.0 8.3 124.3 94 90 B PASS
117 1t Tract 4/1-ot 59 1259.0 10.5 124.3 94 90 B PASS
118 Tract 4/Lol 7 1262.0 11.4 126.7 96 90 B PASS
119 Tract 4/Lot 6 1263.0 10.3 127.9 97 90 C PASS
120 Tract 4/Lot 5 1263.0 10.7 125.3 95 90 C PASS
121 Tract 4/1_ot 3 1264.0 1 L2 124.7 94 90 C PASS
12107/05 138 Tract 4/1-ot 14 1270.0 11.5 125.2 95 90 C PASS
139 Tract 4/Lot 16 1271.0 10.8 123.7 94 90 C PASS
140 Tract 4/Lot 15 1271.0 10.7 124.8 95 90 C PASS
141 Tract 4/Lot 13 1270.0 11.2 126.3 96 90 C PASS
142 Tract 4/Lot 11 1266.0 11.4 121.5 92 90 B PASS
143 Tract 4/Lot 10 1267.0 9.8 124.3 94 90 B PASS
144 Tract 4/Lot 50 1264.0 10.3 123.7 94 90 B PASS
" 145 Tract 4/1-ot 49 1267.0 10.6 121.2 92 90 B PASS
Laing, CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Pratt 4, Stage I Page 4of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
12/09/05 146 Tract 4/Lot 2 1258.0 10.7 121.5 92 90 B PASS
" 147 F Tract 4/Lot 4 1260.0 8.2 117.3 89 90 B FAJL
147 R Tract 4/1-ot 4 1260.0 9.8 122.6 93 90 B PASS
148 Tract 4/Lot 1 1261.0 10.3 124.2 94 90 B PASS
149 Traci 4/Lot 74 1256.0 11.2 123.7 94 90 B PASS
150 "Tract 4/1-ot 73 1258.0 10.5 122.6 93 90 B PASS
151 Tract 4/Loi 59 1261.0 10.7 124.8 95 90 B PASS
152 Tract 4/1-ot 2 1264.0 11.4 123.7 94 90 B PASS
153 Tract 4/Lot 55 125&0 10.7 125.5 95 90 C PASS
154 Tract 4/Lot 52 1262.0 11,2 126.3 96 90 C PASS
155 Tract 4/Lot 45 1264.0 11.3 124.2 94 90 C PASS
156 Tract 4/1-ot 26 1264.0 10.5 123.6 94 90 C PASS
157 Tract 4/Loi 25 1266.0 11.7 119.8 92 90 A PASS
158 Traci 4/Lot 29 1264.0 12.4 121.5 93 90 A PASS
" 159 Tract 4/Lot 42 1263.0 12.2 120.7 93 90 A PASS
" 160 Tract 4/Lot 54 1264.0 11.5 118.8 91 90 A PASS
12/09/05 161 Tract 4/Lot 51 1263.0 10.4 124.5 94 90 B PASS
162 Tract 4/Lot 50 1267.0 10.6 122.3 93 90 B PASS
163 Tract 4/Lot 53 1264.0 11,2 120.8 92 90 B PASS
164 Tract 4/Lot 44 1267.0 10.8 123.7 94 90 B PASS
165 Tract 4/Lot 27 1266.0 9.7 124.5 94 90 B PASS
166 Tract 4/Lot 28 1268.0 10.3 121.4 92 90 B PASS
167 Tract 4/Lot 29 1268.0 11.5 123.3 93 90 B PASS
168 Tract 4/Lot 43 1269.0 11.2 122.7 93 90 B PASS
12/15/05 239 Tract 4/Lot 57 1256.0 1 1.3 124.2 94 90 B PASS
240 Tract 4/Lot 58 1254.0 10.7 125.6 95 90 B PASS
241 Tract 4/Lot 38 1255.0 10.8 122.7 93 90 B PASS
" 242 Tract 4/Lot 39 1258.0 11.4 123.8 94 90 B PASS
243 Tract 4/Lot 41 1257.0 12.2 119.6 92 90 A PASS
244 Tract 4/Lot 40 1259.0 11.8 121 A 93 90 A PASS
245 Tract 4/Street 1259.0 1 1.5 120.7 93 90 A PASS
246 Traci 4/Lot 30 1258.0 12.4 121.8 94 90 A PASS
247 Tract 4/Lot 31 1259.0 11,5 119.2 92 90 A PASS
248 Tract 4/Street 1260.0 12.3 123.4 95 90 A PASS
" 249 Tract 4/1-ot 33 1258.0 12.2 122.7 94 90 A PASS
250 Tract 4/1-oi 32 1259.0 11.6 124.3 96 90 A PASS
251 Tract 4/Street 1260.0 11.8 122.6 94 90 A PASS
252 Tract 4/Lot 40 1261.0 10.7 121.8 94 90 A PASS
253 Tract 4/Lot 34 1257.0 11.4 119.5 92 90 A PASS
254 Tract 4/Lot 33 1261.0 12.3 120.5 93 90 A PASS
Laing, CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Gracie Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4, Stage 1 Page 5of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
12/15/05 255 Tract 4/Lot 59 1255.0 10.4 125.5 95 90 C PASS
" 256 Tract 4/1_ot 61 1257.0 11.5 124.2 94 90 C PASS
257 Tract 4/Lot 73 1256.0 1 1.7 124.6 94 90 C PASS
258 Tract 4/Lot 51 1261.0 10.8 127.3 96 90 C PASS
12/16/05 259 Tract 4/Lot 63 1259.0 10.6 126A 96 90 B PASS
260 Tract 4/Lot 58 1260.0 11.2 125.7 95 90 B PASS
" 261 Tract 4/Lot 62 1262.0 11.4 123.3 93 90 B PASS
262 Tract 4/Lot 60 1263.0 10.7 124.5 94 90 B PASS
263 Tract 4/Lot 72 1261.0 10.6 123.6 94 90 B PASS
" 264 Tract 4/Lot 63 1263.0 11.2 122.7 93 90 B PASS
265 Tract 4/Lot 38 1263.0 11.4 124.5 94 90 B PASS
266 Tract 4/Lot 37 1262.0 11.7 123.4 95 90 A PASS
267 Tract 4/1-ot 35 1263.0 12.3 124.2 96 90 A PASS
268 Tract 4/Lot 36 1264.0 12.5 121.7 94 90 A PASS
269 Tract 4/1-ot 65 1257.0 11.8 122.3 94 90 A PASS
270 Tract 4/Lot 64 1259.0 11.6 120.3 93 90 A PASS
275 Tract 4-5/Street 1260.0 10.5 124.7 94 90 C PASS
l2/23/05 372 Tract 4/Lot 61 1263.0 13.4 115.2 93 90 E PASS
373 Tract 4/Lot 60 1264.0 12.8 117.3 95 90 E PASS
374 Tract 4/Lot 72 1262.0 13.5 116.3 94 90 E PASS
375 Tract 4/Lot 70 1264.0 13.2 115.6 93 90 E PASS
376 Tract 4/Lot 71 1265.0 11.3 119.4 92 90 A PASS
377 Tract 4/Lot 68 1257.0 10.7 121.8 94 90 A PASS
" 378 Tract 4/Lot 69 1260.0 11.7 120.6 93 90 A PASS
379 Tract 4/1-ot 73 1261.0 11.6 123.2 95 90 A PASS
380 Tract 4/Lot 70 1265.0 11.2 119.5 92 90 A PASS
381 Tract 4/1-ot 67 1263.0 11.5 121.3 93 90 A PASS
382 Tract 4/Lot 65 1263.0 12.3 120.8 93 90 A PASS
383 Tract 4/Lot 66 1262.0 11.6 122.2 94 90 A PASS
384 Tract 4/Lot 37 1264,0 10.8 121.7 94 90 A PASS
385 Tract 4/Lot 39 1263.0 10.7 120.4 93 90 A PASS
386 Tract 4/Lot 35 1264.0 11.4 118,8 91 90 A PASS
387 Tract 4/I-ot 32 1264.0 12.2 119.6 92 90 A PASS
388 Tract 4/Lot 67 1264.0 10.8 121.7 92 90 B PASS
389 Tract 4/Lot 69 1265.0 10.5 123.3 93 90 B PASS
390 Tract 4/Lot 62 1264.0 9.7 122.7 93 90 B PASS
391 Tract 4/1-ot 64 1265.0 11.2 124.3 94 90 B PASS
392 Tract 4/Lol 66 1265.0 12.6 114.5 92 90 E PASS
" 393 Tract 4/Lol 68 1265.0 13.4 115.6 93 90 E PASS
Laing, CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
` Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4,Stage 1 Page 6of 8
Surnmerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
12/23/05 394 Tract 4/1-ot 71 1266.0 13.2 113.8 92 90 E PASS
395 Tract 4/Lot 56 1264.0 12.7 116.2 94 90 E PASS
12/27/05 404 Tract 4/Lol 17 1270.0 13.2 113.6 92 90 E PASS
405 Tract 4fLot 19 1271.0 12.8 115.4 93 90 E PASS
406 Tract 4/1-ot 48 1271.0 12.5 114.5 92 90 E PASS
407 Tract 411-ot 17 1271.0 13.3 115.8 93 90 E PASS
408 Tract 4/1-ot 18 1272.0 13.6 116.2 94 90 E PASS
" 409 Tract 4/1-ot 10 1269.0 11.4 123.2 95 90 A PASS
" 410 Tract 4/Lot 8 1267.0 10.8 121.4 93 90 A PASS
411 Tract 4/Lot 9 1268.0 11.3 122.7 94 90 A PASS
03/20/06 1759 Tract 4/1-ot 30 1260.0 12.5 118.5 92 90 J PASS
1766 Tract 4/Lot 31 1262.0 12.1 119.2 92 90 J PASS
1761 Tract 4/Lot 34 1263.0 12.4 119.1 92 90 J PASS
1762 Tract 4/Lot 36 1265.0 12.0 118.1 92 90 L PASS
1763 Tract 4/Street 1261.0 12.3 119.5 92 90 J PASS
1764 Tract 4/Street 1262.0 11.8 117.9 91 90 L PASS
1765 Tract 4/1-ot 41 1.264.0 11.5 119.7 92 90 L PASS
1766 Tract 4/Lot 65 1264.0 12.3 118.5 92 90 J PASS
1767 Tract 4/1-ot 22 1269.0 12.3 117.7 93 90 1 PASS
1768 Tract 4/Lot 38 1265.0 12.5 118.4 94 90 1 PASS
1769 Tract 4/1-ot 71 1267.0 13.2 116.3 92 90 1 PASS
1770 Tract 4fLot 63 1265.0 12.7 117.2 93 90 1 PASS
1771 Tract 4/Lot 66 1266.0 11.4 121.5 94 90 L PASS
1772 Tract 4/Lot 33 1266.0 11.6 119.4 93 90 L PASS
1773 Tract 4/1-ot 41 1268.0 12.2 120.8 94 90 L PASS
i 774 Tract 4/Lot 55 1267.0 12.4 119.3 92 90 L PASS
05/04/06 2721 Village Parkway 1257.0 11.4 125.5 93 90 M PASS
2722 Village Parkway 1259.0 10.8 123.6 92 90 M PASS
" 2723 Village Parkway 1261.0 9.7 124.5 92 90 M PASS
2724 Village Parkway 1262.0 10.3 126.2 93 90 M PASS
05/15/06 FG-I (SE) Parcel 4/Lot 14 FG 10.2 119.8 92 90 A PASS
FG-2 Parcel 4/1-ot 15 FG 9.6 121.3 93 90 A PASS
" FG-3 Parcel 4/1-ot 16 FG 9.8 122.5 94 90 A PASS
FG-4 Parcel 4/1-ot 17 FG t0.3 120.7 93 90 A PASS
FG-5 Parcel4/Lol 18 FG 10.4 121.3 93 90 A PASS
FG-6 Parcel 4/1-ot 19 FG 9.5 123.2 95 90 A PASS
FG-7 (SE) Parcel 4/Lot 20 FG 9.2 122.6 93 90 B PASS
FG-8 Parcel 4/1-ot 21 FG 8.8 123.4 93 90 B PASS
Laing,CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4, Stage I Page 7of 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
05/15/06 FG-9 Parcel 4/1-ot 22 FG 9.3 121.5 92 90 B PASS
FG-l0 Parcel 4/Lot 23 FG 9.5 122.7 93 90 B PASS
FG-I 1 Parcel 4/Lot 24 FG 8.7 120.6 91 90 B PASS
" FG-12 Parcel 4/Lot 25 FG 10.2 123.2 93 90 B PASS
" FG-13 Parcel 4/1-ot 26 FG 10.3 119.8 92 90 A PASS
FG-14 Parcel 4/Lot 27 FG 9.6 121.4 93 90 A PASS
" FG-15 (SE) Parcel 4/Lot 28 FG 9.4 120.6 93 90 A PASS
" FG-16 Parcel 4/Lot 29 FG 10.5 122.3 94 90 A PASS
05/25/06 FG-17 Parcel 4/Lot 38 FG 9.5 120.3 93 90 A PASS
FG-18 Parcel 4/Lot 39 FG 9.7 119.8 92 90 A PASS
FG-19 Parcel 4/1-ot 40 FG 10.2 121.5 93 90 A PASS
FG-20(SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 41 FG 9.9 123.2 95 90 A PASS
FG-21 Parcel 4/1-ot 42 FG 10.4 122.7 94 90 A PASS
FG-22 Parcel 4/1-ot 43 FG 9.5 l 21.8 92 90 B PASS
FG-23 Parcel 4/Lot 44 FG 9.2 123.5 94 90 B PASS
" FG-24 Parcel 4/1-ot 45 FG 10.3 122.7 93 90 B PASS
" FG-25 Parcel 4/1-ot 46 FG 8.8 121.3 92 90 B PASS
FG-26 Parcel 4/Lot 47 FG 9.2 123.7 94 90 B PASS
FG-27 Parcel 4/1-ot 48 FG 9.5 124.2 94 90 B PASS
" FG-28 Parcel 4/Lot 49 FG 10.3 122.8 93 90 B PASS
FG-29 Parcel 4/Lot 50 FG 9.6 121.7 92 90 B PASS
FG-30(SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 51 FG 10.2 119.6 92 90 A PASS
" FG-31 Parcel 4/1-ot 52 FG 9.8 121.5 93 90 A PASS
FG-32 Parcel 4/1-ot 53 FG 9.7 120.6 93 90 A PASS
06/05/06 FG-33 Parcel 4/1-ot 54 FG 10.3 121.2 93 90 A PASS
" FG-34 Parcel 4/Lot 55 FG 9.5 119.7 92 90 A PASS
FG-35 (SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 56 FG 9.8 120.6 93 90 A PASS
FG-36 Parcel 4/1-ot 57 FG 10.4 121.5 93 90 A PASS
FG-37 Parcel 4/1-ot 58 FG 10.2 123.3 95 90 A PASS
FG-38 Parcel 4/Lot 59 FG 9.3 122.4 93 90 B PASS
FG-39 Parcel 4/Lot 60 FG 8.7 123.7 94 90 B PASS
FG-40 Parcel 4/Lot 61 FG 8.8 121.6 92 90 B PASS
FG-41 Parcel 4/Lot 62 FG 8.6 121.4 92 90 B PASS
" FG-42(SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 63 FG 9.8 123.2 93 90 B PASS
FG-43 Parcel 4/1-ot 64 FG 9.3 122.7 93 90 B PASS
FG-44 Parcel 4/1-ot 65 FG 9.2 119.6 91 90 B PASS
FG-45 Parcel 4/Lot 66 FG 9.7 120.5 93 90 A PASS
FG-46 Parcel 4/Lot 67 FG 10.5 122.7 94 90 A PASS
FG-47 Parcel 4/Lot 68 FG 10.2 121.8 94 90 A PASS
FG-48 (SE) Parcel 4/Lot 69 FG 9.5 123.2 95 90 A PASS
Laing,CP, Lake Elsinore, LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No. 420-000-07
Tract 4,Stage t Page 80f 8
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920
Lake Elsinore, California
06/13/06 FG-49 Parcel 4/1-ot 70 FG 9.8 121.3 93 90 A PASS
FG-50 Parcel 4/Lot 71 FG 10.3 122.5 94 90 A PASS
FG-51 Parcel 4/Lot 72 FG 10.2 120.7 93 90 A PASS
FG-52 Parcel 4/Lot 73 FG 9.7 121.4 93 90 A PASS
FG-53 Parcel 4/Lot 74 FG 10.5 123.6 95 90 A PASS
" FG-54 Parcel 4/Lot 30 FG 9.5 124.2 94 90 B PASS
IP FG-55 Parcel 4/1-ot 31 FG 8.8 123.5 94 90 B PASS
FG-56 Parcel 4/1-ot 32 FG 8.7 121.8 92 90 B PASS
FG-57(SE) Parcel 4/Lot 33 FG 9.5 121.4 92 90 B PASS
FG-58 Parcel 4/1-ot 34 FG 9.2 120.7 91 90 B PASS
FG-59 Parcel 4/Lot 35 FG 8.6 123.3 93 90 B PASS
" FG-60 Parcel 4/1-ot 36 FG 8.8 122.6 93 90 B PASS
FG-61 Parcel 4/Lot 37 FG 9.3 121.8 92 90 B PASS
" FG-62 Parcel 4/Lot I FG 10.7 119.3 92 90 A PASS
FG-63(SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 2 FG 10.3 121.7 94 90 A PASS
FG-64 Parcel 4/1-ot 3 FG 9.6 120.5 93 90 A PASS
06/19/06 FG-65 Parcel 4/Lot 4 FG 9.8 125.8 97 90 A PASS
FG-66 Parcel 4/1-ot 5 FG 9.6 125.8 97 90 A PASS
FG-67 Parcel 4/1-ot 6 FG 10.2 125.8 97 90 A PASS
" FG-68 Parcel 4/1.ot 7 FG 10.4 125.8 97 90 A PASS
FG-69(SE) Parcel 4/1-ot 8 FG 9.5 125.8 97 90 A PASS
" FG-70 Parcel 4/Lot 9 FG 8.8 125.8 95 90 B PASS
FG-71 Parcel 4/1-ot 10 FG 9.6 125.8 95 90 B PASS
FG-72 Parcel 4/Lot I 1 FG 9.2 125.8 95 90 B PASS
FG-73 Parcel 4/1-ot 12 FG 9.7 125.8 95 90 B PASS
FG-74 Parcel 4/Lot 13 FG 10.2 125.8 95 90 B PASS
05/15/06 FS-75 Parcel 4/Lot 14-slope FG 10.3 119.6 92 90 A PASS
FS-76 Parcel 4/Lot 15-slope FG 9.8 121.4 93 90 A PASS
FS-77 Parcel 4/Lot 15-slope FG 9.5 120.7 93 90 A PASS
FS-78 Parcel 4/Lot 16-slope FG 10.4 122.2 94 90 A PASS
FS-79 Parcel 4/Lot 17-slope FG 10.6 119.8 92 90 A PASS
FS-80 Parcel 4/Lot 18-slope FG 9.7 120.6 93 90 A PASS
FS-81 Parcel 4/1-ot 19-slope FG 9.8 119.5 92 90 A PASS
" FS-82 Parcel 4/Lot 19-slope FG 10.3 120.4 93 90 A PASS
FS-83 Parcel 4/Lot 20-slope FG 10.2 120.5 93 90 A PASS
FS-84 Parcel 4/1-ot 20-slope FG 9.7 119.9 92 90 A PASS
Notes: F=Failed Test
R= Retest
(SE)=Sulfate and Expansion Test"Taken (refer to Table I for Results)
1
APPENDIX A
SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS
(Excerpted from Reference No. 1)
L Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,200b
Interim hough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 21 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR PEAK GROUND
ACCELERATION and 1997 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
Peak ground acceleration (PGA) values were calculated for the subject project. The PGA
values provided here can be used in the design of pertinent structures of the subject project.
The values provided here should be evaluated by the project structural engineer. Values are
given for fill (soil) areas. The PGA analysis was performed by following the guidelines and
recommendations provided in the following publications: the 1997 Universal Building Code
(UBC); Martin and Lew (1999); California Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publications 42 (1999) and 117 (1997); Petersen and others (1996); and Jackson and others
(1995).
PGA values were estimated by conducting a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis using the
FRISKSP computer program by Blake (1998). The PGA values represent ground motions
that, as a minimum, have a 10-percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years, as required
by the 1997 UBC. Three PGA values were calculated for fill (soil) areas using the
attenuation functions of Boore and others (1997), Bozorgnia and others (1999) and Sadigh
and others (1997) from the FRISKSP computer program. Table Di lists the PGA values
from each attenuation function and the mean PGA of the three values for fill (soil) areas.
The probability of exceedance curves for each attenuation function are shown on Figures D1
through D3.
The 1997 UBC seismic design parameters for the site were calculated for fill (SD soil type)
areas using the UBCSEIS computer program written by Blake (1999). Table Dl includes the
1997 UBC seismic design parameters and Table D2 lists the faults within 100 km of the
subject site. The design response spectrum for fill areas is shown on Figure D4 and a map of
the active faults within 100 kilometers of the subject site is shown on Figure D5.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage 1 Page 22 of 24
S%im mercy Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, Califomia
TABLE D 1
PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION VALUES AND SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
SOUTHERLY PROJECT, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION VALUES FOR FILL (SOIL)
Attenuation Function (FRISKSP) Estimated PGA Value
Bozorgnia and others (1999) 0.59g
Sadigh and others (1997) 0.60g
Boore and others (1997) 0.60g
0.60g
Mean PGA Value
1997 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
SITE COORDINATES NEAREST TYPE A FAULT
Site Latitude: 33.6511 San Jacinto - Anza
Site Longitude: 117.3003 Distance: 36.8 km
UBC SEISMIC ZONE NEAREST TYPE B FAULT
0.4 Elsinore -Temecula
Distance: 3.7 km
UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS
Na: 1.1
Soil Type SD (Stiff Soil Profile 600-1200 Nv: 1.4
ft/sec) Ca: 0.50
Cv: 0.88
Ts: 0.705
To: 0.141
Neblett &Associates, Inc.
1
Laing-CP, Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12, 2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 23 o!'24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
TABLE D2
FAULT PARAMETERS
SOUTHERLY PROJECT, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
APPROX. SOURCE MAX. SLIP FAULT
ABBREVIATED DISTANCE1 TYPE MAG. RATE TYPE
FAULT NAME (km) (A,B,C) (Mw) (mm/yr) (SS,DS,BT)
------ ---- -- ------ -------
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 1 3 .7 I B I 6.8 5.00 SS
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 4.5 I B I 6 .8 I 5.00 SS
CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 1 31 .6 B 6 .7 1.00 { DS
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 32 .5 I B 6 .9 12 .00 f SS
SAN JACINTO-ANZA ! 36.8 A I 7.2 12.00 I SS
ELSINORE-WHITTIER I 38.5 I B I 6 .8 { 2.50 I SS
ELSINORE-JULIAN I 40 .4 A I 7.1 5.00 4 SS
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO { 40 .9 B ! 6.7 1 12.00 SS
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 45.3 B { 6. 9 1 .50 SS
SAN ANDREAS - Southern I 54 .0 I A I 7 .4 ` 24 . 00 I SS
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 57 .8 B 6 . 9 1 . 00 SS
ROSE CANYON 59 .1 B 6 . 9 , 1 . 50 SS
CUCAMONGA 60.6 { A 7 . 0 { 5 . 00 DS
SAN JOSE 62.5 B 6 . 5 0 .50 I DS
SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 66 .4 B I 7 . 0 I 3 . 00 DS
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 67 .5 B ' 7 . 0 1 . 00 DS
CLEGHORN j 69.4 B { 6 . 5 { 3 . 00 SS
PINTO MOUNTAIN 70.0 B { '7 .0 2 .50 SS
PALOS VERDES 71.5 B 1 7 . 1 I 3 .00 + SS
CORONADO BANK I 71 .8 I B 1 7 . 4 3 .00 I SS
SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture ! 76.3 j A { 7 . 8 34.00 SS
SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 76 .4 B { 6 . 8 4 . 00 I SS
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 80 .4 i B 6 . 7 0.50 I DS
CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 82 .7 I B I 6 . 5 I 0.50 I DS
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 84 . 6 1 B 6 .5 2.00 SS
RAYMOND I 86 . 9 { B { 6 . 5 0.50 DS
HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 89 .4 I B { 7 . 1 I 0.60 I SS
BURNT MTN. { 91 .6 1 B I 6 . 5 I 0.60 I SS
VERDUGO I 95 .3 I B { 6 . 7 I 0.50 ` DS
EUREKA PEAK 96 . 0 1 B 6 .5 0.60 SS
LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 99 . 5 { B I 7 . 3 0.60 SS
LANDERS 99 .7 I B I 7 .3 I 0.60 I SS
HOLLYWOOD I 100 .6 1 B 6 .5 1. 00 DS
SS = strike-slip; DS = dip-slip
Fault Parameters from Peterson and others (1996)
Neblett & Associates, hic.
' Lainc CP,Lake Elsinore,LLC September 12,2006
Interim Rough Grade Compaction Report Project No.420-000-07
Parcel 4,Stage I Page 24 of 24
Summerly Development Site
Tract 31920, Lake Elsinore, California
SEISMICITY REFERENCES
Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B., and Fumal, T.E., 1997, Equations for Estimating Horizontal
Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: A
Summary of Recent Work: Seismological Research Letters, Vol.68, No. 1, pp. 128-153.
Bozorgnia, Y., Campbell, K., and Niazi, M., 1999, Vertical Ground Motion: Characteristics,
Relationship with Horizontal Components, and Building Code Implications: SMIP99
Seminar on Utilization of Strong Ground-Motion Data, Sponsored by the California Division
of Mines and Geology.
Blake, T.F., 1999, UBCSEIS 1.03 A Computer Program for the Estimation of Uniform Building
Code Coefficients Using 3-D Fault Sources: Thomas F. Blake, Computer Services and
Software,Thousand Oaks,CA.
Blake,T.F., 1998, FRISKSP 3.016 A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Estimation of Peak
Acceleration and Uniform Hazard Spectra Using 3-D Faults as Earthquake Sources: Thomas
F. Blake, Computer Services and Software,Thousand Oaks,CA.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1999, Fault-Rupture. Hazard Zones in California:
Special Publication 42.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating
Seismic Hazards in California: Special Publication 177.
International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code, Vol. 1 and 2, April
1997.Jackson, D.D., Aki, K., Cornell, J.H., Dieterich, J.H., Henyey, T.L., Mandyiar, M.,
Schwartz, D., and Ward, S.N., 1995,
Seismic Hazards in Southern California: Probable Earthquakes, 1994 to 2024: Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 85,No. 2, pp. 379-439, April 1995.
Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, Department of
Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology,Geologic Data Map Number 6
Martin, G.R., Lew, M., 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMGSpecial
Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California:
Southern California Earthquake Center, Univ. of Southern California,March 1999.
Petersen, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H. Cao, T., and Reichle, M.S., 1996, Probabilistic
Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California: California Department of
Conservation, DMG, Open-File Report 96-08.
Sadigh, K., Chang, C.-Y., Egan, J.A., Makdisi, F., and Youngs, R. R., 1997, Attenuation
Relationships for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes Based on California Strong Motion Data:
Seismological Research Letters, Vol.68, No. 1,pp. 180-190.
Neblett &Associates, Inc.