GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARD INVESTIGATION NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING ANDREW HILL HIGH SCHOOL 3200 SENTER ROAD SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
for
East Side Union High School District Mr. Julio Lucas, Director of Construction 830 North Capitol Avenue San Jose, California 95133
by
Cleary Consultants, Inc. 560 Division Street Campbell, California 95008
August 2019 ^CLEARY CONSULTANTS, DNC. Christophe A. Ciechanowski, President, GE Grant F. Foster, Vice-President, GE Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists J. Michael Cleary, Principal, CEG, GE
August 12, 2019 Project No. 978.13F Ser. 6316
Mr. Julio Lucas, Director of Construction East Side Union High School District 830 North Capitol Avenue San Jose, California 95133
RE: GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARD INVESTIGATION NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING ANDREW HILL HIGH SCHOOL 3200 SENTER ROAD SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Lucas:
As requested, we have performed a geotechnical and geologic hazard investigation for the planned Stadium Concession Stand Building project at Andrew Hill High School in San Jose, California. The accompanying report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. The site and subsurface conditions are discussed, recommendations for the soil and foundation engineering aspects of the project design are presented and potential geologic hazards are evaluated. The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of the grading and foundation plans for the proposed new construction and observation/testing of the earthwork and foundation installation phases of the project.
We refer you to the text of the report for detailed recommendations. If you have any concerning our findings or the report, please call. 3 CD <&> %m Yours very tmly, Ql rn 2662 3D CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC.
o€ Dustin Lettenberger Grant Foster Of 'o/v Staff Engineer Geotechnical Engineer 2662Uj A , CLfy £'k Or
Copies: Addressee (email) /^yj.UL CLEr U \ : Gilbane Building Company (email) Attn: Alex Morrison, Kwan ChoJ 1 No. 352 \ * CERTIFIED ENGINEERING 560 DIVISION STREET • CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 ■ (650) 948-05, www.clearyconsultantsinc.com \ V GEOLOGIST ---- :U OF Ci-.W. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal
INTRODUCTION 1
SCOPE 2 A. Geotechnical Investigation...... 2 B. Geologic and Seismic Hazards Assessment 3
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 4
SITE CONDITIONS.. 5 A. Surface...... 5 B. Subsurface... 6 C. Groundwater 7
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMICITY 7
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION 11 A. Fault Offset Hazards...... 11 B. Ground Shaking Hazards...... 12 1. Strong Ground Shaking...... 12 2. Soil Liquefaction...... 12 3. Soil Densification...... 14 4. Other Seismic Hazards...... 15 C. Flooding...... 15
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 16 A. Earthwork...... 17 1. Stripping and Site Preparation...... 17 2. Stadium Concession Stand Building Pad Overexcavation and Recompaction...... 18 3. Recompaction of Surface Soils Outside Building Area .... 19 4. Fill Placement and Compaction...... 19 5. Utility Trenches...... 20 6. Surface Drainage...... 21 7. Construction Observation...... 21 B. Stadium Concession Stand Building Foundations...... 21 C. Seismic Design Parameters...... 22 D. Slabs-on-Grade and AC Hardscape...... 23 E. Soil Corrosivity...... 24
PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION 25
LIST OF REFERENCES TABLES
Page No.
TABLE 1 - Summary of Significant Earthquake Faults Capable of Generating Strong Ground Shaking at the Andrew Hill High School New Stadium Concession Stand Building Project Site, San Jose, CA...... 9
TABLE 2 - Correlation Between Resistivity and Corrosion Potential 24
DRAWINGS
Drawing No.
SITE VICINITY MAP 1
LOCAL GEOLOGIC MAP 2
REGIONAL FAULT MAP 3
REGIONAL EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER MAP 4
SITE PLAN 5
KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS 6
SUMMARY OF FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES 7
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES 8
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS ONE AND TWO 9-12
PLASTICITY CHART 13
R-VALUE TEST RESULTS 14-15
CORROSIVITY TEST SUMMARY 16
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A- Andrew Hill High School, New Stadium Concession Stand Building, Liquefaction and Dry Settlement Analyses and Calculations, EB-2, Drilled May 20, 2019 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical and geologic hazards investigation for the planned Stadium Concession Stand Building project at Andrew Hill High School in San Jose, California (see Drawing 1, Site Vicinity and Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map for location). The purpose of this investigation was to explore the soil and foundation conditions in the general location of the planned concession stand and to develop recommendations for the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project design. We have also performed an evaluation of potential geologic/seismic hazards at the site.
We understand that the project will include the construction of a new stadium concession stand building on the southwest side of the existing stadium/running track which is located on the northeast side of the campus. The approximate planned location of the new building is shown on Drawing 5, Site Plan. We understand that the approximately 30 foot by 45 foot stadium concession stand building will be of modular construction with a crawlspace and conventional concrete spread footings. Building loads are expected to be typical for one-story modular building construction.
The project will also include the installation of new exterior slabs-on-grade, asphalt hardscape and associated underground utilities.
We have previously performed geotechnical/geologic investigations, including associated construction observation and testing services, for a number of projects at Andrew Hill High School beginning in 1994 (see List of References). Relevant information from our prior investigations was used in the current study.
1 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Preliminary geotechnical findings and recommendations were transmitted to the District and their representatives on June 28, 2019.
SCOPE
As presented in our proposal letter dated March 29, 2019, the scope of our services for this investigation has included:
A. Geotechnical Investigation
1. A review of relevant published and unpublished geologic literature, maps and
geotechnical information for the area.
2. Several reconnaissances of the site by our staff.
3. A field subsurface investigation consisting of two (2) exploratory boring drilled
at the project site.
4. Laboratory testing of samples obtained from the boring.
5. Engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data.
6. Preparation of this geotechnical investigation and geologic and seismic hazards assessment report for use in the project design and construction. The report includes findings and recommendations for the following:
a. Geologic and seismic setting of the site and surrounding area, including research and review of available geologic/seismic reports and maps.
2 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. b.2016 CBC seismic design criteria.
c. Grading including site preparation and fill placement.
d. Stadium concession stand building soil and foundation engineering design criteria.
Estimated foundation settlements.e.
f. Support of exterior concrete slabs-on-grade and asphalt hardscape.
g- Treatment of expansive soils (as required).
Backfilling and compaction of utility trenches.h.
1. Surface and subsurface drainage.
J- Any other unusual design or construction conditions encountered in the investigation.
Geologic and Seismic Hazards AssessmentB.
1. Discussion of geologic and seismic conditions and data on the nature of the site and potential earthquake damage including:
a. Regional geology and seismic conditions and historical information on the seismicity of the local and regional area.
3 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. b. Location of known active and potentially active faults in the vicinity of the site, as well as nearby inactive faults.
2. Earthquake ground motion acceleration design parameters and geologic site classification in accordance with the 2016 California Building Code study requirements.
3. Potential site impacts related to faulting, liquefaction, lateral spreading, seismic settlement and differential compaction, landsliding, flooding and dam failure inundation with recommended mitigation measures, where appropriate.
This report has been prepared for the specific use of the East Side Union High School District and their consultants in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. In the event that any substantial changes in the nature, design or location of the project are planned, the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall not be considered valid unless such changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing. Any use or reliance of this report or the information herein by a third party shall be at such party's sole risk.
It should also be recognized that the passage of time may result in significant changes in technology, building code requirements, state of the practice, economic conditions, or site variations which would render the report inaccurate. Accordingly, neither the owner, nor any other party should rely on the information or conclusions contained in this report after three years from its date of issuance without the express written consent of Cleary Consultants, Inc.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
A site reconnaissance and the subsurface exploration were performed on May 21,2019 under the guidance of our Staff Engineer, Mr. Dustin Lettenberger. Two exploratory borings were drilled
4 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. using truck-mounted, hollow-stem and solid flight auger drilling equipment to a maximum depth of 45 feet at the approximate locations shown on Drawing 5, Site Plan.
A key describing the soil classification system and soil consistency terms used in this report is presented on Drawing 6 and the soil sampling procedures are described in Drawing 7. The logs of the borings are presented on Drawings 9 through 12.
The boring was located in the field by surveyor’s wheel measurements and interpolation of the
features shown on the site plan provided us. These locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used.
Samples of the soil materials from the borings were returned to our laboratory for classification and testing. The results of moisture content, dry density, percent finer than No. 4 and No. 200 sieves, plasticity index and free swell testing are shown on the boring logs. The laboratory testing procedures followed during this investigation are summarized on Drawing S. Drawing 13 summarizes the results of the plasticity index testing. The results of R-Value testing performed on untreated and chemically-treated samples of the upper soils are presented on Drawings 14 and 15. The results of soil corrosivity testing performed on a composite sample of
the surficial soils collected from the borings are presented on Drawing 16.
A list of references consulted during the investigation is included at the end of the text.
SITE CONDITIONS
A. Surface
The new stadium concession stand building site is located at the southwest corner of the stadium running track. The project site is presently occupied by storage containers placed on asphalt- paved hardscape and landscaping covered with wood chips. The site is bordered by residential
5 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. housing to the south-southeast and a grass sports practice field to the west-northwest. The site vicinity is relatively level with a slightly depressed area on the east side of the site. Asphalt pavements in the vicinity of the site were observed to be in generally good condition with occasional longitudinal cracking. Several medium to large-sized trees are present south, west and northwest of the planned building site.
The average elevation of the site is approximately 155 feet above Mean Sea Level. The overall regional topographic gradient is less than one percent to the southwest on the campus.
B. Subsurface
The exploratory borings generally encountered firm to very stiff silty clay in the upper 17 feet, underlain by stiff sandy silty clay to a depth of 22 feet, further underlain by loose silty sand to a depth of 27 feet. The silty sand was in turn underlain by firm to stiff sandy silty clay to the maximum depth explored, 45 feet.
The upper silty clay soils encountered at the site are considered to have a moderate expansion potential based on their plasticity characteristics (Plasticity Indices = 13 to 14 percent) and the free swell test data (Free Swells = 50 to 60 percent). The results of the free swell testing and plasticity index testing are shown on the boring logs. The results of the plasticity index testing are also presented on Drawing 13.
The attached boring logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations shown on Drawing 5 and on the particular date designated on the logs. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these boring locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change of soil conditions at these boring locations due to environmental changes.
6 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. GroundwaterC.
Free groundwater was not encountered during this investigation or during our previous investigations on the Andrew Hill High School campus. It should be noted that the borings were only open for a period of a few hours and this may not have been sufficiently long to establish stabilized water level conditions. Fluctuations in the groundwater level can also occur because of variations in rainfall, temperature, run-off, irrigation, and other factors not evident at the time our measurements were made and reported herein.
Groundwater elevation data provided by the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Historical Groundwater Elevation Data GIS website and Plate 1.2 (“Depth to Historically High
Groundwater”) of State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Report 044 for the San Jose East quadrangle (2000) indicates the historic high groundwater table in the site vicinity to be between 30 and 40 feet below the ground surface.
Based on our review of the above information, we have conservatively assumed an historic high groundwater depth of 30 feet for our liquefaction analysis.
GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
The Santa Clara Valley, a broad, sediment filled basin bordered on the east by the Diablo Range and on the west by the Santa Cruz Mountain Range, is about 13 miles wide in the vicinity of the school site, which is situated in the easterly portion. Structurally, the Santa Clara Valley has formed as a result of tectonic downwarping controlled by three northwest trending active fault zones: The San Andreas fault on the southwest and the Hayward and Calaveras faults on the northeast. The new stadium concession stand building site is situated on alluvial fan deposits which underly the south portion of the Santa Clara Valley. Published regional geologic mapping by Dibblee (2005) indicates that the site vicinity is underlain by Holocene-age alluvium (Qa) consisting of sand, clay, silt and gravel mixtures, as shown on Drawing 2, Local Geologic Map.
7 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Wentworth, et al (1999) and Helley and Wesling (1990) similarly map the project site as being underlain by Holocene-age levee deposits (Qhl).
The San Francisco Bay Area is recognized by geologists and seismologists as one of the most active seismic regions in the United States. The three major fault zones which pass through the Bay Area in a northwest direction have produced approximately a dozen earthquakes per century strong enough to cause structural damage. The faults causing these earthquakes are part of the
San Andreas fault system, a major rift in the earth's crust that extends for at least 450 miles along the California Coast and includes the San Andreas, Hayward and Calaveras faults. The site is located approximately 12.5 miles northeast of the San Andreas fault, 11.1 miles southwest of the
Hayward fault and 7.1 miles southwest of the Calaveras fault. The site is also located approximately 0.9 miles northeast, 2.2 miles northeast, 3.3 miles southwest and 5.7 miles northeast of the potentially active Piercy, San Jose, Evergreen and Monte Vista-Shannon faults. In addition, the site is located approximately 1.4 miles southwest of the inferred buried/concealed trace of the potentially active Silver Creek fault and 5.5 miles southwest of the Quaternary (age undifferentiated) Arroyo Aguague fault. A regional fault map (Jennings & Bryant, 2010) is presented on Drawing 3.
The distances between the site and the capable segments of the above faults, as well as other significant faults within a radius of 60 miles from the site, were determined using the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program 2008 USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps - Fault Parameters, as presented below in Table 1:
8 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. TABLE 1 - Summary of Significant Earthquake Faults Capable of Generating Strong Ground Shaking at the Andrew Hill High School New Stadium Concession Stand Building Project Site, San Jose, CAW> (2)
Approximate Distance and Direction to Maximum Earthquake Generating Generating Earthquake Fault Fault (miles) (Moment Magnitude) Monte Vista - Shannon 5.7 SW 6.5 Calaveras CN + CC + CS 7.1 NE 7.0 Hayward - Rodgers Creek 11.1 NE 7.3 RC + HN + HS Northern San Andreas 12.5 SW8.1 SAO+SAN+SAP+SAS Zayante-Vergeles 16.3 SW 7.0 Greenville Connected 21.2 NE 7.0 San Gregorio Connected 28.7 SW 7.5 Mount Diablo Thrust 30.1 NE 6.7 Ortigalita 30.2 SE 7.1 Monterey Bay-Tularcitos 30.4 SW 7.3 Great Valley 7 33.5 NE 6.9 Quien Sabe 36.1 SE 6.6 Green Valley Connected 42.8 NE 6.8 Rinconada 42.8 SW 7.5 USGS Earthquake Hazards Program 2008 USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps - Fault Parameters, run August 1,2019 Site Latitude: 37.2939°N; Site Longitude: 121.829FW
Since the early 1800's, a number of major regional earthquakes have occurred along the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras and other fault zones in the vicinity of the San Francisco Bay Area and the surrounding region, as shown on Drawing 4, Regional Earthquake Epicenter Map (Toppozada, et al, 2000). A discussion of significant regional historic earthquakes within a radius of 60 miles from the site is presented below.
Several major earthquakes have occurred on the San Andreas fault, including earthquakes having estimated magnitudes ranging from 6.3 to 7.4 in 1838, 1840, 1865, and 1890, the presumed epicenters of which are located about 18 miles west, 36 miles southeast, eight miles southwest, and 30 miles southeast of the project site, respectively. The San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 had a Richter Magnitude of approximately 8.3, the epicenter of which was located approximately 46 miles northwest of the site. Earthquakes of magnitude 5.8, 5.3, and 5.5 occurred in 1910, 9 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. 1957, and 1961 with epicenters located approximately 25 miles southeast, 46 miles northwest, and 52 miles southeast of the site; the 1957 Daly City earthquake caused approximately one million dollars (approximately eight million 2018 dollars) in damage. On October 17,1989, the Loma Prieta Earthquake, which had its epicenter 18 miles southwest of the site and a recorded Moment Magnitude of 6.9, produced widespread damage throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Most of the liquefaction-related damage caused by the Loma Prieta Earthquake was in areas of shallow water table (10 feet or less) underlain by unconsolidated fill and loose soil deposits, such as the Marina District of San Francisco, the westerly portion of Oakland, and downtown Santa Cruz.
In 1868, an earthquake having an estimated Richter Magnitude of 7.0 occurred along the Hayward fault at a location approximately 32 miles northwest of the project site. This earthquake opened fissures at random locations along the fault from San Pablo to Mission San Jose.
Historical earthquakes along the Calaveras fault include events in 1861,1897,1899,1979,1984 and 2007 with estimated or recorded magnitudes ranging from 5.6 to 6.5. These earthquakes had epicenters located approximately 32 miles northwest, 27 miles southeast, 36 miles southeast, 22 miles southeast, eight miles northeast and 10 miles northeast of the project site, respectively.
In 1836, an earthquake with an estimated magnitude 6.4 was reported along the Sargent fault, the epicenter of which was located approximately 33 miles southeast of the project site. An earthquake of estimated magnitude 5.5 occurred on the Quien Sabe fault in 1889, with an epicenter located approximately 34 miles southeast of the site. Earthquakes of magnitude 5.7 and 6.1 occurred on the Monterey Bay Complex in 1910and 1926, at locations approximately 37 and 55 miles southwest of the site, respectively. The San Gregorio fault produced an earthquake of magnitude 5.8 with an epicenter approximately 28 miles southwest of the site in 1926. An earthquake with Richter Magnitude 5.4 experienced on the Concord fault in 1955 had its epicenter approximately 48 miles northwest of the site. Two earthquakes in 1980, along traces of the Greenville fault, had their epicenters approximately 37 miles northeast of the site; these
10 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. earthquakes had Richter magnitudes of 5.5 and 5.8. On August 24, 2014, a branch of the West Napa fault produced a magnitude 6.0 earthquake, the epicenter of which is located approximately 69 miles northwest of the site. In addition, numerous earthquakes of magnitudes 4.0 or greater have been recorded throughout the San Francisco Bay Area along the San Andreas, Hayward,
Calaveras and other faults.
Modeling of earthquake occurrence probabilities over the 30-year period of 2014 to 2043 on both a statewide and regional basis was performed by the 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities. The results of the study are presented in the Long-Term Time- Dependent Probabilities for the Third Uniform California Earthquake Forecast (Field, E.H., et. ah, 2015). The report indicates a 72 percent probability that one or more earthquakes of magnitude 6.7 or greater will occur in the San Francisco Bay region between 2014 and 2043. Additionally, the probability of one or more regional earthquakes of magnitude 6.0 or greater over the same time period is indicated to be 98 percent. Likewise, the occurrence of at least one regional earthquake of magnitude 5.0 or greater over this time period is evaluated as being a near certainty.
Therefore, similar to most of the San Francisco Bay Area, it is reasonable to assume that the new stadium concession stand building and other site improvements will be subjected to a moderate to large earthquake from one of the above-mentioned faults during their lifetime. During such an earthquake, strong ground shaking is likely to occur at the site.
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION
A. Fault Offset Hazards
Based on our site reconnaissance, field exploration and review of available geologic information, we conclude that there are no known active or potentially active faults crossing the planned stadium concession stand building site.
11 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. The site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone as defined by the State of California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (1982) or in a fault hazard zone of the City of San Jose (1983) or Santa Clara County (2012). Therefore, the hazard resulting from surface fault rupture or fault offset at the site is considered to be low.
B. Ground Shaking Hazards
1. Strong Ground Shaking
Strong ground shaking is likely to occur during the lifetime of the planned new stadium
concession stand building and other site improvements as a result of movement along one or more of the regional active faults discussed above. The building and other proposed improvements will need to be designed and constructed in accordance with current standards of earthquake-resistant construction.
Ground shaking during an earthquake could cause furnishings which are not rigidly attached (such as shelves, refrigerators, stoves and sinks) to undergo movement with respect to the building. Design measures that minimize such potential movement and also minimize the adverse effects of such movement where they cannot be prevented should be utilized.
2. Soil Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, essentially cohesionless soils lose strength during strong seismic shaking and may experience horizontal and vertical movements. Soils that are generally most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-grained sands that lie within roughly 50 feet of the
ground surface.
12 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. The site is mapped within a potential liquefaction hazard zone as defined by the California Geological Survey (2001) and Santa Clara County (2012).
Our investigation found that the project site is predominantly underlain by firm to very stiff silty clay and sandy silty clay to the maximum depth explored of 45 feet, with a layer of loose silty sand encountered at a depth of 22 to 27 feet in EB-2.
The fine-grained sandy clay layers were further analyzed for liquefaction susceptibility using criteria from Bray, J.D. and Saneio, R.B. in their 2006 paper “Assessment of the
Liquefaction Susceptibility of Fine Grained Soils”. This study found that fine-grained soils with a plasticity index of less than 12 and water content to liquid limit ratio of less than 0.85, or a plasticity index of 12 to 18 and water content to liquid limit ratio of less than 0.8, are not susceptible to liquefaction. Based on these criteria, the silty clay and silty sandy clay layers in the upper 22 feet and from a depth of 27 to 32 feet were not found to be susceptible to liquefaction. The sandy silty clay from a depth of 32 feet to the maximum depth explored, 45 feet, was found to be potentially susceptible to liquefaction.
EB-2 was analyzed for liquefaction-induced settlement using the LiquefyPro computer program (Version 5.0) and a factor of safety (FOS) of 1.3 per CGS Special Publication 117A. The assumed groundwater depth used in the analysis was 30 feet, as discussed earlier.
LiquefyPro evaluates liquefaction potential and calculates the settlement of saturated and unsaturated deposits due to seismic loads using SPT blowcount, total unit weight, fines content, peak horizontal acceleration and earthquake moment magnitude data. The program is based on the most recent publications of the NCEER Workshop and SP117 Implementation.
13 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Based on the results of our analysis, the theoretical liquefaction-induced settlement at the stadium concession stand building site is approximately three and one-quarter inches, with up to one and five-eighths inches of differential settlement predicted over a distance
of 50 feet, using the calculated peak ground acceleration (PGAm = 0.450) for the site as specified in Item 20 of CGS Note 48 (2013), and the Tokimatsu and Seed calculation method with magnitude scaling correction. The results and supporting data for the liquefaction analysis are included in Appendix A of this report.
Based on the above information, we conclude that the likelihood that the planned new stadium concession stand building and other site improvements will be damaged by earthquake-induced soil liquefaction is low, provided that they are designed to withstand the predicted settlements.
3. Soil Densifieation
The recognized procedures for evaluation of seismically-induced settlement in dry sandy soils (Tokimatsu and Seed, 1987; Pradel, 1998) are considered most applicable to non- cohesive loose clean sands with less than five percent fines (Day, 2002). The layers above the historically high groundwater table (30 feet) were conservatively analyzed for seismically-induced dry soil settlement using the LiquefyPro computer program. The calculated total earthquake-induced dry soil settlement at the site is one-half inch, with up to one-quarter inch of differential settlement predicted over a distance of 50 feet.
Based on the above information, we conclude that the likelihood that the new stadium concession stand building and other site improvements will be damaged by earthquake- induced soil densifieation is low.
14 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. 4. Other Seismic Hazards
We have also considered the possibility of other seismically induced hazards that could potentially impact the planned new stadium concession stand building and other site improvements, such as lateral spreading, ground cracking, lurching and landsliding.
The west bank of Coyote Creek is located approximately 1700 feet northeast of the site; due to the creeks distance from the site and depth to the historic high groundwater level
(30 feet), lateral spreading is considered very unlikely. Because of the site’s gentle topography and the absence of an adjacent “free face” in the site vicinity, the likelihood that the site will be affected by lateral spreading or lurching is considered remote.
Ground cracking may be caused by any of the phenomena discussed above. Since there is a low potential for liquefaction, seismically-induced dry settlement and lateral spreading of the soils underlying the site, it is also considered unlikely that significant ground cracking will occur at the site.
Ground surface manifestation and cracking hazards were also considered; however, due to the depth to the indicated potential zone of liquefaction (30 feet), the likelihood of surface cracking/deformation is considered very low.
As indicated by mapping by the California Geologic Survey (2001) and Santa Clara
County (2012), the site is not located within a landslide hazard zone. The site is essentially level and therefore the likelihood of landsliding is considered remote.
C. Flooding
F.E.M.A. Flood Insurance Rate Mapping (May 2009) indicates that the project site is located within Other Areas Zone D: “Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible.” The
15 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. mapping indicates that the Coyote Creek flood zone is located approximately 1,700 feet northeast of the planned building site and the “1% annual chance flood discharge” will be contained to Los Lagos Golf Course, which is bordered on the south by Capitol Expressway and on the west by Lone Bluff Way, in the vicinity of the campus.
Dam failure inundation mapping prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Water District for Anderson Dam (2016) indicates that the project site would be subject to inundation in the event that the dam failed catastrophically; however, such a failure is considered highly unlikely. The site is not located within known dam failure inundation zones for the other reservoirs in Santa Clara County, including Lexington (2016) and Guadalupe (2014).
The site is outside of the runup zone resulting from a seismically-generated tsunami (California Geological Survey, 2009). The site is also not within the vicinity of any lakes or reservoirs, therefore there is not a hazard at the site from seiches.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of our investigation, we judge that there are no geologic/seismic hazards or constraints which would preclude the construction of the planned stadium concession stand building at the Andrew Hill High School campus. From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, we also conclude that the improvements can be constructed as planned provided the recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project.
The upper soils encountered at the site exhibit weak strength and variable consistency, and accordingly, are considered unsuitable for support of the proposed modular stadium concession stand building in their present condition. In order to provide suitable support for conventional spread footing foundations, reworking of the upper soils underlying the stadium concession stand building site should be performed, as discussed further in the report. The new modular
16 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. stadium concession stand building can then be supported on conventional spread footing foundations obtaining support in properly compacted engineered fill.
The soils have a moderate expansion potential and a cushion of Class 2 aggregate baserock should be provided under exterior concrete flatwork to mitigate expansive soil movements.
Our analysis indicates that the maximum combined theoretical seismically-induced liquefaction and dry soil settlement at the site is approximately three and one-half inches, with approximately one and three-quarter inches of differential settlement predicted over a distance of 50 feet.
The recommendations presented in the remainder of this report are contingent on our review of the earthwork and foundation plans for the project and our observation of the grading, foundation installation and concrete slab installation phases of the construction.
EarthworkA.
1.Stripping and Site Preparation
Existing underground utilities, root bulbs, as well as any other site improvements which are to be removed should be cleared from the proposed construction area. Any below
grade obstructions, such as buried tanks or old foundations, should then be removed to their full depth and extent and hauled from the site.
The stadium concession stand building pad and other improvement areas should then be
stripped to a sufficient depth to remove any remaining organic laden topsoil. Any areas of loose or soft materials or undocumented fills that are exposed during the grading should also be removed or recompacted, as determined by our representative.
17 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Holes resulting from the removal of underground obstructions (such as old foundations, abandoned utilities or tree root bulbs) that extend below the planned finished grade should be cleared of loose soil and debris, then backfilled with suitable material compacted to the requirements discussed below for engineered fill (see Section 4, Fill
Placement and Compaction).
2. Stadium Concession Stand Building Pad Overexcavation and Recompaction
After the new building site has been cleared and stripped of roots, organic laden topsoil and any below grade obstructions, including concrete foundations and buried utilities, the soils beneath the building pad should be overexcavated and replaced as a properly engineered fill. The soils underlying the building pad should be removed to a depth of four feet or at least two feet below the bottom of footings, whichever is greater, and stockpiled for re-use as engineered fill. The overexcavation should extend three feet beyond the outer face of footings.
The exposed soil at the bottom of the overexcavated area should be ripped to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to approximately optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Designation D1557 before placing new fill. Compaction should be performed using suitably sized compaction equipment such as a self-propelled sheepsfoot compactor. Placement of stabilizing fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent) and a 12-inch layer of virgin Class 2 aggregate baserock, or, alternatively chemical stabilization, may be required to stabilize the bottom of the overexcavation if excessive pumping or instability is observed, prior to bringing up the fill removal area with on-site stockpiled material. After the exposed subgrade soils are recompacted, the fill removal area can then be brought up in thin lifts with the excavated soils placed and compacted to the requirements given below for engineered fill.
18 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. 3. Recompaction of Surface Soils Outside Building Area
After the new construction areas outside of the building pad have been cleared, stripped and excavated to required grade, the exposed soil should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. The upper 12 inches of the exposed subgrade should be processed such that the moisture is at least two percent above the laboratory established optimum moisture content, and then compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Designation D1557. The moisture conditioning process should be observed by our representative.
The subgrade should be maintained at least two percentage points above the optimum moisture content prior to placing additional fill or Class 2 aggregate base. Should drying of the soils occur, they should again be scarified, moisture conditioned to the proper moisture content and recompacted.
Placement of stabilizing fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent) and a 12-to-18-inch thick layer of Class 2 aggregate baserock may be required to stabilize subgrade areas if excessive pumping or instability is observed, prior to placement of the required Class 2 aggregate baserock section.
Compaction should be performed using heavy compaction equipment such as a self- propelled compactor. Additional fill or baserock can be placed, as required, after the surface soils are moisture conditioned and recompacted.
4. Fill Placement and Compaction
Existing soils having an organic content of less than three percent by volume, and which are free of construction debris, can be used as engineered fill. Fill material should not,
19 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. however, contain rocks or lumps greater than six inches in greatest dimension with not more than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches. Imported fill used to raise grades in building and pavement areas should be predominantly granular with a maximum plasticity index of 12. Imported fill to be placed within building pad areas should not contain ground-up asphalt; any imported aggregate baserock placed within the building pad should be virgin/non-recycled.
Engineered fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D1557. Fill material should be spread and compacted in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness. In order to achieve satisfactory compaction in the subgrade and fill soils, it is likely that it will be necessary to adjust the soil moisture content at the time of soil compaction. This may require that water be added and thoroughly mixed into any soils which are too dry, or that repeated scarification and "turning over" of the soils during periods of dry weather will be necessary in order to aerate and reduce the moisture content of any soils which are too wet.
5. Utility Trenches
The presently available subsurface information indicates that the required utility trenches can be excavated with conventional backhoe equipment. Trenches deeper than five feet should be properly braced or sloped in accordance with the current requirements of CAL-OSHA or the local governmental agency, whichever is more stringent.
Utility trenches should be backfilled with engineered fill placed in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness, except thicker lifts can be used with the approval of our representative provided satisfactory compaction is achieved. If on-site soil is used, the material should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction by mechanical means only. Imported clean sand also can be used for backfilling trenches provided it is compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction.
20 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Water jetting to achieve the required level of backfill compaction should not be permitted.
6. Surface Drainage
Positive surface gradients of at least two percent on porous surfaces and one percent on paved surfaces should be maintained adjacent to the building so that water does not
collect in the vicinity of the foundations. Water from roof downspouts should be collected into closed pipes or discharged onto impermeable surfaces, which carry the
runoff away from the building and discharge into approved drainage facilities.
7. Construction Observation
Grading and earthwork should be observed and tested by our representative for conformance with the project plans/specifications and our recommendations. This work includes site preparation, selection of satisfactory fill materials, and placement and compaction of the subgrades and fills. Sufficient notification prior to commencement of earthwork is essential to make certain that the work will be properly observed.
B. Stadium Concession Stand Building Foundations
The new stadium concession stand building can be supported on conventional continuous and isolated spread footings which obtain support in properly engineered fill. Spread footings should be founded at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade and be embedded at least 18 inches into supporting soil. Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches and isolated footings should be at least 24 inches square. Footings located adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces below an imaginary 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected upward from the edge of the bottom of the trench. Care should be taken to keep the footings moist by spraying lightly prior to the concrete pour.
21 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. At the above depths, footings can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of2000 psf due to dead loads with a one-third increase for dead plus live loads (2660 psf) and a 50 percent increase for total design loads (3000 psf) including wind and seismic. All continuous footings should be provided with adequate top and bottom reinforcement (as specified by the structural engineer) to provide structural continuity and to permit spanning of local irregularities. The steel reinforcement requirements should be determined by the structural engineer.
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. A friction coefficient of 0.25 is considered applicable. As an alternative, an equivalent fluid pressure of250 pcf starting one-half foot below the ground surface can be taken against the sides of footings poured neat.
Soil conditions in the foundation excavations should be checked by our representative prior to placing reinforcing steel or concrete. The excavation of footing trenches should be performed so that the trenches are left open for the minimum practical length of time prior to the placement of concrete. Footing trenches should be kept moist so that any drying-shrinkage cracks are closed prior to placement of concrete. Moisture should be added in a light mist spray.
Post-construction settlements of the spread footing foundation under proposed loads are expected to be within tolerable limits.
C. Seismic Design Parameters
Seismic design values for the project were determined using the online OSHPD U.S. Seismic Design Maps website and the subsurface information obtained from the exploratory borings. Based on the results, a site-specific seismic hazard analysis is not required (per CBC 2016 Section 1613A.3.5) for the project site, as Si < 0.75 and is assigned to Seismic Design Category Site Class D.
22 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Using the site Latitude (37.2939 °N) and Longitude (121.8291 °W) and the site classification as input, the computer application provides mapped acceleration parameters, site coefficients and design spectral acceleration parameters for both "short" (0.2 seconds) and long period (1-second) durations as detailed in the 2016 CBC.
Based on the results of our investigation, the tables provided in Section 1613A.3.3 and 1613A.3.5 of the 2016 CBC, and our analysis using the OSHPD U.S. Seismic Design Maps website, the following seismic design parameters can be used in lateral force analyses at this site:
Site Class E - Soft Clay Soil Profile with Standard Penetration Test Values of less than 15 blows/foot
Site Coefficient Fa = 0.9 Site Coefficient Fv = 2.4 Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values; Ss = 1.5, Si = 0.6 Spectral Response Accelerations; SMs = 1.35, SMi = 1.44 Design Spectral Response Accelerations; SDs = 0.90, SDi = 0.96
D. Slabs-on-Grade and AC Hardscape
Exterior concrete flatwork, sidewalks and curb and gutters should be underlain by at least six inches of Class 2 aggregate baserock placed on the prepared subgrade.
The moisture content of the re-compacted subgrade should be maintained at least two percent above optimum prior to placement of the baserock materials to “seal in” the moisture and the subgrade should be proof-rolled to provide a smooth, firm non-yielding surface for uniform support. The baserock and upper 12 inches of underlying subgrade should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction.
Reinforcement of slabs should be provided in accordance with their anticipated use and loading, but as a minimum, slabs should be reinforced with No. 3 bars at 18 inches on center, both ways,
23 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. or No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center, both ways. Concrete slabs should be articulated with a maximum joint spacing of approximately ten feet in both directions.
New AC hardscape should consist of a minimum of two and one-half inches of asphalt concrete over six inches of Class 2 aggregate baserock.
E.Soil Corrosivity
Laboratory resistivity, pH, chloride and sulfate testing was performed on a composite soil sample obtained from the upper three feet of the borings during our geotechnical investigation for this project. The testing was performed by Cooper Testing Laboratory for the purpose of evaluating the soils' corrosion potential for use in the design of underground utilities and embedded concrete on this project.
In summary, the test results indicated a minimum resistivity of 1,629 Ohm-Cm, a pH of 7.9, a chloride content of 29 ppm, and water soluble sulfate content of 134 ppm. Soils with chloride contents of less than 500 ppm and sulfate contents of less than 1500 ppm are considered to be of "low" corrosivity. However, based on the resistivity testing the soils are considered "moderately corrosive."
Table 2 below shows the general correlation between resistivity and corrosion potential.
Table 2 - Correlation Between Resistivity and Corrosion Potential Ic)
Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) Soil Classification Below 500 Very Corrosive 500 to 1,000 Corrosive 1,000 to 2,000 Moderately Corrosive 2,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive Above 10,000 Progressively Less Corrosive (c) National Association of Corrosion Engineers.
24 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. The above condition could result in reduced life span of buried steel piping and culverts for this project. Thicker gauge pipelines would have greater life spans. For example, the life spans for 18,16 and 14-gauge steel culverts with a soil resistivity of 1,629 ohm-cm and a pH of 7.9 are estimated to be roughly 31,40 and 49 years, respectively (California Division of Highways, 1993).
For the purposes of design of concrete in contact with the soil, there are no restrictions on types of cementitious materials to be used, based on the resistivity testing and sulfate testing.
PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
We should be provided the opportunity to review the foundation and grading plans and the specifications for the project when they are available. We should also be retained to provide soil engineering observation and testing services during the grading and foundation installation phases of the project. This will provide the opportunity for correlation of the soil conditions found in our investigation with those actually encountered in the field, and thus permit any necessary modifications in our recommendations resulting from changes in anticipated conditions.
'k'k'k’k'k'k'k'k’k'k
25 CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. LIST OF REFERENCES
Association of Bay Area Governments, 1983, Plate 1. Fault Traces Used as Sources of Ground Shaking, San Francisco Bay Region.
Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B. and Fumal, T.E., 1997, Equations for Estimating Horizontal Response Spectra and Peak Accelerations from Western North American Earthquakes. A Summary of Recent Work. Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1, January, 1997.
Borcherdt, R.D., 1975, Studies for Seismic Zonation of the San Francisco Bay Region: U.S. Geologic Survey, Professional Paper 941-A.
Bortugno, E.J., Wagner, D.L., and Me Junkin, R.D., 1991, Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 5A, California Division of Mines and Geology.
Bray, Jonathan D. and Sancio, Rodolfo B., 2006, Assessment of Liquefaction Susceptibility of Fine-Grained Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, September 2006, page 1165- 1177.
California Building Code, 2016.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1982, Special Studies Zones, San Jose East Quadrangle.
California Geological Survey, 2013, Note 48, Checklist for the Review of Engineering Geology and Seismology Reports for California Public Schools, Hospitals and Essential Services Buildings.
California Geological Survey, 2009, Tsunami Inundation Maps.
California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California Special Publication 117A.
California Geological Survey, 2001, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map, San Jose East Quadrangle.
California Geological Survey, 2001, Seismic Hazard Zones Map, San Jose East Quadrangle.
California Geological Survey, 2000, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 044, San Jose East Quadrangle.
Civiltech Software, Liquefy Pro Program, Version 5.0. LIST OF REFERENCES, CONTINUED
Cleary Consultants, Inc., 2005, Geotechnical Investigation, Phase III Construction, Andrew Hill High School, January 28, 2005.
Cleary Consultants, Inc., 2004, Geotechnical Investigation, Sports Facility Improvements, Andrew Hill High School, January 9, 2004.
Cleary Consultants, Inc., 1995, Geotechnical Investigation, New Science and Medical Building, Andrew Hill High School, September 28, 1995.
Cleary Consultants, Inc., 1994, Geotechnical Investigation, Courtyard Areas, Andrew Hill High School, June 10, 1994.
Committee on Earthquake Engineering, Housner Chen, 1985, Liquefaction of Soils During Earthquakes, National Research Council, National Academy Press.
Day, R.W., Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Handbook, 2002, Me Graw-Hall.
Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 2005, Geologic Map of the San Jose East Quadrangle, Santa Clara Counties, California, Dibblee Geology Center Map #DF-155.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, May 18, 2009, Santa Clara County, California, Panel 262 of 830.
Field, E.H., et. al., 2015, Long-Term Time Dependent Probabilities for the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3), Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 105, No. 2A, pp. 511-543.
Helley, E.J., and Wesling, J.R., 1990, Quaternary Geologic Map of the San Jose East Quadrangle, Santa Clara County, U.S. Geological Survey O.F.R., 90-427.
Ishihara, Kenji, 1985, "Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes," Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco, CA, Volume 1, p. 321-376, August.
Jennings, C.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2010, Fault Activity map of California: California Geologic Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6. map scale 1:750,000.
OSHPD, 2019, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, https://www.seismicmaps.org
Pradel, Daniel, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, April 1998, P364 -368.
San Jose, City of, 1983, Fault Hazard Map, San Jose East Quadrangle. LIST OF REFERENCES. CONTINUED
Santa Clara County, 2012, Geologic Hazard Zone Maps.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2016, Anderson Dam Flood Inundation Maps.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2016, Lexington Dam Flood Inundation Maps.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2014, Guadalupe Dam Flood Inundation Maps.
Seed, H. Bolton, and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, EERI Monograph.
Southern California Earthquake Center, March 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117.
Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, August 1987, Volume 113,pages 861 - 878.
Toppozada, T. et al, 2000, Epicenters of and Areas Damaged by M>5 California Earthquakes, 1800-1999, CDMG Map Sheet 49.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2016, Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014- 2043, Fact Sheet 2016-3020.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2015, UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex Fault System, Fact Sheet 2015-3009.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2015, San Jose East 7 1/2" Quadrangle Map, 1:24,000.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Fault Parameters online program, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/hazfaults_2008_searcli/query_main.cfm.
Vallee, R.P. and Skryness, R.S., 1980, Sampling and In-Situ Density of Saturated Gravel Deposits, Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM International, Vol. 2, No. 3, pages 136 - 142.
Wentworth, C.M., Blake, M.C., Jr., McLaughlin, R.J. and Graymer, R.W., 1999, Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Jose 30 x 60-Minute Quadrangle, California, U.S.G.S. Open File Report 98-795
Wills, C.J., Weldon, R.J. and Bryant, W.A., 2008, California Fault Parameters for the National Seismic Hazard Maps and Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2007, U.S.G.S. Open File Report 2007-1437A, CGS Special Report 203A, SCEC Contribution #1138A. LIST OF REFERENCES. CONTINUED
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2007, U.S.G.S. Open File Report 2007-1437A, CGS Special Report 203A, SCEC Contribution #1138A
Youd, T.L., 1997, Updates in the Simplified Procedure: An Overview of NCEER Workshop in Salt Lake City on Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Third Seismic Short Course on Evaluation and Mitigation of Earthquake Induced Liquefaction Hazards, San Francisco, CA. : 'ty „><4 \ v ■> v- v*. '• * S »**' \ > ■ v\ \ k v ★|< SITE * 4 .• \* ,r* I I .’ •. *. . ! . ^ //i,; I V ■*■ V ■■ « ✓ *, * • H Ilf! v S rv ■ ■* <•** . ■* •* v -•* , m • / \< y
•• ■ , • r :• , \ i-
■ < \S> V n p f; \J. -a, 1 ■ \,<-'\ 'T' ■ i .1 v^-s- ■*vS V M
MAP EXPLANATION
ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONES SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES Earthquake FaultZonos Liquefaction Zones Zone boundaries are delineated by straight-lino segments; the Areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, boundaries define the zone encompassing active faults that geotechnical and ground water conditions indicate a potential for constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or permanent flround displacements such that mitigation as defined In fault creep such that avoidance os described In Public Resources Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. Code Section 2621.5(a) would be required.
Active FoullTraces Earthquake-Induced Landslide Zones Faults considered to have beon active during Holoceno time and Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local 1906 ,c to have potential for surface rupture; Solid Line in Black or topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions Red where Accurately Located; Long Dash in Black or Solid Line in indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such lhal Purple where Approximately Located; Short Dash In Black or Solid mitigation as defined In Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would Line in Orange where Inforred; Dotted Line in Black or Solid Line in be required...... 1 Rose where Concealed; Query (?) indicates additional uncertainty. Evidence of historic offset indicated by year of earthquake- associated event or C for displacement caused by fault creep. A
OVERLAPPING ALQUIST-PRIOLO AND SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES Overlap of Earthquake Fault Zone and Liquefaction Zone Areas that are covered by both Earthquake Fault Zone and Liquefaction Zone.
Overlap of Earthquake Fault Zono and Eorthquoko-lnduccd Landslldo Zono Areas that are covered by both Earthquake Fault Zone and Earthquake- Induced Landslide Zone. Note: Mitigation methods differ for oach zono - AP Act only allows avotdonco; Seismic Hazard Mapping Act allows mitigation by onglneorlngfgootochnlcal design as wall as avoldanco.
BASE: California Geological Survey, 2001, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, San Jose East Quadrangle, California
SITE VICINITY AND EARTHQUAKE ZONES OF REQUIRED INVESTIGATION MAP NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING
CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Andrew Hill High School Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists San Jose, CA APPROVED BY PROJECT NO. DATESCALE DRAWING NO. GF 1" = 2000' August 2019 1978.13F ' ryr\\ ; : *•- Vs v if \\ Vrj*-v% X- ’■ A4S : IT w?. ^/mi ■' >*■*}* >■ \y y y\ w x v - k/ ■# iff?’' .' - ■ ,■■*• ■ ■■■■ ■ .lift Tfiin % \ * , I!'r- S? Park\ % -’rfl I l 1 A V- Ek> ■ fcV**;' S ,iw\ ■;V , • / H ^ ;a Si .V ' ,E> v V • Vi’ I ■ -'■■ -t: f-A, * «-* '• j •d -> j* J . f v Vi \ v. Trailer y S' J AW i I Pfrk'9 N >•- > : •- ..- - :f:V C. •. V V V \ E‘ .♦. * , tS\ V V$' 11 O t ^ * i^CV V V V--. ■ 4 V. j -~y ,*- v „.y>^ \ //-V \<3 ’ ♦ v* \ / vs \ RY '.VSSy. V V- r'\ • •s v Qa V -•-f c“ • S - \ / * . ’> \ , I M i%.' Is • ¥ .- \ S/'y*** v. A' •'• -i* .- -• • ‘a . j4?' . ' • ‘E\ V;.,:- - & y ■ - 'V : Su • ? \ ■# . C\ A 8:' 4.?' ’* \ \ \3 s ...... <£'% eSry I \\ \ V\' - I'piri** yv v \, *’/■ ★ < site! -S \ Park, % * hX>*5S» N ■ °|\A o.- V * ‘''til l t y • 4ILm£ vr \ \ ■ . ■ V’V * Sa«"\ A )> r v - H' ; \ 1 : V4 ,:= ' ■'> V& V E A * %y%- } U Qa ^ f-- V v>. ■nr 4; \= 1 "Vo s > . *6 » \ A ,V r • V V> i 1^1 & I ,.. V-T%r i r
-V,v' 'yJjyXy' «uuaa* N. '• ' N- .* SA/ V«—1v ! j •:. V v. 56% X 'w =± ■« v\\ H.m v * y - & 2l JSJUv, V I AiC V ■:?T^ 'S3 :f t 1 ■: s t/. :i A^lf^ cz.- v •p- Sr i] >&ch ?! ! tj; “T •i V- Vi>A ii El > r * iLiij V. !S-Efe=3l >v-LJ I a /-,:•*■ v- * •» —>*.r it *’>•. V*. ’A\* . x.T! - Hellycr tkJl ,t i ” >x. V v>' * ; t -! !^-= / tlT ?o» *.v ; = HPU.VM, \>.iV.V;f -» /• A AYr#|L *A‘ _ V*L •;• U—= *= »» • J fm 1 1 ;i V8 5; . « \ tv I' 1 __jii: I i 1 lt-= ' Hi .j £jr\ a l' ’’ - .- «•_ M« 1 <1! A ij- tf/ v. \ ■ a(P -*->• (ir*-J,Trp.r# .1 8 |V \ . f^\> N W' \X • fI.------r!- V,. \ 1 :" 0) ■\S •• / # . /jT!s4i' TXl'f'l ^■tE . 0»'iv^-*nj '/ f'. € : ,5> •••■ 0/ , L'4* 1 y^cTvY.) ■ 1 healdAi^ uj ® HI.. CITY t {?q,:rY ■/ T V v'v. A- ■. : m x\i- •• /• fivt ' li iT ^piSf P/r ir B'-C ‘ -*fe : S^OyJ f; -V V '•- . Jjs V. ' v sp JOSE ___ ; ,n fm [LA^ A ? K V )l S? GM 174^1 If* A* Xl ■ WM EXPLANATION N
Qa Alluvial Gravel, Sand and Clay Soil of Valley Areas Qg Sand and Gravel of Coyote Creek Channel sp Franciscan Complex - Serpentine fm Franciscan Assemblage ^ Fault, dashed where approximate, dotted where concealed BASE: Thomas W. Dibblee, Jr., 2005, Geologic Map of the San Jose East Quadrangle, Santa Clara Countv. California LOCAL GEOLOGIC MAP B NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING
0t Andrew Hill High School # CLEARYi CONSULTANTS, INC. Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists San Jose, CA APPROVED BY SCALE PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 1"= 2000' 978.13F August 2019GF 2 Donici ■• • • v • Ulotu'«j Mull Fault along V/tiich historic (last 200 years) displacement has occurred. ■In*, ft. SA Anlk ,1 xv Mil fc. ConcoraN,^ ^ •• ' O % K9 MCO] \ Holoceno laull displacement (during past 11.700 years) without \ I ^ 1 Ktcniiicnw^ Sr historic record. I A Dla it- --7 Late Quaternary fault displacement (during past 700,000 years). l)
c I" O) V OJ 6.0 - 6.4 s< «■ lUfi&rM ft ?»■ P;, ' 5.5 - 5.9 ✓ 7 ?-'A $8*7 “X'A 5.0 - 5.4 « >.: V ‘ y A ?'.-V cr. sL-.mi A "I'x- /i . r ✓ Historical Faulting V .-/ : r Holocene Faulting m •* M. » r G&Ufttt, ■ (C Highways (Major) N Highways (Minor) 122 121
Lakes
Last two digits of M )> 6.5 earthquake year
BASE: CDMG Map Sheet 49; Toppozada et al, 2000. Magnitude 5.0 and Greater Earthquakes Plotted Through 1999; Subsequent Earthquakes through August 2014 plotted in yellow. REGIONAL EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER MAP NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists San Jose, CA APPROVED BY SCALE PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. GF/CC1" = 25 miles ± 978.13F August 2019 4 r *
V >■. STADIUM CONCESSION j , STAND BUILDING (P) V- I , EB-1 l >S£! ■ EB-2 A * \ \ * V > r
. ■ f
TO
r*7
* -t- ,\ A 1%A 1 > J N EXPLANATION EB-1 Approximate Location of Exploratory Boring
BASE: Google Maps, most recent available satellite imagery (undated), downloaded July 31, 2019 SITE PLAN NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists San Jose, CA SCALEPROJECT NO.APPROVED BY DATEDRAWING NO. GF 1" = 40' ± 978.13F August 2019 5 GROUP PRIMARY DIVISIONS SECONDARY DIVISION SYMBOL CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines GRAVELS GRAVELS (LESS THAN x/i GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines o MORE THAN HALF 5% FINES) sto o o H r* OF COARSE GRAVEL C/3 GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines s^ oz FRACTION IS WITH to to LARGER THAN FINES o a GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines to co NO. 4 SIEVE H CLEAN $ Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines O to 0 sw w O co SANDS SANDS (Z> (LESS THAN 5! SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines 5 H MORE THAN HALF 5% FINES) O W 59 u oi OF COARSE SANDS O SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines S FRACTION IS WITH SMALLER THAN FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines NO. 4 SIEVE Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey ML SILTS AND CLAYS fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity
GRAIN SIZES
SANDS AND GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT^STRENGTH AND CLAYSBLOWS/FOOT ^SILTS VERY SOFT 0-1/4 0-2 VERY LOOSE 0-4 SOFT 1/4 -1/2 2-4 LOOSE 4-10 FIRM 1/2-1 4-8 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 STIFF 1-28-16 DENSE 30-50 VERY STIFF 2-4 16-32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4OVER 32
RELATIVE DENSITYCONSISTENCY Number of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.D.) split barrel (ASTM D-1586). Unconfined compressive strength in tons/sq.ft, as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test (ASTM D-1586), pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation. KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS JB NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING 9K Andrew Hill High School m t CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, CA Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO.DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F August 2019 6 FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The soils encountered in the borings were continuously logged in the field by our representative and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487).
Representative soil samples were obtained from the borings at selected depths appropriate to the soil investigation. All samples were returned to our laboratory for classification and testing.
In accordance with the ASTM D1586 procedure, the standard penetration resistance was obtained by dropping a 140 pound hammer through a 30-inch free fall. The 2-inch O.D. Standard split barrel sampler was driven 18 inches or to practical refusal and the number of blows were recorded for each 6-inch penetration interval. The blows per foot recorded on the boring logs represent the accumulated number of blows, or N-value, required to drive the penetration sampler the final 12 inches. In addition, 3-inch O.D. x 2.42-inch I.D. drive samples were obtained using a Modified California Sampler and 140 pound hammer. Blow counts for the Modified California Sampler were converted to standard penetration resistance by multiplying by 0.6. The sampler type is shown on the boring logs in accordance with the designation below.
6" x 2,42" Liner Modified California Sampler
Bag Sample Standard Split Barrel Sampler
Where obtained, the shear strength of the soil samples using either Torvane (TV) or Pocket Penetrometer (PP) devices is shown on the boring logs in the far right hand column.
SUMMARY OF FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING 4SS Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, CA Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F August 2019 7 LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
The laboratory testing program was directed toward a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of the soils underlying the site.
The natural water content was determined on 32 samples of the materials recovered from the borings in accordance with the ASTM D2216 Test Procedure. These water contents are recorded on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.
Dry density determinations were performed on 29 samples to measure the unit weight of the subsurface soils in accordance with the ASTM D2937 Test Procedure. The results of these tests are shown on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.
Atterberg Limit determinations were performed on eight samples of the subsurface soils in accordance with the ASTM D4318 Test Procedure to determine the range of water contents over which the materials exhibited plasticity. The Atterberg Limits are used to classify the soils in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and to evaluate the soil's expansion potential. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing 13, and on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.
The percent soil fraction passing the #4 sieve and #200 sieves were determined on 10 samples of the subsurface soils in accordance with the ASTM D1140 Test Procedure to aid in the classification of the soils. The results of these tests are shown on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.
Free swell tests were performed on 10 samples of the soil materials to evaluate the swelling potential of the soil. The free swell tests were performed by slowly pouring 10 ml of air-dried soil passing the No. 40 sieve into a 100 ml graduated cylinder filled with approximately 90 ml of distilled water. The suspension was stirred repeatedly to ensure thorough wetting of the soil specimen. The graduated cylinder was then filled with distilled water to the 100 ml mark and allowed to settle until equilibrium was reached (approximately 24 hours). The free swell volume of the soil was then noted. The percent free swell was calculated by subtracting the initial soil volume from the free swell volume, dividing the difference by the initial volume, and multiplying the result by 100 percent. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs.
R-Value tests were performed on representative samples of the subgrade soils by Cooper Testing Laboratory in accordance with California Test Method 301-F on both untreated material and on material chemically-treated with a five percent mixture of 50 percent hi-calcium quicldime and 50 percent Portland cement, and indicated R-Values of 12 and 59, respectively, at an exudation pressure of 3 00 pounds per square inch. The results of the tests are presented on Drawings 14 and 15.
Corrosion testing was performed on a composite sample of the surficial soil materials from the site. Testing included resistivity, pH, chloride and sulfate testing performed in accordance with ASTM G57, ASTM G51, Caltrans 422 (modified) and Caltrans 417 (modified), respectively. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing 16 and are discussed in Section E. Soil Corrosivity.
DRAWING NO. 8 EQUIPMENT 6" Diameter Solid Flight Auger* ELEVATION LOGGED BY DL DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER Not Enc, DEPTH TO BEDROCKNot Enc.DATE DRILLED 5/21/2019
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH (FEET) I III sae S2 o ogfe DO 00 DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. 00 Q oo h O CO A|8&h Asphalt Hardscape: 3,5" AC over 4" AB Dark Stiff CL Brown SILTY CLAY, moist, fine to medium grained sand 1 22 101 @1.5': Liquid Limit = 33% 11 Plasticity Index = 14% 21 102 PP=1.75 Finer Than #4= 100% 2 Finer Than #200= 92% Brown Free Swell = 50% 3 12 @3.0': Liquid Limit = 33% 21 Plasticity Index = 14% X Finer Than #4= 100% Firm Finer Than #200 = 96% 4 20 103 Free Swell = 50% 8 20 105 PP=1.25 5 :l! Stiff
6 11 X 21 7
8
9 @19.0': very moist 26 92 9 27 92 PP=0.75 - 10 :l
- 11
12 Firm - 13
- 14 31 89 5 22 102 PP=0.25 - 15 f
- 16
SANDY SILTY CLAY, moist, fine to occasionally coarse Brown " ' grained sand CL @19.5': Finer Than #4= 100% - 18 Finer Than #200= 85% Free Swell = 30% * Drilled with CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig - 19 20 104 PP = Pocket Penetrometer 14 Bottom of Boring = 20.0' m 10322 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN SOIL TYPES ANDI THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 1 JEunr NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING mmm Andrew Hill High School Vi CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, California Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F August 2019 9 EQUIPMENTELEVATION8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger* LOGGEDBY DL DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER NotEno, DEPTH TO BEDROCKNot Enc.DATE DRILLED 5/21/2019
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH i-i in & 2GT (FEET) HI £ S3b Sge DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST.o in a xn xn a O Q m 04 Landscape - 2" Wood Chips over Soil Dark Very CL Brown Stiff SILTY CLAY, moist, fine grained sand, asphalt 1 fragments Fill 14 109 19 SILTY CLAY,"moist,""fine"allied sand BrownVery CL 15 109 Stiff 2 I @1.5': Liquid Limit = 32% Plasticity Index =13% Finer Than #4 = 100% 3 18 Finer Than #200= 94% X 15 Free Swell = 60% Stiff 4 15112 16 15 109 5 i 6
7
8
9 @9.5': very moist 22 102 Liquid Limit = 42% 14 Plasticity Index = 19% 27 96 PP=2.25 Finer Than #4= 99% - 10 Finer Than #200= 97% Free Swell = 50% 11
- 12 - Brown Firm with Gray Mottling - 13 -
- 14 24 96 8 28 96PP=0.75 - 15 1 - 16 -
17 - SANDY SILTY CLAY, moist, fine grained sand, mottledBrown Stiff CL with @19.5': Liquid Limit = 27% Gray Plasticity index = 8% Mottling - 18 - Finer Than #4= 100% Finer Than #200= 74% Free Swell = 40% - 19 19 104 * Drilled with CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig 16 PP = Pocket Penetrometer 18 108 20 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN SOIL TYPES AND1 THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 Ba NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Bm Andrew Hill High School m t CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, California Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F10 August 2019 8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger* ELEVATIONEQUIPMENT LOGGED BY DL DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER Not Ene. DEPTH TO BEDROCKNot Enc. DATE DRILLED 5/21/2019 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH §8p B (FEET) £ SC Ss fef| So O 1/3 a DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST, O m s u in P* SANDY SILTY CLAY, moist, continued... StiffBrown CL with Gray Mottling - 21 -
22 - SILTY SAND, moist, fine grained sand, mottled Brown SMLoose with Gray Mottling - 23 -
- 24 @24.0': Finer Than #4 = 100% 13 104 Finer Than #200 = 49% 9 Free Swell = 30% - 25 3 - 26 -
------27 - SANDY SILTY CLAY, moist, fine grained sand StiffBrown CL
28 -
- 29 @29.5': Liquid Limit = 29% 10421 Plasticity Index = 13% 16 Finer Than #4 = 100% 20 PP=1.75106 Finer Than #200 = 85% - 30 3 Free Swell = 60% 31 -
- 32 - Brown CL- with ML Gray Mottling - 33
- 34 @34.5': Liquid Limit = 25% 21 100 Plasticity Index = 6% 13 Finer Than #4 = 100% 21 101 Finer Than #200 = 79% - 35 3 Free Swell = 20% - 36 -
- 37 - Firm
- 38 -
@39.0': very moist - 39 31 79 * Drilled with CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig 7 PP = Pocket Penetrometer 9128 40 1 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN SOIL TYPES AND THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, California Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F August 2019 11 EQUIPMENT 8" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger*LOGGEDELEVATION BY DL DEPTH TO GROUNDWATERNot Enc, TO BEDROCKNot Enc.DATE DRILLED 5/21/2019DEPTH DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH pep IS (FEET) I SO 2(f H £ 3g& a COLOR CONSIST, CO M CO DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS W H w Q s CO SANDY SILTY CLAY, very moist, continued .... Brown Firm CL- with ML Gray Mottling - 41 -
- 42 - Stiff CL
- 43 - @44.5': Liquid Limit = 31% Plasticity Index = 9% 44 Finer Than #4 = 98% 26 99 Finer Than #200 = 92% 14 Free Swell = 25% 2994 Bottom of Boring = 45.0' a - 46 -
- 47 -
- 48 -
- 49 -
- 50 -
- 51 -
- 52 -
53 -
- 54 -
- 55 -
- 56 -
- 57 -
- 58 -
- 59 - * Drilled with CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig 60 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN SOIL TYPES AND THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 2 a NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Bt Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, California Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECTNO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F12 August 2019 60
50 {S ♦ v« CH ♦G 0s 40 wX CL 30 H U MH H cfl 20 A » or C »< OH 10 J§ i 4 . CL-ML. ML or OL ML 0 W 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 LIQUID LIMIT (%)
NATURAL PASSING UNIFIED KEY BORING SAMPLE WATER LIQUID PLASTICITY NO. LIQUIDITY SOIL SYMBOL NO. CONTENTDEPTH LIMIT 200 SIEVEINDEX INDEX CLASSIFICATION (feet) % % %% SYMBOL
A 1 1.5 21 33 14 92 0.1 CL H 1 3.0 21 33 14 96 0.1 CL
2 1.5 15 32 13 94 -0.3 CL ❖ \Z7 2 9.5 27 42 19 97 0.2 CL © 2 1819.5 27 8 74 -0.1 CL
T^T 2 29.5 20 29 13 85 0.3 CL
2 34.5 21 25 796 0.3 CL-ML $
2 44.5 29 31 9 92 0.8 CL
PLASTICITY CHART 4Eu NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Andrew Hill High School CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. San Jose, California Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists PROJECT NO. DATE DRAWING NO. 978.13F August 2019 13 CODPER R-value Test Report (caitrans 301)
Job No.: 978.13F______Date: 07/03/19 Initial Moisture, 11.3 Client: Cleary Consultants Tested PJ R-value 12 Project: Andrew Hill High School - New Sladium Concession Stand Building Reduced RU Sample 1&2 @ 0.5-3.O' Checked DC Expansion 80 psf Soil Type: Brown Silty Clay Pressure Specimen Number A B CD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 278 185 367 Prepaired Weight, grams 1200 1200 1200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 7085 50 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3133 3143 3148 Weight of Mold, grams 2077 2102 2098 Height After Compaction, in. 2.542.58 2.49 Moisture Content, % 17.8 19.2 16.0 Dry Density, pcf 107.0102.6 110.2 Expansion Pressure, psf 52 0 194 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 134146 114 Turns Displacement 4.38 4.44 3.68 R-value 10 5 22
♦ R-value T 1000 100 T ■ Expansion Pressure, psf 90 J-- 900
80 800
70 700 a
60 600 U» CL C o 40 400 c a. 30 300 .2
20 ■ 200
10 100
0 0 0 100 200 300 400500 600 700800
Exudation Pressure, psi
DRAWING NO. 14 CODPER 61-value Test Report (caitrans 301) Ri.:4
Job No.: 978.13F Date: 07/08/19 Initial Moisture, 13.9 Client: Cleary Consultants Tested PJ R-value 59 Project: Andrew Hill High School - New Stadium Concession Stand Building Reduced RU Sample 1&2@ 0.5-3.0' Checked DC Expansion 140 psf Soil Type: Brown Silty Clay (+5% Quicklime Plus) Pressure Specimen NumberA B CD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 223 351 476 Prepaired Weight, grams 1200 12001200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 60 35 20 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3112 3129 3103 Weight of Mold, grams 20442084 2098 Height After Compaction, in. 2.512.44 2.53 Moisture Content, % 19.6 17.3 15.8 Dry Density, pcf 106.8107.8107.8 Expansion Pressure, psf 19824922 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 88 40 28 Turns Displacement 3.22 3.603.28 R-value 687739
100 -1 ♦ R-value T 1000 (■Expansion Pressure, psf 90 I-- 900
80 800
70 700 In a 60 600 d> 3 CD CO 3 ra 50 500 L.3 > Dl 1 c cd o 40 400 w a 30 - 300 &
20 200
10 100
0 m -L 0 0 100300200 400 500 600 700800
Exudation Pressure, psi
DRAWING NO. 15 CGDPER Corrosivity Tests Summary
CTL# 018-1003 Date: 6/28/2019PJPJ Tested By: Checked: Client: Cleary Consultants Project: Andrew Hill High School - New Stadium Concession Stand Building Proj. No: 978.13F Remarks: Sample Location or ID Resistivity (5) 15.5 “C (Ohm-cm) Chloride Sulfate pH ORP Sulfide Moisture As Rec.Min Sat. mg/kgmg/kg % (Redox) Qualitative At Test Soil Visual Description Dry Wt. Dry Wt- Dry Wt. Eh (mv) At Test by Lead % Sample, No. Depth, ft.BoringASTM G57Cal 643 ASTM G57 ASTM D4327ASTMASTM D4327 D4327 ASTM G51 ASTMG200 Temp °C Acetate PaperASTM D2216
1&2 0.5-3.0 1,629 29 1347.917.10.0134 50225 Brown Silty CLAY
DRAWING NO. 16 APPENDIX A
Andrew Hill High School New Stadium Concession Stand Building Liquefaction and Dry Soil Settlement Analyses and Calculations EB-2 Drilled May 21, 2019 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING
Hole No.=EB-2 Water Depth=30.00 ft Magnitude=8.50 Acceleration=0.450g
N-Value Unit Weight -pcf Fines % Soil Description (ft). 0 20 0 200 0 100 — 0 1 T IT 1 T I I I I I TTT I I I I II I I I SILTY CLAY (CL) SILTY CLAY (CL)
- 10
SILTY SANDY CLAY (CL) — 20 n. SILTY SAND (SM)
SANDY SILTY CLAY (CL)
— 30 51
— 40
SPT or BPT test
— 50 E I
-C
Q) ;> ‘o
< c:)n — 60 iro GO
O ;> b o &CL — 70 3 CT
Andrew Hill High School •CLEARY CONSULTANTS, INC. LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING
Hole No.=EB-2 Water Depth=30.00 ft Magnitude=8.50 Acceleration=0.450g
Soil Description Raw Unit Fines Shear Stress Ratio Factor of Safety Settlement (ft) SPT Weight % o 1 0 15 0 (in.) 10 — 0 19 124 94 r- SILTY CLAY (CL) l i i r i i f i i i i i i i r i hi i i i i i 19 128 8&Lq SILTY CLAY (CL) 18 125 NoLq 16 125 NoLq
14 122 NoLq — 10
8 123 NoLq
86 123 NoLq SILTY SANDY CLAY (CL) 16 127 NoLq — 20 96 122 if&Lq SILTY SAND (SM) 9 118 49
96 128 ttfibLq SANDY SILTY CLAY (CL) 1 16 127 NoLq — 30
13 122 79
7 116 79 — 40
14 121 92 fs1 S = 3.61 in. CRR ------CSR fs Saturated Shaded Zone has Liquefaction Potential Unsaturat.
— 50 E o o sz o ;> 'q
< 3 — 60 0) i V) — sz I H — ;> b
o it — 70
cr
•m Andrew Hill High School "CLEAHY CONSULTANTS, INC. ******************************************************************************************************* LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY Copyright by CivilTech Software www.civi1techsof tware.com
***★****:fr******************'*••*■*7^*******••^^•*•A:**•!fc**•fc-•!t*•^r•Jlr*•■fc••*■•lt•fr'^r***•fr**■fr***•!^**•******,*:,l|c,*********■**,*',*'****•#r*•ilr*,**•*'* Font: Courier New, Regular Size 8 is recommended for this report. Licensed to , 8/5/2019 5:14:41 PM
Input File Name: \\CCISERVER\Shared Folders\Rough Drafts\Grant Foster Rough Drafts\Liquefy Pro Data Files grant\978.13F Andrew Hill HS, Stadium Concession Stand Bldg, EB-2.1iq Title: NEW STADIUM CONCESSION STAND BUILDING Subtitle: Andrew Hill High School
Surface Elev.= Hole No.=EB-2 Depth of Hole= 45.00 ft Water Table during Earthquake= 30.00 ft Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 45.00 ft Max. Acceleration 0.45 g Earthquake Magnitude= 8.50
Input Data: Surface Elev.= Hole No.=EB-2 Depth of Hole=45.00 ft Water Table during Earthquakes 30.00 ft Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 45.00 ft Max. Acceleration=0.45 g Earthquake Magnitude=8.50 No-Liquefiable Soils: Based on Analysis 1. SPT or BPT Calculation. 2. Settlement Analysis Method: Tokimatsu, M-correction 3. Fines Correction for Liquefaction: Idriss/Seed 4. Fine Correction for Settlement: During Liquefaction* 5. Settlement Calculation in: All zones* 6. Hammer Energy Ratio, Ce = 1.25 7. Borehole Diameter, Cb= 1 8. Sampling Method, Cs= 1 9. User request factor of safety (apply to CSR! , User= 1.3 Plot one CSR curve (fsl=User) 10. Use Curve Smoothing: Yes* * Recommended Options
In-Situ Test Data: Depth SPT gamma Fines pcf %ft
0.00 19.00 124.00 94.00 1.45 19.00 124.00 94.00 1.50 19.00 125.00 NoLiq 2.50 18.00 125.00 NoLiq 4.00 16.00 125.00 NoLiq 9.00 14.00 122.00 NoLiq 14.00 8.00 123.00 NoLiq 16.95 8.00 123.00 NoLiq 17.00 16.00 127.00 NoLiq 19.00 16.00 127.00 NoLiq 21.95 16.00 127.00 NoLiq 22.00 9.00 118.00 49.00 24.00 9.00 118.00 49.00 26.95 9.00 118.00 49.00 27.00 16.00 127.00 NoLiq 29.00 16.00 127.00 NoLiq 34.00 13.00 122.00 79.00 39.00 7.00 116.00 79.00 44.00 14.00 121.00 92.00
Output Results: Settlement of Saturated Sands=3.2Q in. Settlement of Unsaturated Sands=0.41 in. Total Settlement of Saturated and Unsaturated Sands=3.61 in. Differential Settlements!.803 to 2.379 in. HrHHHrHHrHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I CJ CO -H nronnronrororoc^nrororonro^nrororo^rorocorororororocorororororororornronrororororororonr^corornrocorororororororororororororororororo
>1 U HHHHrHHHHHHHrHHrHHHHHHHHHHH^H^HrHHrHHHHHHHHHrHrHHrHr-HHr-HHr-irHHrHrHHrHHtHHr-iHrHHHHHHHHrHrHHr-lrH TJ • I CJ CO -H oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
+J a3 oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo to CNr'ItN(NC'irNOJ(N01CN(N0)CSl(N{N(N(NCNCNCNCN01OJ(NfvJ(NC^OJ(NCN{NCN{NCNO3CNtNCNfsJ(NNCNCN[N05CNCNM(NtN(N(N(NN(NCN(NCNCNCM0JCNCNCNCvlCN(N(NCN(NlNlN I C2 CO -H ronronrocnrornroromronro^roroc^rornrnrorncaroc^cororofororornrorororor^Mrorornrnrororororocororororororornronrornroroc'Ororororororororoco
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CO oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo LnLnLfiinLnLnininininuiLninLnLninLnuiLntnininLninininininiiiinLnininiouiioLnioinioinLi'iLnLnininiOLninLninLnwLninLninmiOLninmmini/iLnLnLninLnLnui
CQ lw COCOCOCOCI>aDa3a3COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOOOCOODCOCOCOCDCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCX)COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCXICOCOCOaDCOCOCO a (^nrorocof^nrnn^rororororoonnrororo^rnfornrnrnrnrornrornrnrorornrororororororororororororofornforororororororororororornrnrnrororororororo CO U oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo s LnLnLnLnininLniriLninLnLriinLninLnLnLnLninLnLnLriLninLnLniriLnLnLnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Pi ^'^•^•^•^^•^'^•^^•^'^•^'^•^•^T^r^'.^T^^^t^^-^^-^^rj'^'^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Pi u HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHriHHHHHHHHHHHHHMNCSWrii(SN^N01MO)(Nl[N(NMCN[N(N(NMMOJNMOICNNMMWM(MrJNO]N(NCN(NCN
A jj oinoioouiouiou-iOLnoinotnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoinoLnOLnoinoinoinoinoLnoLnoLnoLnoiooLnouiOLnoLnoLnoLnoinoLnoLnoinoin a ooHHCNCNmro^*vj
tOtOUWtOtOtO!OtOtOtOtONJWtOWWWWWtOWWtO[OWK)tOtOtOtON3tOtOtOK)WWtOMfOWtOMtOWtOtOtOK)tOIONJtOtOtOWtOtOtO!010NJtOtOWWtOWtOtOtON3IOtOW oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo WWWWWWWWWWWWUUJWWWWWWWWWWUlUWWWUUWWWWWWWWWUlWWUWWWCOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWUl >J>J'jNjsO>0>JsJ-s3sJ
WUWWWWWWWWWWWUWUWU)WWWWWUMjJWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWUWWU)WUWWWWLJWLJWWU)Wl*JULJUWUJWWWWUWUWWWWW WtOWKJtOMMMWWWWWtOWWMtOtOfOtOWtOfOtOWWtOWWWtOWtOWWWWtOWWtOtOWtOfObOtOWMtOWtOtOMMtOlOtOWlOWWtOtOt'JlOMtOtOtOtOfOtOWfO oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
^_4 ^_4 |—<1 ^-4 |*4 ^4 |wi |~4 j~4 |~4 }_4 ^4 }«4 A ^~4 |-4 ^«4 |*4 ^4 |—4 ^-4 ^4 ^4 |~4 ^—1 ^~4 }~4 |~4 £-4 ^4 }~4 ^>4 }-4 ^4 |~4 |>4 ^-4 £-4 |~4 4 ^-4 j«4 ^-4 }*4 }—4 4 }-4 }-4 ]-4 ^-4 }-4 ^-4 }4 }-4 ^4 }-4 ^-4 ^-4 ^4 }-4 ^-4 [-4 ^4 ^-4 ^4 ^—4 ^-4 }v4 ^~4 }-4 ^-4 }-4 ^~4 ^4 ^-4 ^4
U)OJWOJWUJWWWWlOWU)UJU)WOJU)U)WUJWUJWUJWUJWU)U)OJWUJUJWWWWWWWWWUJU!U>UiWUJUJUJUJWUJUJWWLUUJUJU;UJWUJU)UJtOUJUJtOUlUJUJWWU) cna\chChmcho^cnc^o^o^ch^mo^cho^cna^c^cr\cno^cn
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHrlHHrlHHHHHHHHrlHrlHHriHriHHHHrlrlrlHrlHrlHHHrlHHHriHHHHHrlHrlrlrlHHHHHHHHHHrl
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CN0VlCNr^CNCNr^CNCSCNCNCNCNCMCNr^CNCNCN(NCN(NCN(NCNCMOJ(N(NC^C\(NO3(N
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ini/iinmLnwinLnLnini/iinLnLninLniriLninwLni/iininmininwinininintninLniiiLninmLnini/iiiiininLnuiLnLnLOwinuiininmLninLniiiLni/iLnuiLnLninLnLnLnLnLnLnLfjLnin
rnrnrnroronrorornrnrornrororoncorororomrorornroropiropnrn^^rof^rnrornrnrorornrornroronr^fnrofornronrnrorororororororornroi^rnrornrorororororororo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 03C
ounoinoinoLnoLnoLnouiOLnoLnoLnotnom oifiOLnouioinoinoLnoLnouioinoLnoinoinoLnoirioinoinoifioifio^oinoi/)Otnoi/ioi/ioinoinooriHoi(NmM^’?iiHfU£)^>hcoco(jitiiooHH ■^^Lninoorv-c^coa3crioootHHCNCNrom^«^LnLnlsDU?i>r~-cocoooooHr-{c>3r^roro'^'^Lninv£>^i>i>coooocri...... OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOr-IrHr-it—i r^r^r^^r^r^C^r^r^r^r^r^OOOOOOroOOOTOOOOOOOOOraOOOOOOCTiCriCriOCri HHHHMHMHHHHHHtHHHMHHHHHHHMHHHHiHHrHHHHHrHrHrHHHHrHHHHHHrHHHHtHHHr-IHr-IHHrHHHr-lHHHrHHHHHHr-Hr-irH ooooooooooooooooooooooaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (NfNCNCJCNCNMOJOIOJOJCNMMCNOJtNCNJNMtNCNCNCNfNMOlCNMOJ^OlCNCNCNCNtNMCNNNCMCNNMWMWCNMtNtMCNCNtNOJMCNr^CMCNMlMMMMMtNCNCNCNtNCNMNM ronnnmnnmmnnnnnnnmmnmnnnmtnnmnrfimnnnmmfonfonnMrtrororororonnnmmnnmnromnr'inmnnnf'immroMroroforofon oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Lnini/imLnininini/iLninininLnLnifluiininLninini/iinininminLniniDininLni/iiflinLnininLnLninini/imiJiLn^ini^i/iminininLnuiLnLninmLnLnLnini/iuiLnLnLnLnLriLnLnLn Mi^fOMMfororofOfnfOMforifOfOfnmfnmMfnnmnronmnrofomnmnroronnronnnn'iMmfnmfnmromMmrommnmnnnnnmnronnronronroroi^ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CNCNC>lOJC^CN(NOJNO0O>I(NO]NC'IOlCNCMC]C'ltNO](NOl(\(NM(NOlOJOJOJC'JC'3C'JCiC^(NCNCNN{NOjr']OJCNO3CNMMO^(NOJfs]CN(N(NC'3{NCN(NCN(NOJ{NCN(N3CNOJCN(NCN(,'3MOJCN oinoLnoLnoLnounoinouiOLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoinoi-noLnoinomoinoinoinoLDOLnoLnoLnoLnOLnoLnomoinoinoinoinOLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLn (NCNnro^^ui!^^^r^r^cooocnoOHt-M{NCNrnn^^unLn'0'or'r'a5c»ocrsOOrHH03CNrnrn'^^inLnu50i>!> HHHHHHHrHrHrHHtHHHr-irHCNCNCN303CNCN(NCNCNCNio>i04CNCNCNCN tHHHHHt^HrHHtHHHrHHtHWHHHrHHHrHHtH^HrHtHHHHHHHHr^r4HrHH^HHHrHiHrHHHHrHr-irHr-irHHr-ir-IHHrHtHHHHHHr-iHr-IHt~iiHHH oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CNM(Nir^CNCNCNCNr^rS5CNOJCNCSIO3CNCNiCNO3CNCNCNCNCNCNCNOl(NOJ r^c^r^r'C^r^i>t^c^c^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^t^r'C^r'r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r^r'Vovx)U3V£>U3V£>kDU)'x)'vD'j3'^^'vO'X)'vD^DU>^DVD^'^)kD^D^U3kDvr)kDUDU> rorornro^ronrornrnro^MrooirornrOrnrOrorirornrornrofnrnrnrot^^rororOi^rororororornrOMrororororororororororornrnrornrorororororornrornrornrornrororn oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo C^CNCN3rMr^O3CNC^CNCNC\CNCNCNCNCN(N04CNO3CNC\lCNCgfNCNCNr4CNlOJC^O3CNCNCNCNCN0QCNCN3(NC\CN(NrQO3CNCNCN3 OLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoinoinoLnoLnoLnoLnoinoinOLnoi/iOiriOirsoLnoinoinoinoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoul ooHrHCNCNrnrn^^inLnv£i^r^r^cocoo^o^ooHHo^r^rnfn^^LriLnu>'^)r'r'COcoc^ UlU1lt.*.WWtOWPHOOU)tOCOCD'Js]CriCnUlLH^iC.WWMWHHOOU>VDa)COs3N3(rifflinW^^WU!tON:HHOOU3^COa)s]'Jfl>^aiUl^ibWWtOWHHOO'X)U5CD(B wowowomouiouioaiouio^ouiouiomouiowowowoutowowoyioaiouiouiouiouiouiouiouiouiowouiowouiouiouiouioinoino OOOOOOOOOOOOWWtOWWWtOWtONJWtOWtOWWtOfOMroWWMMWtOtOtOWEOWtOfOWIOWtOtOtOWWWMtOfOtOtOMtOMtOWtOtOMWEOWWMtOlOtOW MHMHMHMHMHMHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OJWOJOJOJOJOJOJWOJOJUIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo WUlWWWWWUlWWWWWWWWWWWWWUlWWWWWWOJWUJWWWUWUJWWUWWUJUUWWUWWUWWUUUWUJUWUlWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW (T\<^(T\ Lnm^aiuioiuiuiuiuimLnuii^aiminuiuiLnuiLninuiuiinuiuiuiuiuitnmmuiuiwmwuiwuiwuiuiuiuiuiwuiaiwuiaiLnuimuiuiinuiuiijiuiijimLnLnwcnuiLnLnLn^Ln oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo WWWWU)WWWWUJWUJUJWWWWWWWWUJWWWWWUIWWU>U)WWOJWUJWOJU>WWWWU>U>U>U;(jJOJUJIjJLJUJUJGJUJUJU>WOJU>U1U>U)UJU>U»U> ooaoaoooooooooooooooaoaoaoooooaoaooooooaooooaooooooaaooooooooaoooooooooooooo WUlUJUlWWWUJWUlOJWUJWUJWOJWUJWUlWWWWWWWUJOJWUJUlWWOJWWWUJUJWUJWWWtOWWUJOJUJWUJUJLOUJLOUJWLAJUJWUJWUJUJWWWUJUJUJWlOU) s > (j?uiuiuiuiijiuioiuimmo^a^o^^cna^cn<^c^a^cncncr\mCT^cna^(^mcha^cncncnchcncr\^ c^r'^U3^uitr)uiiriTj«^^rnnrocsicNHHHOOOO^cricncocooDr^i>E>U3^0LninLn'^^^rororocN!CNr- oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ininirii/iininLnuiinuimuiininininLnwinininmLni/iLnLninminiii^iniriirsinmininiouiLnLnLninLninLnwLninLn^inininiriuiLni/iminLntnin^winiriLninLnLnLnLnLnLfi ^OVO'kOVOkOVO'sOVOVX)VX)VO'kDV£)'«OVOVO'kOVi)y)^Vi)kOVi)VOVOVi)^0'vO'sOViJ'sOVOkOVO«J?VOkOVOVOVOVD^OVOVDVDVDVXlVDVDVi)' nrnrOrOrOr0rnnr0rornrornrOrororOrOOJCN OLnoinoinowoL/iOLnoLnouioinoinouioinouioinoinoinoinoiiiowomoinoinoinowoi/ioi/ioi/ioinoLnoLnoi/ioi/ioinoi/ioinouiOinoin up^^^cococ^i^ootHHcsiojron^^Lninvo'xir^^cococncnoorfrHC'JCNrorn^^inin^vor'r'CococTicnoOi-iHCNCNrorO'^'^LnLnuJUJr^r'COcocricriooHHCNCNrnro oiNCSO!tNW^wrofonronmmmmnnmnnnmnronn'!t,^'i,'d'^'4'^’3,^'}''?'Si^^'3<^^^'i'j,LnLninLnLnLninLnininLnini/itnLniJ,iinini/iii,iU)U5io^U)'£U)U) 0)NCNCNlCNCNCMCNOJ(NCN(NCN(NCNCNCNCNCN^01^0i!CNO;CNC4(NCNMCM«(NN(NOJM03MOJf\1f'3M(N05(N030JO]CNOJCNC^CNICNCNO]NO]WCNMO]NfN(NMINO]CN(NCNCNCN01(N OTcx>r~t>viDkD'4Dinu^^^r^nrnfnrornnrn(^roforoMrO(^rnr^rnrOf^(^r^{^rofnrnrororororororororororororornronroror^rororocN!C^cNrv)CNTHHiHrHrHOOOOOcnco M01MCNCNMMOJ(NOJMMOJCNCN(NOJ(N(NCN(NOJ£NOJCN01(NOi!Nl(NMMOJMCNMMM(NMMCN!NM(NMCNMCNCNWC\l«MM(NMMOJMCSJ(NO]MM«W(NNMCNlCN(NCN|HH MmoifonmnMmnronrfi^mnMfommf'ifnnMMnnfnMrtfomfnfnnfomnronfororonromriMMmroroMrororoMrorororonromnimMMroronr'iMrofOM ff>cocohh^w^Lnin^^r’inmnfOi,,iroi,in(,i(Tir,ir,i(TinivifOi¥ifnf,i(vimrtroro(virofnmnforof,,iMm!¥)iyimm(,fifOMrororomroMrtMNWNtNHHriHHOOOOO oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocnco ^CNir'3(%lCNCNC^CNfNCS|(r^CNC^CNCNOl(N(^CN{NfNCNCNCNJC^CNjC'3(>J ^u>^\x>^^^kou>U)VD^^^^vDVD^v^vDVi3^^v^^v£i^vDU)V£>^^V£)U5k£5U>ki3kDvx3^x»VD'X'Lnir)LriinLniriLriLriLnLnLriLnLnLnLnLriinLnLni-nLnLnLnir)LninLnmLnLnLnLr)Lr)Ln mr’inrommmnmmnnnmmnronmnmnr'innnnnnnfnronmmnmmr'immrOfomroronfln'ifnnmmnnmnmmromfonmnmnmmrorOMmnMfn oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CNCNCNCNCNC^OJCNCNCN03CNCnOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO(Ti OLnoLnoLnomoLnoinoLnouioinoinoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoiiioiriOLnomoLnomoinoLnOLDOLnoLnoinoinoinOLnoinouiomoLnoLnoLnoLnoLn ^^ir)Lnvxi^t^r^roaDcnmoOrHrHc^c^rnro^^Lni/)^^r^r^oDcocncrioOt-ii--ifNjcNfnrn'^*^LnLr)vx>' c^^vx)ixi^rncNHHoa^cx)C^'ol^Ln’^rn(NiHHOcncor''^)LnLnrj ************ *************** * * * * ********** * * * * * ***************** ******** <7lO^O^O^COCOOOCOOOOOCO(>r'l>C^C^r^r'V£),^D'Xi'sD^MD^LnLnLnLninLnin*s}<’^^^'^^f<^'^rOrOrOrOrOrOrOrOCN3CNICNCN3CNCMCN(>3HHi-iHHHHHOOOOOOOOOcTiCriCri oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo l/)inuni/imiXlinLnuiU5UJ^^VDkDV0^^^^VD^Vfl^kDkO^^^V5^U5^^^^^V£iVX)VOUDVX>^VX!U3kD'Xi^VD^DVi)^^\X)Vi3UD'XiVX)'^DVO'JDU)'«£)U)'X)VX)Vr>i^DVD' OLnoLnoLnoLnoinoLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoinouioLnoLnoLnoLnoLnoinoinoLnoLnotnoLnoinomoLnoLnoLnoinoinoinoinoLnoLnouioLnoLnoLn CNCNrnro^^i/)uivx>^r^^cocoG^o^ooHrHc>]CNrorn’^^inLriV£i'vors'r'ODcocncnoorHrH tN£NtNOntN(NtN01tN(NntNtNCN(N0j(N01C1M0JfSM(NCN0)Cl(NMC'10){NNC'JMWCSN0JN(N(N(N(NtNCNI0J(NrlHHrlHrlHrlrirlrlrlHrlHrlriHHHHHrlHrlHH oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooaaaoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaooooo ochoDC^U3ui^(^oiHOcncoi>^ui^rnfNHOcr\cX)!>'^Ln^rocNi-iO ^vxiU3Uj^vo^U3'vDkDVDvxiU3^v£)ivD|KC)V£i^o’sDi^£)^DivDU3'vD>sO'sD'^)i^D'vD'^D'vDC^!>r^c^-r^i>[^r^r~r^c^c^r~r^r^rs'[>c^i>i>^'i>[^r~r~r^r^i>!>i>!>[^-!>i>i>r^[^'t^i>c^[~-c^[^r~ rof^rn^rnrorororor^ror^forororororororororororororornrorororororo^roroforororororornrnrnrnrnrornrorororororororororornrornronirorororororororororororo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo '?j<^'^<^'^'^,^,^,^^,^'^romnronromnmnrornrommmfomo>303r^£N{NCN oinouioinoinouiouioinouioinowoinoinoinowoinoLnoinoino^oinoifioinoLnoLnowoinoinouioinoinoinoinoLnoLnoinoinoLnoin oorKHCNCNnro^^LnLnv£)^^^cococncriooHHCNc^rnro^^LnLn^0VDr'r'Cococr5criooTHrHCNCNrnro'^'^LnLnu)VDi>r'COcocr\ ^HtHrHrHHrHHHtHHrHHHt-lHtHr^HfHHrHHrHrHHTHHr-iHt-iHrHrHtHtHtHiHHrHrHHHr-HHT-iHrHHrHrHtHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaooooooooooooooooooooo r^vx)^ncNHcnco[>u3^roc^o * -X -X * -X -X -X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X********-X r^r^c^^r^>vouDvovDV£>vou)iniriinir}Lflini^ri<^^^^rt<^^TFLnifiLnuiLnmLnuimu)V£>vjDV0U>kD^u>^r^t^r^i>^t^!>^aDcococococoa3coa}cncrtc7\mcrimcTimc^ooo OJ(N OOOOOOOOOOOOl(JUJUJimOUriOUJlCri(JlOWrMJlOUJiauiliJ\Cn(Jl(JlCn^m^OU^OlOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHrlHrlHrlHHHHrirl rHHtHHHr-lrHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHt-iHiHHHt-lTHt-iHr-iHt-iHtHHrHt-IHt-irHrHHHrHHHHHHTHHrHHr-iH oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0un0in0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0m0in0in0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0tr)0ir)0Ln0in0ir50in0ir)0in0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0Ln0ir)0Ln0Lri0m0Ln0Ln0Ln0m0Ln cococncnooHHCNC^nr^^^minU3vx)r^i>cococno^ooHrHCN03rn<^,^^t4LnLn^>vi5rs'C^co * F.S.<1, Liquefaction Potential Zone (F.S. is limited to 5 CRR is limited to 2, CSR is limited to 2} Units: Unit: qc, fs, Stress or Pressure = atm (1.0581tsf); Unit Weight = pcf; Depth = ft; Settlement m. 1 atm (atmosphere) = 1 tsf (ton/ft2) CRRm Cyclic resistance ratio from soils CSRsf Cyclic stress ratio induced by a given earthquake (with user request factor of safety) F.S. Factor of Safety against liquefaction, F.S.-CRRm/CSRsf S_sat Settlement from saturated sands S_dry Settlement from Unsaturated Sands S_all Total Settlement from Saturated and Unsaturated Sands NoLiq No-Liquefy Soils