HomeMy WebLinkAboutSOILS AND FOUNDATION EVALS FOR 365-200-027 1 SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.
SOILS, MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
897 VIA LATH, SUITE N COLTON, CA 92324 • (909) 370-0474 • (909) 370-0481 • FAX(909) 370-3156
1
J
Report of
Soils and Foundation Evaluations
I Proposed Single Family Residence
Malaga Road e/o Grape Street
Lake Elsinore, California
1
I
I Project No. 05042-F
March 30, 2005
l
J
J
J
_ I
1
Prepared for:
Amando Arroyo
30303 San Rafael
Menifee, California 92584
1 Established 1984
i
SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.
SOILS, MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
897 VIA LATA, SUITE N • COLTON, CA 92324 • (909) 370-0474 • (909) 370-0481 • FAX (909) 370-3156
March 30, 2005 Project No. 05042-F
Amando Arroyo
30303 San Rafael
Menifee, California 92584
Subject: Report of Soils and Foundation Evaluations
Proposed Single Family Residence
Malaga Road e/o Grape Street
Lake Elsinore, California
Dear Mr. Arroyo:
Submitted herewith is the Report of Soils and Foundation Evaluations conducted for the site of the
planned single family residence located on the north side of Malaga Road, east of Grape Street,
Lake Elsinore, California.
JSoils encountered primarily consist of upper disturbed dry and loose gravelly sand with rocks,
overlying soft rippable granitic bedrock to the maximum depth explored.
1 With the bedrock as described, the subject development should be considered feasible provided
consideration is made in using heavy-duty excavating equipment for shallow depth excavations.
Properly constructed conventional spread foundations established exclusively into compacted fills of
local soils/bedrock are anticipated to provide adequate support for the structures planned.
J Potential for site soils liquefaction susceptibility is considered remote. Based on CDMG Special
Report 113, it is understood that the site is not located within Special Studies Zone. No other
physical constraint pertaining to the planned development is apparent.
This report has been substantiated by subsurface explorations and mathematical analysis made in
accordance with the generally accepted engineering principles, including those field and laboratory
testing considered necessary in the circumstances. We offer no other warranty, either express or
Jimplied.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions
l regarding this report, please call the undersigned at your convenience.
1 Respectfully submitted,
Soils Southwest, In
Moloy Gupta, R 170 0 ' Roy White
�xp. 12-31-013
Dist/5-addressee
Page 2
SSW
Established 1984
33°39'20" N, 117°17'19"W
117'19'00"W ) 117'18'00"W 117'17'00"W WGS84 117o16'00"W
IF
■ " ,�� A � it , - -
<t
- v.VeC♦ tt �' )
to u. a en
.r
I ''try- _f�'—'it�' ��•n i•ii�lj ` i. •� �/� _ �� �'.
281
" -"'4- _ ip ;Oran ^A.i � 1 �E Y as •,�Yyj_� � � �.
.
to,
16
to 'b 46A
A � ,
/ _l9
1 a • 1 ,•oa ��� � �
1 ' ' \ etf�A�L�•l, •�� , 0
.:>
1 21
Pp yVatar T /� / A to
117°19'00" W 117-18'00"nW 117'17'00"W WGS84 117'16'00"W
JT\*rxIN MILE I f�3, �000 FEEL 0 500 1000 METERS
�YJ Printed from TOPO!€.'001 National Geographic Holdings(.c-"n-.topo.com)
�J
Site Index May
PROPOSED RESIDENCE FIGURE: 1
MALAGA RD e/o GRAPE ST PN: 05042-F
Soils Southwest, Inc. LAKE ELSINORE, CA DATE: MAR 2005
_J
Arroyo/Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 05042-F
1.0 Introduction
This report presents the results of Soils and Foundation Evaluations conducted for the site of the
planned single family residence located on the north side of Malaga Road, east of Grape Street,
Lake Elsinore, California.
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the nature and engineering properties of the near
grade and subsurface soils, and to provide geotechnical recommendations for cut and fill slopes
construction, foundation design, slab-on-grade, retaining wall, paving, parking, site grading, utility
trench excavations and backfill, and inspection during construction.
The recommendations contained reflect our best estimate of the soils conditions encountered during
field investigations conducted for the site. It is not to be considered as a warranty of the soils for
l other areas, or for the depths beyond the explorations advanced at this time.
J The recommendations supplied should be considered valid and applicable when the following conditions, are
I fulfilled:
i. Pre-grade meeting with contractor, public agency and soils engineer,
ii. Excavated bottom inspections and verifications by soils engineer prior to backfill placement,
1 iii. Continuous observations and testing during site preparation and structural fill soils placement,
1 iv. Observation and inspection of footing trenching prior to steel and concrete placement,
V. Plumbing trench backfill placement prior to concrete slab-on-grade placement,
vi. On and off-site utility trench backfill testing and verifications, and
I vii Consultations as required during construction, or upon your request.
I 1.1 Site Description
1 The irregular shaped parcel is currently vacant and undeveloped. Maximum overall vertical relief
within the parcel is approximately 46 feet. Seasonal rainfall tends to flow towards south. In general,
the site is bounded on the east and north by vacant parcels, by Residential property and vacant
property on the west and on the south by residential property and Malaga Road.With the exception
of PVC pipes along the driveway, scattered scrubs, no other significant features pertinent to the
proposed construction, were noted.
1.2 Proposed Development
Based on the rough grading plan supplied, it is understood that the subject development will include
a single family dwelling planned on a pad to be constructed by cut/fill transition grading. Maximum
cut and fill placement depths are estimated to about 3 feet and 3 feet, respectfully. Supplemental
construction of interior driveways, cut and fill slopes and exterior street widening are expected to
complete the project.
Conventional wood-frame and stucco construction with concrete slab-on-grade are anticipated with
the development planned. Extensive site preparations and grading should be expected with the
development proposed. During grading, use of heavy duty construction equipments, are anticipated.
Page 3 March 30,2005 SSW
i�
i Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
2.0 Scope of Work
Being beyond scope of work, no Geologic and/or Environmental Site Assessment is included.
Reports on such will be provided on request.
Geotechnical evaluation included subsurface explorations, soil sampling, necessary laboratory
testing, engineering analyses and the preparation of this report. The scope of work included the
1 following tasks:
o Field Testing
Two (2) exploratory test borings using a Hollow-Stem Auger (HSA) drill-rig equipped for
undisturbed soils sampling and Standard Penetration Testing (SPT). The exploratory depth
1 was advanced to maximum 30 feet below the current grade surface. Approximate test
excavation location is shown on Plate 1.
During excavations, the sub-soils encountered were continuously logged, bulk and
undisturbed samples were procured and Standard Penetration Test(SPT)blow-counts were
recorded at frequent intervals. Collected samples were subsequently transferred to our
laboratory for necessary testing. Description of the soils encountered is shown on the Test
lExploration Logs in Appendix A.
o Laboratory Testing
Representative samples on selected bulk and undisturbed site soils were tested in the
laboratory to aid in the soils classification and to evaluate relevant engineering properties of
+ the existing site soils pertaining to the project requirements. These tests may include some
or all of the following tests depending upon site requirements:
In-situ moisture contents and dry density (ASTM Standard D2216-80)
Gradation analysis (ASTM Standard D422-63)
Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content(ASTM Standard D1557-91)
• Sand equivalent(ASTM Standard D2419-95)
Direct Shear(ASTM Standard D3080-90)
Collapse potential (ASTM D5333-92)
Expansion index(ASTM Standard D4829-88)
JSoil corrosivity
Description of the test results and test procedures used are provided in Appendix B.
lo Based on the field investigation and laboratory testing, engineering analyses and
evaluations were made on which to base our preliminary recommendations for design of
foundations, slab-on-grade, paving and parking, site grading, utility trench backfill, soils
potential for expansion, site preparations and grading and monitoring during construction.
o Preparation of this report for initial use by the project design professionals. The
recommendations supplied should be considered as 'tentative' and may require revision
and/or upgrading following review of the final grading and development plans, when
prepared.
i
I
Page 4 March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 05042-F
3.0 Existing Site Conditions
3.1 Subsurface Conditions
The soils encountered primarily consist of upper disturbed dry and loose gravelly sand with rocks,
l overlying soft rippable granitic bedrock to the maximum depth explored.
The near surface loose top soils of gravelly sandy materials existing at their present state as
l described are considered unsuitable for directly supporting structural footings and/or new structural
fills without excessive differential settlement to footings and concrete slab-on-grade. However,
following subexcavations of the upper loose soils, and/or cuts to proposed grade surface, the
subgrade soils/bedrock exposed should be further prepared in form of over excavations and their
replacement as engineered fills for structural support as described in the following sections. Similar
grade preparations should also be expected within the areas planned to receive new structural fills.
1 The subgrades prepared as described are expected to be adequate for the structure proposed with
footings being supported exclusively into engineered fills of local soils or its equivalent or better.
Potential settlements to footings are expected to be within 'tolerable' limits when the planned
footings are established exclusively into compacted fills. No cut and fill transition conditions shall be
allowed. Further, while bridging across local soils and bedrock; supplemental reinforcements to
footings shall be required, over and above the minimum as described herein, in order to minimize
1 potential dissimilar foundation settlements. Supplements reinforcements requirements such
described will be dictated by soils engineer following lot foundation excavations.
1 Cuts slopes, if proposed, should be made at a gradient no steeper than 2:1, provided heavy-duty
construction equipment is used. No out-dipping bedding conditions are anticipated requiring slope
stabilization fills.
Laboratory shear tests conducted on the upper bulk samples remolded to 90 percent of the soils
1 laboratory determined Maximum Dry Density indicates moderate shear strengths. The results of the
laboratory shear tests are provided in Plate B-1 in Appendix B.
Consolidation test conducted on the upper soils remolded to 90% indicate 'low' potential for
compressibility under anticipated structural loading. Results of the laboratory determined soils
consolidation potentials are shown on Plate B-2 in Appendix B.
3.2 Soils Expansion Potential
Gravelly in nature, the site soils are considered 'very low' in expansion characteristic with soil
' Expansion Index, El, less than 20.
3.3 Excavatability
With the pad grade elevations proposed, it is our opinion that for the proposed pad requiring cuts in
excess of 7 to 9 feet may require extensive selective grading using heavy duty construction
J equipment. Supplemental blasting and/or jack-hammering maybe expected for deeper cuts and for
underground utility installations.
i
Page 5 March 30,2005 SSW
05042-F
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore
3.4 Groundwater
No shallow groundwater was encountered and with the hillside nature, no groundwater should be
expected during grading and construction. However, provisions should be made to dispose off
1 surface runoff away from structural pads constructed.
3.5 Subsurface Variations
Based on the results of subsurface explorations and from past experience from similar projects
completed elsewhere, it is our opinion that variations in continuity, depth of subsoil deposits and
ground water conditions, may be expected. Due to the nature and depositional characteristics of the
soils underlying, care should be exercised in interpolating or extrapolating of the subsurface soils
existing in between and beyond the test explorations.
3.6 Seismic Design Parameters based on 1997 UBC.
The site is situated at about 4.8 km from B-Fault (Elsinore -Temecula Fault). Accordingly, for
structural design, the following seismic parameters are provided based on 1997 UBC.
I
Recommended values are based upon Thomas F. Blake UBCSEIS seismic software which is found
in the supplemental seismic parameters provided in Appendix C of this report.
1
1997 UBC Chapter 16 Seismic Design Recommended
1 Table No. Parameters Value
16-1 Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.4
16-J Soil Profile Type Sd
16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.45
16-R Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.78
16-S Near Source Factor, N, 1.0
I
6-T Near Source Factor, N, 1.2
16-U Seismic Source Type M>/=6.9
I
J
Page 6
March 30,2005 SSW
J
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
4.0 Evaluations and Recommendations
4.1 General Evaluations
Based on field explorations, laboratory testing and engineering analysis, it is our opinion that, from
geotechnical viewpoint, the site should be considered suitable for the development planned,
provided the recommendations presented are incorporated in final design and construction.
Site preparations and grading should be performed in accordance with the enclosed Section 5,
Earthwork/General Grading Recommendations, except as modified in the main text of this report,
and with the applicable grading recommendations of the current UBC/CBC and local grading
l ordinance.
4.1.1 Preparations for Cut/Fill Transition Pad
1 Based on the rough grading plan supplied, it is understood that the pad proposed will be constructed
by cut and fill transition grading operations, with an estimated cut depth being about 3 feet.
Site preparations should be performed in accordance with the enclosed Appendix D.
I Based on field explorations completed at this time, it is our opinion that while the cuts proposed may
be feasible using conventional heavy-duty construction equipments, cuts within certain localized
areas, however, jack-hammering and/or blasting may be expected. Major selective grading is,
therefore, warranted.
1 In order to minimize potential for excessive differential settlements to footings, it is our opinion that
no structural foundations shall be allowed straddling over cut and fill transition.Within transition pad
1 areas, it is our opinion that following cuts to planned grades, the subgrades exposed should be
further subexcavated so as to maintain a minimum 3 feet thick compacted fill mat blanket below
finish pad grade surface.
For structural pads requiring new engineered fill placement over the current grade surface, it is our
opinion that for adequate support, grading should include subexcavations of the upper
compressible, dry and loose soils as encountered, or to minimum 3 to 3.5 feet, or to the depths as
I required to expose the moist and dense underlying gravelly sandy soils, whichever is greater,
followed by moisturization, scarification and recompaction, prior to the new engineered fill soils
placement compacted to minimum 90%. Excavated bottoms should be verified by soils engineer
prior to new structural fill soil placement. During grading and fill soils placement, use of vibratory
Jsheeps-foot roller, is strongly suggested.
4.1.2 Cut and Fill Slopes
Unless otherwise specified, the cut and fill slopes, if planned, should be constructed at an overall
slope gradient no steeper than 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical). Structures built in proximity to slopes
Jshould be set-back as per the requirements of the current UBC/CBC.
Adequate 'berm' and intermediate Swale drains should be constructed in order to prevent
uncontrolled water from overflowing overthe slope surface. Further,to minimize surface erosion,the
finished slope surface should be grid-rolled, or such may be over-built and trimmed back to expose
underlying compacted inner core. Post-construction ground-covering is recommended using deep-
rooted draught-resistant vegetation, or by hydro-seeding.
Page 7 March 30,2005 SSW
I
05042-F
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore
THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CUT-SLOPE DESCRIBED SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS "PRELIMINARY".
SUPPLEMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE SUPPLIED IN EVENT OUT-DIPPING BEDDING CONDITIONS ARE
EXPOSED FOLLOWING THE 2:1 CUTS AS PROPOSED.
4.1.3 Fill Material
The on-site soils free of organic, debris and rocks less than 6-inch in diameter, should be
considered suitable for re-use as structural backfills. Larger rocks encountered may be deposed off
l by using as "windrows" along interior streets as approved by soils engineer. No oversize rocks and
boulders shall be permitted within 10 feet below load bearing foundations.
4.2 Spread Foundations
For adequate support, structural footings should be supported exclusively into engineered fills
l compacted to minimum 90% of the soils Maximum Dry Density as determined by the ASTM method
I D 1557-91.
The structure planned may be supported by continuous wall and/or isolated spread footings founded
jexclusively into engineered fill compacted to minimum 90%.
Footings placed should be sized accordingly:
FPerimeter Footings: Interior Footings: III
1 Single Story: 12"x12" Single Story: 12"x12"
Two Story: 15"x18" Two Story: 12"x12"
Structural design should conform to the 1997 UBC Seismic Design requirements as described in
Section 3.6 of this report.
For design, allowable soil vertical bearing capacity of 1800 psf may be assumed for the compacted
fills of local soils or its equivalent or better. The recommended soil vertical bearing capacity may be
increased by 200 psf for each additional foot in foundation depth in excess of the minimum 1 foot
described.
The bearing values indicated are for total dead and frequently applied live loads. However, to
minimize settlements, total maximum bearing values should be limited to 2200 pounds per square
foot. If normal code requirements are applied, the above capacities may further be increased by an
additional 1/3 for short duration of loading which include the effect of wind and seismic forces.
From geotechnical view point, footings should be reinforced with minimum 244 rebar near the top
1 and 244 rebar near the bottom of continuous wall foundations.Additional reinforcements, if required
by the project structural engineer, shall be incorporated during construction.
Supplemental reinforcements may be warranted for footings straddling over underlying bedrock and
local soils compacted to minimum 90%. Recommendations for such, if required, shall be supplied
during construction.
1
Page 8
March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
The settlements of properly designed and constructed foundations supported on engineered fill,
comprising of site soils or its equivalent or better, and carrying maximum anticipated vertical
loadings, are expected to be within tolerable limits. Estimated total and differential settlements are
about 1 and 1/2-inch, respectively.
4.3 Concrete Slab-on-Grade
The prepared subgrade to receive foundations should be considered adequate for concrete slab-on-
grade placement. For normal load bearing conditions, minimum 3-inch thick (net) concrete slabs
may be considered reinforced with#3 rebar at 24-inch o/c. For garage and driveways, such may be
constructed of 4-inch thick (net) concrete adequately reinforced as recommended by structural
engineer.
Within moisture sensitive areas, concrete slabs should be protected by 2-inch of granular sand
overlying 6-mil thick visqueen, followed by additional 2-inch thick granular sand with Sand
Equivalent, SE in excess of 30.
l4.4 Resistance to Lateral Loads
I Resistance to lateral loads can be restrained by friction acting at the base of foundations and by
passive earth pressure.A coefficient of friction of 0.29 may be assumed with the normal dead load
forces for footing established on compacted fills comprised either granitic gravelly sand or gravelly
alluvium. An allowable passive lateral earth resistance of 230 pounds per square foot per foot of
depth may be assumed for the sides of foundations poured against compacted fill. The maximum
lateral passive earth pressure is recommended not to exceed 2300 pounds per square foot. For
design, lateral pressures from level backfills consisting of local silty sandy alluviums may be
estimated from the following equivalent fluid density:
Active: 45 pcf
Passive. 230 pcf
At Rest: 60 pcf
4.5 Shrinkage and Subsidence
Based on the results of our field observations and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that the site
soils when used in grading may be subjected to a volume change. Assuming a 90% relative
compaction for structural fills, and assuming an overexcavation and re-compaction of 36-inch, such
volume change due to shrinkage may be on the order of 10 to 12 percent. Further volume change
may be expected following removal of existing structures, numerous trees and buried utilities, if any.
Site soil subsidence is estimated to about 2.5-inch.
4.6 Temporary Construction Consideration
J Temporary construction excavations up to a maximum depth of 5 feet may be made without any
lateral support. It is recommended that no surcharge loads such as construction equipments, be
allowed within a line drawn upward at 45 degree from the toe of excavation. Use of sloping for deep
excavation may be applicable where plan dimensions of the excavation are not constrained by any
existing structure.
i Page 9 March 30,2005 SSW
1
05042-F
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore
l 4.7 Site Preparations
Site preparations should include subexcavations of the upper dry, disturbed and loose soils, or
upper existing fills, if any, along with jack-hammering and/or blasting, stock-piling, moisturization
and/or aeration to near Optimum Moisture Content. Site preparation should also include cut and fill
1 slopes and re-placement of the excavated on-site and/or imported fill materials as load bearing
blanket fills underneath footings compacted to 90 percent or better. Such earth work should be in
accordance with the applicable grading recommendations of the current UBC/CBC, and as
recommended in Section 5.0 of this report.
4.8 Soil Caving
During excavations for deep utility trenches in excess of 5 feet, heavy caving may be expected. All
temporary excavations should be made at a slope ratio not exceeding of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical),
1 or flatter, as per the construction guidelines as provided by Cal-Osha.
4.9 Structural Pavement Thickness
Based on the estimated Traffic Index (TI) and on the assumed R-value of 65 for local soils as
encountered, the following flexible pavement sections may be considered.
Service Area Traffic Pavement Thickness(inch)
1 Index(TI) Type a.c base
Interior Paving/Parking 5.5 a.c over base 3.0 4.0
IExterior Street 6.5 a.c over base 3.5 5.5
Widening
Within paving areas, subgrade soils should be sub-excavated and scarified to 18-inch or more,
Imoisture conditioned from 3% to 5% percent over optimum, and recompacted to at least 95%.
Concrete paving if desired, should be at least 5-inch thick, reinforced with #3 rebar at 18-inch o/c.
l Subgrades to receive paving should be compacted to 95%. Actual rigid paving sections should be
supplied by the project structural engineer based on Soil Subgrade Reaction of 400 Ib/ft3.
The pavement evaluations are based on estimated Traffic Index (TI) and on soil R-value of 55 as
estimated from soil Sand Equivalent SE of 68. The recommendations are for estimation purpose.
Final pavement sections should be verified based on actual R-value testing on the representative
soils procured following completion of mass grading.
_ J
J Page 10
March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 05042-F
4.10 Retaining Wall
Retaining walls, if planned, should be designed using the following equivalent fluid density:
Slope Surface of Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf)
Retained Material Imported Local
1 (horz. to vert.) Clean Sand Site Soil
Level 30 45
2:1 35 60 11
The recommended lateral pressures do not include any surface load surcharge. Use of heavy
1 equipment near retaining wall may develop lateral pressure in excess of the parameters described
above.
Retaining walls adjacent to traffic should be designed to "resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100
pounds per square foot, which is a result of an assumed 300 pounds per square foot surcharge
behind the walls due to normal traffic conditions. If the traffic is kept back at least ten (10)feet from
l wall, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.
Installation of'french-drain'behind retaining walls should be considered to minimize water pressure
build-up behind retaining walls. Use of impervious material is preferred within the upper 18 inches of
1 the backfill placed.
Backfill behind retaining wall should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative laboratory
Maximum Dry Density as determined by the ASTM D1557-91 test method. Flooding and/or jetting
behind wall should not be permitted. Local sandy soils may be used as backfill compacted,
mechanically using appropriate construction equipment.
4.11 Utility Trench Backfill
I It should be noted that during utility installations at a depth in excess of 8 to 10 feet, localized rock
jack-hammering and/or controlled blasting of the underlying buried bedrock, may be anticipated. In
general, following installations, utility trench backfill within structural pad areas and beyond, should
be placed in accordance with the following recommendations:
o Trench backfill should be placed in thin lifts compacted to 90 percent or better of the laboratory
maximum dry density for the soils used.As alternative,clean granular sand may be used having a SE
value greater than 30.Within deep trenching areas in excess of 5 feet,adequate jetting may be used
to compact the fills placed provided sufficient avenues are maintained to dispose-off excess water.
Soils Southwest, Inc. assumes no responsibility in event sufficient jetting is not permitted within deep
fill areas; thereby causing potential future caving to street paving, curb-gutter, or other peripheral
structures. Jetting and fill placement in presence of soils engineer, is recommended.
o Exterior trenches along a foundation or a toe of a slope and extending below a 1:1 imaginary line
I projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing or toe of the slope, should be compacted to 90
percent of the Maximum Dry Density for the soils used during backfill.All trench excavations should
conform to the requirements and safety as specified by the Cal-Osha
Page 11 March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
4.12 Pre-Construction Meeting
It is recommended that no clearing of the site or any grading operation be performed without the
presence of a representative of this office. An on-site pre-grading meeting should be arranged
between soils engineer and the grading contractor prior to any construction.
4.13 Seasonal Limitations
No fill shall be placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. Where the work is
interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until moisture conditions are
considered favorable by the soils engineer.
4.14 Planters
1 Considering granular, the local soils are considered susceptible to hydroconsolidation. In order to
I minimize potential differential settlement to foundations due to hydroconsolidation, it is
recommended that planters requiring heavy irrigation shall be restricted from using adjacent to
footings. In event such becomes unavoidable, planter boxes with sealed bottoms, should be
Iconsidered. Excessive watering adjacent to footings may cause distress to foundations during the
life-time use of the structure constructed on the gravelly soils described. Consequently, it is
recommended that excessive watering adjacent to footings shall be avoided.
4.15 Landscape Maintenance
1 Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided. Pad drainage should
be directed towards streets and to other approved areas away from foundations.Slope areas should
be planted with draught resistant vegetation. Over watering landscape areas could adversely affect
the proposed site development during its life-time use.
4.16 Observations and Testing During Construction
JRecommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that all necessary cuts into
the uphill planned should be performed under direct observations of the project soils engineer. If
warranted, buttress fill soil stabilization may be required for the portions of the cut slopes exposing
1 out-dipping bedding as described earlier. In addition, excavated footings should be inspected,
verified and certified by soils engineer prior to steel and concrete placement to ensure their sufficient
embedment and proper bearing on compacted engineered fill. Additional inspections by soils
engineer is recommended to verify footing excavations being free of loose and disturbed material.
J Structural backfills should be placed and compacted under direct observations and testing by this
facility. Excess soils generated from footing excavations should be removed from pad areas and
such should not be allowed on subgrades as un-compacted fill prepared to receive concrete slab-
on-grade.
J4.17 Plan Review
No grading was available during the preparation of this report. It is recommended that precise
grading plans,when prepared, should be available for review and to verify the assumptions used in
J preparing this report. If during construction, conditions are observed different from those as
presented, revised and/or supplemental recommendations will be required.
I
Page 12 March 30,2005 SSW
J
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
6.0 Earth Work/General Grading Recommendations
Site preparations and grading should involve overexcavation and replacement of local soils as
structural fill compacted to 90% or better.
Structural Backfill:
During grading, excavated site soils should be considered suitable for reuse as backfill material.
Loose soils, formwork and debris should be removed prior to backfilling the walls. On-site sand
backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommended specifications
provided below. Where space limitations do not allow conventional backfilling operations, special
backfill materials and procedures may be required. Pea gravel or other select backfill can be used in
limited space areas. Recommendations for placement and densification of pea gravel or other
special backfill can be provided during construction.
Site Drainage:
I Adequate positive drainage should be provided away from the structure to prevent water from
ponding and to reduce percolation of water into backfill.A desirable slope for surface drainage is 2
percent in landscape areas and 1 percent in paved areas. Planters and landscaped areas adjacent
1 to building perimeter should be designed to minimize water filtration into subsoils. Considerations
should be given to the use of closed planter bottoms, concrete slabs and perimeter subdrains where
applicable.
1 Utility Trenches:
Buried utility conduits should be bedded and backfilled around the conduit in accordance with the
project specifications. Where conduit underlies concrete slab-on-grade and pavement, the
remaining trench backfill above the pipe should be placed and compacted in accordance with the
following grading specifications.
General Grading Recommendations:
Recommended general specifications for surface preparation to receive fill and compaction for
structural and utility trench backfill and others are presented below.
1. Areas to be graded, backfilled or paved, shall be grubbed, stripped and cleaned of all buried and
undetected debris, structures, concrete, vegetation and other deleterious materials prior to grading.
2. Where compacted fill is to provide vertical support for foundations, all loose, soft and other incompetent
I soils should be removed to full depth as approved by soils engineer, or at least up to the depth as previously
I described in this report. The areas of such removal should extend at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of
exterior foundation limit or to the extent as approved by soils engineer during grading. For structural support,
minimum fill compaction requirement is 90%.
3. The recommended compaction for fill to support foundations and slab-on-grade is 90%of the maximum
dry density at or near optimum moisture content. To minimize any potential differential settlement for
foundations and slab-on-grade straddling over cut and fill, the cut portion should be over excavated and
replaced as compacted fill, compacted to at least 95%of the maximum dry density as described in this report.
Page 13 March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
4. Utility trenches within building pad areas and beyond should be backfilled with granular material and such
should be mechanically compacted to the maximum density as described.
5. Compaction for all structural fills shall be determined relative to the maximum dry density as determined by
ASTM D1557-91 compaction methods. All in-situ field density of compacted fill shall be determined by the
1 ASTM D1556-82 standard methods or by other approved procedures.
6. All new imported soils if required shall be clean, granular, non-expansive material or as approved by the
1 soils engineer.
7. During grading, fill soils shall be placed as thin layers, thickness of which following compaction shall not
exceed six inches.
8. No rocks over six inches in diameter shall be permitted to use as a grading material without prior approval
of the soils engineer.
l 9. No jetting and/or water tampering be considered for backfill compaction for utility trenches without prior
approval of the soils engineer. For such backfill, hand tampering with fill layers of 8 to 12 inches in thickness or
as approved by the soils engineer is recommended.
1
10. Any and all utility trenches at depth as well as cesspool and abandoned septic tank within building pad
area and beyond, should either be completely excavated and removed from the site, or should be backfilled
lwith gravel, slurry or by other material, as approved by soils engineer.
11. Any and all import soils if required during grading should be equivalent to the site soils or better. Such
should be approved by the soils engineer prior to their use.
1 12. Any and all grading required for pavement, side-walk or other facilities to be used by general public,
should be constructed under direct observation of soils engineer or as required by the local public agencies.
13. A site meeting should be held between grading contractor and soils engineer prior to actual construction.
Two days of prior notice will be required for such meeting.
_J
J
J
J
J
J
Page 14 March 30,2005 SSW
�J
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
I
6.0 Closure
1
The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based on the findings and
observations as made at the time of the subsurface test explorations. If during construction, the
subsoils/bedrock conditions appear to be different from those-disclosed, or following grading plan
review, if the assumptions made in preparing this report is found different, considerations should be
made for possible need for modification for the geotechnical recommendations provided in this
report.
Recommendations provided are based on assumptions that during grading, use of heavy-duty
l construction equipment should be used, along with a possibility of localized blasting and/or jack-
hammering of the underlying dense granitic bedrock. Where out-dipping bedding is exposed, slope
stabilization should be expected. Further, it should be noted that structural foundations should be
established exclusively into compacted engineered fills, depth of such should be at least 24-inch
below foundation bottom. No cut/fill transition conditions should be allowed underneath load bearing
foundations.
I Final grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by this office when they become available.
Site grading must be performed under inspection by geotechnical representative of this office. All
footing excavations should be inspected prior to steel and concrete placement to ensure that
1 foundations are founded into satisfactory soils and excavations are free of loose and disturbed
materials.
A pregrading meeting between grading contractor and soils engineer should be arranged, preferably
at the site, to discuss the grading procedures to be implemented and other requirements described
in this report to be fulfilled.
IThis report has been prepared exclusively for the use of the addressee for the project referenced in
the context. It shall not be transferred or be used by other parties without a written consent by Soils
Southwest, Inc. We cannot be responsible for use of this report by others without inspection and
j testing of grading operations by our personnel.
Should the project be delayed beyond one year after the date of this report; the recommendations
presented shall be reviewed to consider any possible change in site conditions.
The recommendations presented are based on the assumption that the necessary geotechnical
observations and testing during construction will be performed by a representative of this office. The
field observations are considered a continuation of the geotechnical investigation performed. If
another firm is retained for geotechnical observations and testing, our professional liability and
responsibility shall be limited to the extent that Soils Southwest, Inc. would not be the geotechnical
engineer of record.
1
J
J
Page 15 March 30,2005 SSW
Arroyo/Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 05042-F
PLOT PLAN AND TEST LOCATIONS
(Schematic, Not To Scale)
n c 1�v oV
\ e„lots
RM 16
rrl 8 17
Rm
6
a,
IgPo cry -�
(�1698•�r. f B—1
y a"•8't;•RrP
l�Xif�Af B—� , 17190 FF•� y OSS VP
1 N
� E 2:� � 2:► _ 1 —
of
fW Legend nl�
\ A prae��a �
Fa,6htd grb--Fp r,
FD. OLv 2K2 F1u6 R,Wxd�u Gco—Fg
thse.ed L5 111rT• u40 N4 devwion—ire lzbw.*Jb
IDl.�i 2 Lo i Fi+u.twd nocc.
-A5 5
` I LbIEPIzYJ DAYlight�D1• ESlimhf'90 LL__128Cv•Y2os
�AS ,£ Ol
\ Op LS-3('9&-L rep- VrhusS3/n TOP
w 0dr•tir1y0 p e—
=
aY -ie Aei IJeSo Slorepuf--_ p.l
I \ Toa of slaps-- ay�18L; AYOU )OD AX--
Jf \ Fbw l ne t'4' ��• 3pbw SO"IZA
a� Fbx-line 2%
rALdng sonar—*1400
hgmcdcontour--_L__
'?jo3-246-7075`
v&L* Ih4-399-U9 J
/ b 4%I.w5reer--.us
1��1�iq �phfl '�� I�20 �a9f�.��It�lAall
o ro NIA. CA, 9Z
J
JLegend: • B-1 Approximate locations of Test Borings Plate 1
Page 16 March 30,2005 SSW
J
. l
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
1
7.0 APPENDIX A
_I Field Explorations
1 Field evaluations included site reconnaissance and two (2) exploratory test borings using a truck
J mounted hollow-stem auger drillrig. During site reconnaissance, the surface conditions were noted
and test excavation locations were determined.
1 Soils encountered during explorations were logged and such were classified by visual observations
in accordance with the generally accepted classification system. The field descriptions were
modified,where appropriate,to reflect laboratory test results.Approximate test locations are shown
on Plate 1.
Relatively undisturbed soils were sampled using a drive sampler lined with soil sampling rings. The
1 split barrel steel sampler was driven into the bottom of test excavations at various depths. Soil
samples were retained in brass rings of 2.5 inches in diameter and 1.00 inch in height. The central
portion of each sample was enclosed in a close-fitting waterproof container for shipment to our
I laboratory.
Logs of test explorations are presented in the following summary sheets that include the description
of the soils and/or fill materials encountered.
I
I
1
_1
J
J
J
Page 17 March 30,2005 SSW
J
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
1
1
1
LOG OF TEST EXPLORATIONS
I
I
1
l
J
. I
. l
_ J
_ J
. 1
�1
Page 18 March 30,2005 SSW
.� I Soils Southwest, Inc.
1�
� 897 Via Lata, Suite N LOG OF BORING B-1
^,� Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: Amando Arroyo Job No.: 05042-F
Logged By: John Boring Diam.: 81, Date: 18 Mar 05
LL o
° C ° y Description and Remarks
9'� a U c ,., o o
m 0U. cm vcE r
Vm m` Gv uE °.- Ny t .+
cco E m� Za ao a aa, a°fi
0)ia00u 3:c 7 IL 7UM a ou.
Scattered weeds
•:
GP-SP :i:� -
•:: '.':.
Sand - Lt brn, gravelly, med. to coarse,
scat. rock 2" (Max 131 pcf @ 9.0%)
2
!�i
6.0 127 96
4
;4 r
18
6
ROCK - Lt gray to Lt brn, coarse, rippable
granitic bedrock
8
4.0 117 89
10
50 /
12
Groundwater: None Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: 7.0'
Datum: N/A Malaga e/o Grape
Elevation: N/A Lake Elsinore
Bulk/Grab sample , California sampler r'i Standard penetration test
Soils Southwest, Inc.
897 Via Lata, Suite N LOG OF BORING B-1
Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: Amando Arroyo Job No.: 05042-F
Logged By: John Boring Dam.: 811 Date: 18 Mar 05
C LL N C
° ° o y Y Description and Remarks
l0 U d V N a N N d L aL+
a
c o E m� ZG. aCL
�`> o
mam c G c IL 7Uco 0 OLL
14
50
16
18
20
50
22
24
26
28
�,- Soils Southwest, Inc.
897 Via Lata, Suite N
Colton, CA 92324 LOG OF BORING B-1
(909)370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: Amando Arroyo Job No.: 05042-F
Logged By: John Boring Diam.: 811 Date: 18 Mar 05
1 c LL m E c C
O V C
d LL Description and Remarks
i+ G�-
.- 0 c a E t r
� E E C as
'.3 dap m 10 2 c `m o c w
ou
30
1 50
- End of boring @ 31'
1 Bedrock @ 7.0'
32 No groundwater
1
34
1
36
l
38
e -
40
42
J 44
J
Soils Southwest, Inc.
897 Via Lata, suite N LOG OF BORING B-2
L: `� Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: Amando Arroyo JOb No.: 05042-F
Logged By: John Boring Diam.: 81, Date: 18 Mar 05
o
° o y Description and Remarks
ot•0am U
0 d= HN wE aaiv E > d m u
tc7 ota
Ldia Un
-
GP-SP :•�:f'• Scattered weeds
:• ! • - Sand - Lt brn, gravelly, med. to coarse,
: :•, scat. rock 2"
7*
.41
ve
�'•:
2
10
4
�a�•'f i
I 41 '
:!•A
6.0 113 86 •• � ;�_
6
j•••�+° 8
".
24
ROCK - Lt gray to Lt brn, coarse, rippable
granitic bedrock
1 10
3.0 121 92
12
_J
50
Site Location Plate #
Groundwater: None
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: 7. 01
Datum: N/A Malaga e/o Grape
Elevation: N/A Lake Elsinore
`� 1 Bulk/Grab sample . California sampler n Standard penetration test
Soils Southwest, Inc.
897 via Lata, suite N LOG OF BORING B-2
Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: Amando Arroyo Job No.: 05042-F
Logged By: John Boring Diam.: 811 Date: 18 Mar 05
cLL o
° o ° Description and Remarks
lC a N U N LL C O. N E- E L L
oa3 a` u E A? y a ad
c c o E m = Z`a a o c A �° d m
yam n 5 aU SUM (9 DLL
14
1 - End of boring @ 15'
Bedrock @ 8.75'
16 No groundwater
i
1
18
I 20
22
24
I
26
1
28
I
KEY TO SYMBOLS
Symbol Description
II Strata symbols
IIr.•,. . Poorly graded gravel
:a• and sand
II Basalt
(or generic rock)
Soil Samplers
❑ Bulk/Grab sample
California sampler
I
Standard penetration test
I
I
I
J
I
i
Notes :
1 . Exploratory borings were drilled on 18 Mar 05 using a
4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
1I2 . No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or
when re-checked the following day.
I� 3 . Boring locations were taped from existing features and
elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan.
4 . These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and
recommendations in this report.
5 . Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported
on the logs .
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
8.0 APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Programs
Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soils for the purpose of classification and for the
I determination of the physical properties and engineering characteristics. The number and selection of the
types of testing for a given study are based on the geotechnical conditions of the site. A summary of the
various laboratory tests performed for the project is presented below.
Moisture Content and Dry Density:
Data obtained from these test, performed on undisturbed samples are used to aid in the classification and
correlation of the soils and to provide qualitative information regarding soil strength and compressibility.Test
results are provided in the following table.
I Direct Shear(ASTM D3080):
Data obtained from this test performed at increased and field moisture conditions on relatively remolded soil
sample is used to evaluate soil shear strengths. Samples contained in brass sampler rings, placed directly on
I test apparatus are sheared at a constant strain rate under a normal load,appropriate to represent anticipated
structural loadings. Shearing deformations are recorded to failure. Peak and/or residual shear strengths are
obtained from the measured shearing load versus deflection curve.Test results,plotted on graphical form,are
1presented on Plate B-1 of this section.
I Consolidation (ASTM D4186):
Drive-tube samples are tested at their field moisture contents and at increased moisture conditions since the
soils may become saturated during life-time use of the planned structure.
Data obtained from this test performed on relatively undisturbed and/or remolded samples, were used to
I evaluate the consolidation characteristics of foundation soils under anticipated foundation loadings.
Preparation for this test involved trimming the sample, placing it in one inch high brass ring, and loading it into
the test apparatus which contained porous stones to accommodate drainage during testing. Normal axial
1 loads are applied at a load increment ratio, successive loads being generally twice the preceding.
Soil samples are usually under light normal load conditions to accommodate seating of the apparatus.
Samples were tested at the field moisture conditions at a predetermined normal load. Potentially moisture
+ sensitive soil typically demonstrated significant volume change with the introduction of free water.The results
J of the consolidation tests are presented in graphical forms on Plate B-2.
I Potential Expansion (UBC 29-2)
_J Sandy gravelly in nature, the site soils are considered non-expansive in contact with water.Although no actual
laboratory testing is performed at this time, it is recommended that supplemental testing for soil expansion
should be performed to verify potential soil expansion following mass grading completion.
Page 19 March 30,2005 SSW
r-1
lArroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
I
Laboratory Test Results
I
A. In-Situ Moisture-Density(ASTM D2937)
Sample Location Dry Moisture Laboratory Percent
& Sample Depth Density, Pcf Content Maximum Dry Compaction
(ft) (%) Densit , cf (%
B-1 @ 3 127 6.0 96
l B-1 @ 8 117 4.0 131 89
I B-2 @ 5 113 6.0 86
B-2 @ 10 121 3.0 92
B. Maximum bry Density-Optimum Moisture Content
(ASTM D1557-91)
JSample Location Max. Dry Density cf Optimum Moisture Content
B-1 @ 0-3 ft. 131 9.0
I
C. Expansion Index, El
I (ASTM D4928, UBC 18-2)
J Sample Location Expansion Index, El. Expansion Potential
lB-1 @ 0-3 ft. 03 "very low"
J
J
J
J
Page 20 March 30,2005 SSW
J
l DIRECT SHEAR TESTS
I t
z '
0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
NORMAL LOAD—KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
COHESION FRICTION
SYMBOL LOCATION DEPTH(ft) TEST CONDITION (Psf) (degree)
O B-1 0-3 Bulk-remolded to 90% 250 39
Proposed Single Family Residence PROJECT NO. 05042-F
Malaga Road e/o Grape Street
Lake Elsinore, California PLATE B-1
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC.
Consulting Foundation Engineers
CONSOLIDATION TESTS
1
1 LOAD 1N KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
l .5 1 2 3 4 8 15 30
I
I
2 jSfi.,bulk-remolded to 90%
1
1 4-
1
Q 6_
1 °
O s-
1
W
+ U 10-
JI W
l a
.J 12-
J
14-
• WATER PERMITTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE
`l Proposed Single Family Residence PROJECT NO. 05042-F
1 Malaga Road e/o Grape Street
Lake Elsinore, California PLATE B-2
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC. 1
Consulting Foundation Engineers
J
J
CONSOLIDATION TESTS
1 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
.5 1 2 3 4 8 15 30
1
2-
4-
Z B-2 @ 5 ft.,undisturbed
Q 6-
Q
I °
o g_
1
W
1 U 10-
W
a
l 12-
_ 1
14-
0 WATER PERMITTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE
l Proposed Single Family Residence PROJECT NO. 05042-F
J Malaga Road e/o Grape Street
Lake Elsinore, California PLATE B-3
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC.
Consulting Foundation Engineers
J
�l
Arroyo/Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 05042-F
1
1
I Appendix C
Supplemental seismic Design Parameters
1
I
I
l
J
J
J
J
Page 21 March 30,2005 SSW
* *
* U B C S E I S
*
* Version 1.03
*
I COMPUTATION OF 1997
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
JOB NUMBER: 05042-F DATE: 03-29-2005
1 JOB NAME: Amando Arroyo Malaga Rd e/o Grape St Lake Elsinore
FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT
ISITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33. 6555
SITE LONGITUDE: 117 .2885
IUBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4
UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD
INEAREST TYPE A FAULT:
NAME: SAN JACINTO-ANZA
I DISTANCE: 35. 6 km
NEAREST TYPE B FAULT:
NAME: ELSINORE-TEMECULA
DISTANCE: 4 .8 km
NEAREST TYPE C FAULT:
NAME:
1 DISTANCE: 99999.0 km
SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS:
Na: 1. 0
� p Nv: 1.2
Jy Ca: 0. 45
Cv: 0. 78
Ts: 0. 699
`I To: 0. 140
********************************************************************
* CAUTION: The digitized data points used to model faults are
I * limited in number and have been digitized from small-
scale maps (e.g. , 1:750, 000 scale) . Consequently,
* the estimated fault-site-distances may be in error by
* several kilometers. Therefore, it is important that
`I * the distances be carefully checked for accuracy and
* adjusted as needed, before they are used in design.
********************************************************************
Page 1
J
---------------------------
'l SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS
---------------------------
Page 1
J APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT
ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE 1 TYPE
FAULT NAME I (km) 1 (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT)
________--------===I= ---==I== --I==-==1=- ==1=====_____
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 1 4. 8 I B I 6.8 1 5.00 1 SS
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 5.7 I B J 6.8 I 5.00 I SS
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 1 31. 4 I B 1 6. 9 1 12.00 1 SS
CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) I 32.2 I B 1 6.7 I 1.00 I DS
SAN JACINTO-ANZA 1 35. 6 I A 1 7.2 I 12.00 I SS
ELSINORE-WHITTIER J 39.1 ( B 1 6. 8 J 2.50 ( SS
ELSINORE-JULIAN 1 40. 1 I A 1 7.1 1 5.00 I SS
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 1 40.3 1 B 1 6.7 1 12.00 1 SS
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 1 46.5 1 B 1 6.9 1 1.50 I SS
SAN ANDREAS - Southern 1 53.1 I A 1 7.4 1 24 .00 I SS
-� NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I 58. 9 I B 1 6.9 I 1.00 I SS
ROSE CANYON I 59. 8 I B 1 6. 9 I 1.50 I SS
CUCAMONGA J 60.3 I A 1 7.0 I 5.00 I DS
SAN JOSE I 62. 9 ► B 1 6.5 I 0.50 I DS
1 SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 66.7 I B J 7. 0 I 3.00 I DS
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 66. 9 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I DS
CLEGHORN ( 68. 9 I B J 6.5 1 3.00 I SS
PINTO MOUNTAIN 1 68. 9 ( B J 7.0 I 2.50 I SS
PALOS VERDES 1 72.7 ( B 1 7.1 1 3.00 1 SS
CORONADO BANK 1 73.0 I B I 7.4 I 3.00 I SS
SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 1 75.5 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 1 SS
SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 1 76.2 I A 1 7.8 1 34.00 1 SS
l NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 1 79. 4 ( B 1 6.7 I 0.50 1 DS
11 CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 1 83.0 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 1 DS
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 1 84.0 I B 1 6.5 1 2.00 1 SS
RAYMOND 1 87. 4 I B 1 6.5 1 0.50 1 DS
HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 1 88.5 I B 1 7.1 1 0. 60 1 SS
BURNT MTN. 1 90.4 I B 1 6.5 I 0. 60 1 SS
EUREKA PEAK 1 94.8 J B 1 6.5 1 0.60 I SS
VERDUGO 1 96.0 I B J 6.7 I 0.50 1 DS
J LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS ( 98.4 I B 1 7.3 I 0. 60 1 SS
LANDERS 1 98.5 J B J 7.3 1 0. 60 I SS
HOLLYWOOD 1 101.3 I B 1 6.5 I 1.00 J DS
JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 1 107.2 I B 1 6.7 I 0. 60 1 SS
SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 1 113.3 1 B J 6. 6 i 4.00 I SS
SANTA MONICA 1 114 .0 1 B J 6. 6 1 1.00 1 DS
EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 1 114. 1 I B I 6. 9 I 0. 60 1 SS
J ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 115.1 I B ( 6.8 I 4.00 I SS
SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) I 116.0 ( B I 6.7 I 2.00 1 DS
SAN GABRIEL 1 117.7 I B 1 7.0 1 1.00 1 SS
MALIBU COAST ( 122.5 I B I 6.7 I 0.30 I DS
CALICO - HIDALGO I 123.0 1 B I 7 .1 I 0. 60 I SS
PISGAH-BULLION MTN. -MESQUITE LK 1 128. 9 I B ( 7. 1 I 0. 60 I SS
SANTA SUSANA 1 134.2 J B I 6. 6 J 5.00 J DS
ANACAPA-DUME I 135.2 I B I 7.3 1 3.00 I DS
.J GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE I 139. 6 1 B 1 6. 9 1 0. 60 I SS
J Page 2
J
---------------------------
SUMMARY-OF-FAULT-PARAMETERS
Page 2
I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT
ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE
FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS, DS,BT)
I----====1=====I=====I=__=====1------__
HOLSER I 143.1 I B J 6.5 I 0.40 J DS
SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 146.4 ( B ( 6. 6 I 5.00 ( SS
ELMORE RANCH I 149. 9 I B I 6. 6 I 1. 00 I SS
BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 150. 4 I B J 6.5 J 25.00 J SS
SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) I 152. 1 I B I 6. 6 J 4.00 I SS
BLACKWATER I 154.2 I B I 6. 9 I 0. 60 I SS
OAK RIDGE (Onshore) I 154.5 I B I 6. 9 I 4.00 I DS
SIMI-SANTA ROSA I 156.5 J B J 6.7 I 1.00 I DS
SAN CAYETANO I 161.7 I B I 6. 8 J 6.00 J DS
ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA I 166.3 I B I 7.0 ( 3.50 J SS
-� IMPERIAL I 179.1 J A I 7.0 I 20.00 I SS
SANTA YNEZ (East) I 180. 6 I B I 7.0 J 2. 00 I SS
GARLOCK (West) I 185.2 I A I 7. 1 I 6.00 I SS
VENTURA - PITAS POINT I 187.8 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS
I GARLOCK (East) I 193.5 J A J 7.3 I 7.00 I SS
M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA I 195. 9 I B I 6.7 ► 0.40 I DS
PLEITO THRUST J 197 .0 J B I 6.8 I 2. 00 I DS
RED MOUNTAIN i 202.2 I B J 6.8 I 2.00 I DS
1 BIG PINE I 205.2 I B ( 6.7 I 0.80 I SS
ISANTA CRUZ ISLAND I 209.4 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS
WHITE WOLF I 211.8 J B I 7.2 I 2.00 I DS
So. SIERRA NEVADA I 216. 9 J B J 7. 1 I 0. 10 I DS
LITTLE LAKE I 219. 9 I B I 6.7 ( 0.70 J SS
OWL LAKE I 220.2 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I SS
PANAMINT VALLEY I 220.4 I B ( 7.2 I 2.50 I SS
TANK CANYON J 220. 9 I B ( 6.5 I 1.00 I DS
J DEATH VALLEY (South) ( 231.4 I B I 6. 9 J 4. 00 I SS
SANTA YNEZ (West) I 235.9 J B I 6. 9 I 2.00 I SS
SANTA ROSA ISLAND I 245.7 I B I 6. 9 I 1.00 I DS
DEATH VALLEY (Graben) ( 270.5 I B I 6. 9 I 4. 00 I DS
LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE I 278.9 I B I 6. 8 J 0.70 1 DS
OWENS VALLEY I 289.2 I B I 7. 6 I 1.50 I SS
LIONS HEAD I 296.3 1 B I 6. 6 I 0.02 I DS
SAN JUAN I 297.8 J B I 7.0 I 1.00 I SS
SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) I 303.2 I B I 7 .0 1 0.20 I DS
CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) I 313.3 I B I 6.5 I 0.25 I DS
HUNTER MTN. - SALINE VALLEY I 314 .0 B I 7.0 I 2.50 I SS
DEATH VALLEY (Northern) I 323.7 I A I 7.2 1 5. 00 1 SS
INDEPENDENCE I 325. 1 I B I 6. 9 I 0.20 J DS
LOS OSOS I 332.5 I B I 6.8 I 0.50 I DS
HOSGRI I 342.4 I B I 7.3 1 2.50 I SS
RINCONADA I 350.2 I B I 7 .3 I 1.00 I SS
BIRCH CREEK ( 381.8 I B I 6.5 1 0.70 I DS
WHITE MOUNTAINS I 385.8 I B I 7 . 1 1 1.00 I SS
SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) I 399.7 I B I 5.0 I 34 .00 J SS
JDEEP SPRINGS I 403. 9 I B I 6. 6 I 0. 80 I DS
Page 3
�.J
___---------_______________
1 SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS
---------------------------
Page 3
------------------------------------------- -
APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP ( FAULT
ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE
FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS, DS,BT)
---- --------------- --
DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) 1 408.2 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 1 SS
ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns. ) 1 417.5 1 B I 6.8 I 1. 00 1 DS
FISH SLOUGH 1 424.5 1 B I 6.6 I 0.20 I DS
HILTON CREEK 1 443.7 1 B I 6.7 I 2.50 I DS
HARTLEY SPRINGS 468.5 1 B I 6. 6 I 0.50 1 DS
ORTIGALITA 1 480.8 I B I 6. 9 I 1.00 1 SS
CALAVERAS (So.of Calaveras Res) I 488.5 I B 1 6.2 I 15.00 1 SS
MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS 494.7 I B 1 7. 1 I 0.50 I DS
PALO COLORADO - SUR I 498.3 I B 1 7.0 I 3.00 I SS
QUIEN SABE I 501.1 I B 1 6.5 I 1.00 1 SS
1 MONO LAKE I 504. 6 I B 1 6.6 I 2.50 I DS
ZAYANTE-VERGELES 520. 6 I B 1 6.8 I 0.10 I SS
SARGENT 1 525.4 I B I 6.8 I 3.00 I SS
SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 525.8 1 A I 7. 9 I 24.00 I SS
1 ROBINSON CREEK 536.0 B I 6.5 I 0.50 I DS
SAN GREGORIO I 569.7 I A I 7.3 I 5.00 I SS
GREENVILLE I 572.4 I B I 6. 9 I 2.00 1 SS
HAYWARD (SE Extension) 574.5 I B I 6.5 I 3.00 I SS
MONTE VISTA - SHANNON 1 575.5 B I 6.5 I 0.40 I DS
ANTELOPE VALLEY I 576. 6 1 B 1 6.7 I 0.80 I DS
HAYWARD (Total Length) 1 593.7 1 A 1 7.1 I 9.00 I SS
CALAVERAS (No.of Calaveras Res) I 593.7 I B 1 6.8 I 6.00 I SS
I GENOA I 602.5 I B 1 6. 9 I 1.00 I DS
l CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY 640. 1 1 B 1 6. 9 I 6.00 I SS
RODGERS CREEK 1 679.3 1 A 1 7.0 I 9.00 I SS
WEST NAPA 1 679.5 1 B 1 6.5 I 1.00 I SS
I POINT REYES 1 700.5 1 B 1 6.8 1 0.30 1 DS
.J HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA 1 700.8 1 B 1 6.9 1 6.00 I SS
MAACAMA (South) I 741.3 I B I 6. 9 1 9.00 I SS
COLLAYOMI I 757.4 B I 6.5 I 0.60 1 SS
BARTLETT SPRINGS I 759. 9 1 A I 7.1 1 6.00 1 SS
MAACAMA (Central) I 782. 9 I A I 7. 1 1 9.00 I SS
MAACAMA (North) I 841.7 I A 1 7 .1 I 9.00 I SS
ROUND VALLEY (N. S. F.Bay) I 846.5 1 B 1 6.8 1 6.00 I SS
JI BATTLE CREEK I 865.0 1 B 1 6.5 1 0.50 I DS
LAKE MOUNTAIN I 904.8 1 B 1 6.7 1 6.00 1 SS
GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND I 922. 6 1 B 1 6.9 I 9.00 1 SS
J MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE I 979.7 1 A 1 7.4 I 35.00 I DS
LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) I 984.8 A 1 7.0 I 5.00 I DS
MAD RIVER I 986. 6 B 1 7.1 I 0.70 I DS
CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE I 994.0 1 A 1 8.3 ( 35.00 I DS
J McKINLEYVILLE I 997.3 I B 1 7.0 I 0. 60 I DS
TRINIDAD 998. 6 I B 1 7 .3 I 2.50 I DS
FICKLE HILL 999. 4 I B 1 6.9 I 0. 60 1 DS
TABLE BLUFF 1 1005.5 B 1 7.0 I 0. 60 1 DS
JLITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1 1018.7 1 B 1 7.1 I 1.00 1 DS
J Page 4
J
1 '
---------------------------
SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS
---------------------------
Page 4
------------------------------- ----------
I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP ) FAULT
ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE
FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT)
BIG LAGOON - BALD MTN.FLT.ZONE 11035.1 I B I 7.3 I 0.50 I DS
1
1
l
1
l
J
J
J
J
J
J
J Page 5
J
� Spectral Acceleration (g)
(� O O O O
O N M -- I
—1 O Cr O CJi O Ul O m O f31 O u
� O V
4000
CD
p 1� III I I I I IIII IIII IIII Frl
O
n
b
ICD o o �
N C/�
CL
C/) lot
CD
J � �
J
0
J
_ I
***********************
* *
* E Q F A U L T
* *
rl * Version 3.00
* *
***********************
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS
1 JOB NUMBER: 05042-F
DATE: 03-29-2005
I JOB NAME: Amando Arroyo Malaga Rd e/o Grape St Lake Elsinore
CALCULATION NAME: 05042-F
_ I FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT
ISITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33. 6555
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2885
SEARCH RADIUS: 10 mi
lATTENUATION RELATION: 26) Idriss (1994) Horiz. - Soft Soil
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma) : M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
DISTANCE MEASURE: rdist
SCOND: 0
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: Campbell SHR:
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
.J FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km) : 0. 0
J
J
J
J
J Page 1
J
1
-------- ------
EQFAULT SUMMARY
---------------
-----------------------------
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
(ESTIMATED MAX_ EARTHQUAKE EVENT
APPROXIMATE (-------------
_ -
ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK JEST. SITE
FAULT NAME I mi (km) JEARTHQUAKEI SITE ( INTENSITY
I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g JMOD.MERC.
ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 3.0 ( 4.8) 1 6.8 ( 0.442 1 X
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY ( 3.5 ( 5.7) 1 6. 8 0.429 1 X
-END OF SEARCH- 2 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE ELSINORE-TEMECULA FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
1 IT IS ABOUT 3. 0 MILES (4.8 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4418 g
l
J
J
J
J
J
J
J Page 2
J
CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP
Amando Arroyo Malaga Rd e/o Grape St Lake Elsinore
500
450
1 400
1 350
l 300
I 250
l 200
150
�] 100
E
J 50
J
J -50
J
100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
J
J
J
1 EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDES & DISTANCES
Amando Arroyo Malaga Rd e/o Grape St Lake Elsinore
7.50
1 -
1
7.25 --
I
I
7.00
1 �
16.75
1
6.50 --
.J
J 6.25
10
Distance (mi)
J
J
J
MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKES
lAmando Arroyo Malaga Rd e/o Grape St Lake Elsinore
1
1
1
I CD
C: 1
0
I � -
I
U
U
_ 1 a
.01
I
J
-� .001
. 1 1 10
Distance (mi)
_1
J
J
STRIKE- SLIP FAULTS
26) Idriss ( 1994) Horiz. - Soft Soil
M =5 M=6 M=7 M=8
1
i
atM[hYlOty>W 1 VlD`[�Lta.Ki.�:rh
�eaFtr�MiYO�f�r�41n��,y.O py0
C: . 1
0
a�
a�
U
U
Q
.01
1
.001 i
10 100
Distance [adistj (km)
J
DIP- SLIP FAULTS
26) Idriss ( 1994) Horiz. - Soft Soil
M=5 M=6 M=7 M=8
1
o
.01
.001
1 10 100
Distance [adist] (km)
BLIND-THRUST FAULTS
26) Idriss ( 1994) Horiz. - Soft Soil
� � h
M=5 M=6 M=7 M=8
4-1
1
y�
0
CO
a�
� o
U
U
i � Q
.01
.001
1 10 100
Distance [adistj (km)
{rrlIt O<CAL'rp m
UA.'tuMV A(TVi11CN or V11ryy AVJ i K•i,QQT 1.4c N[1gUKCI AgCYCY
JA n F.DAM,9TAT6 OMLMST uInANTMffNT OF MMSE VATIM
.X: ..
1
� Y�• .
4 f f
r c ,
` , ,
J r.r
441
-
J
� I
' .,•M•11.1<.M•. .... ... � KAU rM10C r
rr 1<rlNrwfl4}9r0 C/Yr4<r<p'p4T.
:.w w�r.:,� -,T .��^
MAI UK ATN/N �'rt•lrw s rW rr4<•�b r.a'�.'•
IWtnN<fy Afll<f/AtN<
.nr•,I+.Iln.1 It..Ir•n+r.r a rirye ir.rn....n..-..n mi,n rrir ro..
., �.w L<n f►ca w....oKA Ke f v. f Caa r nq'»• nln w STATE OF CALIFORNIA e
^.rr.
...'. _.«.1, <.r<.Yfan•....aw.w">Wr�..,41){f./ SPECIAL STUDIES ZONES
.. ♦VW nYW Oe11<J•MYw•AYW q�r141 rr4.Yw.IJI.+.'tn,
,` t N 1Ir'rMLM`M'�r IVrgN•<rinar rMi.N M NY cl q.<an' pMiwtlN In IM•<• ndle•<Yr rr,er.vnl awtN o<w•:v xert•er••t C*k"*,T.l 1*111M f M Ilr<CflWN1 ft"NtN•MI CMf IYONTAl1T./LlAfl MOTI
J --_Aw.t pANm r,.Awwn<(nel ANO CNKMte)ew4en Noe yi^NVrpAt 1 r•tea µiv.^^JnY•tywM Wl•e..I M1Mw,wuw rrw
tnn ab<r rA.v„,eal.r.a m..a.r<+.Am M o.wa•r.,•�... ELSINORE QUADRANGLE
11 �ru<•V•nw•V!1•{<bl1NtTYrMt0..fMe4<l n4<1M0<IM«<bV•
11•<IA llvfrNfw N•AttrW LI T' .YNv4.N+atYsr•I•N.•4r�4retl•rrA o"Do '�n•-40 A..<
OFFICIAL MAP .a,tw'••,AY<ty f«w,w•tKnrA. Kuwtrw/a<o<wwt nttKw
0��T•N fry OfM1 W tl N IVA.p•Hb•NgTM111"N IWr KI w14ac W IJrninp .awv n^<wr<N a<.N.
raelr q N b OnM<•<Lrf<IJli/i,.nf Nf�l•,. Effective: January 1, 1980 ., 1 {�^••brr.; ,„„a� w7«„
e--Q lnrt•tl propel en•I wns IOYnNry �14Lr.A•4'Alw..a<r
J .y
---State Geologist
J
Arroyo/Malaga Road,Lake Elsinore 05042-F
PROFESSIONAL LIMITATIONS
1 Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances by other reputable Soils Engineers practicing in these general or similar localities. No other
1 warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report.
The investigations are based on soil samples only, consequently the recommendations provided shall be
-1 considered 'preliminary'. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed
representative of site conditions; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between test
excavations. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Soils Engineer and
designs adjusted as required or alternate design recommended.
The report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative,to
ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the project
1 architect and engineers. Appropriate recommendations should be incorporated into structural plans. The
necessary steps should be taken to see that out such recommendations in field.
I The findings of this report are valid as of this present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property
can occur with the passage of time, whether they due to natural process or the works of man on this or
adjacent properties. In addition,changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur from legislation or
broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by
I change outside of our control.Therefore,this report is subject to review and should be updated after a period
of one year.
RECOMMENDED SERVICES
The review of grading plans and specifications,field observations and testing by a geotechnical representative
I of this office is integral part of the conclusions and recommendations made in this report. If Soils Southwest,
Inc. (SSW) is not retained for these services, the Client agrees to assume SSW's responsibility for any
potential claims that may arise during and after construction, or during the life-time use of the structure and its
1 appurtenant.
The recommendations supplied should be considered valid and applicable, provided the following
conditions, in minimum, are met:
i. Pre-grade meeting with contractor, public agency and soils engineer,
ii. Excavated bottom inspections and verification s by soils engineer prior to backfill
placement,
iii. Continuous observations and testing during site preparation and structural fill soils
placement,
I iv. Observation and inspection of footing trenching prior to steel and concrete
placement,
V. Subgrade verifications including plumbing trench backfills prior to concrete slab-on-
grade placement,
vi On and off-site utility trench backfill testing and verifications,
vii Precise-grading plan review, and
viii. Consultations as required during construction, or upon your request.
_.� Soils Southwest, Inc. will assume no responsibility for any structural distresses during its life-time
use; in event the above conditions are not strictly fulfilled.
J
Page 22 March 30,2005 SSW
J